1 1 i C-- .s> Ol Theological Literature. An Exposition ^•^jo, ofthe John. .Pa arson. DJ) , - "/gimtie/ej^ooii-, ''"fer^^Vieffjuffiiin^ */ a. ColUg'- in thif ^qloitf AN EXPOSITION OF THE CREED. - iiiiiHiiiiiiiriiiiiiiiiiiinifii Ancient and Modern Library of Theological Literature. AN EXPOSITION OF THE CREED BY JOHN PEARSON, D.D. SOMETIME LORD BISHOP OF CHESTER WITH AN ANALYSIS BY THE LATE W. H. MILL, D.D. ' RECTOR OF ERASTED, AND CHAPLAIN TO ARCHBISHOP HOWLEY VOLUME I, ; LONDON GRIFFITH FARRAN OKEDEN cSj WELSH NEWBERY HOUSE CHARING CROSS ROAD AND SYDNEY ANALYSIS OF PEARSON ON THE CREED. ARTICLE I. "I believe in God the Father Almighty , Maker of heaven and earth." § I. '^ I believe." WHAT three things are implied in the word CREDO, "I believe," understood before every Article of this con fession (though expressed but twice) ? and First. With respect to internal Faith or Belief, I. State what is its formal Object ; and how, with respect to the object, it is distinguished from other modes of assent : viz., I. From Knowledge ; whether arising A. From Sense or Perception, B. From Intuitive Understanding, C. From Scientific Demonstration.' 2. From mere Opinion.. ' II. State what is the measure of the Credibility of objects; and hence proceed to the great divisions of Faith in respect to the sources of that credibility, viz., I. Human Faith. — Illustrate the principle of this assent, shewing how it extends to all the concerns of human life, and proceeds through all degrees up to the highest pitch of moral certainty. 2. -Divine Faith, which is the proper subject of our present consideration. — In this, A. Deduce the infallible certainty of the assent thus bestowed (i.) From the infinite knowledge and wisdom of the Testifier. (2.) From His infinite justice and holiness. y'i Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. B. Explain what is the nature of the Divine testi mony on which this Faith is founded ; (i.) As to the nature of the truths about which it is conversant. (2.) As to the mode of their communication from God, which is twofold : viz., a. Immediate, i.e., without the inter vention of other men, in the several ways a. Of address by God in person, or through the ministration of an Angel representing Him, as in the delivery of the Law. /3 Of extraordinary inspiration by His Holy Spirit. 7 Of actual presence among men in the person of His Incarnate Son. b. Mediate, as a By direct communication from those who had the truths immediately from God in either of the above ways (as Moses, &c., by the first ; the Prophets by the second; the Apostles and other Disciples of Christ by the third) ; which is the case with those whom Noah warned, with the Israel ites under the Theocracy, and the Jews and Gentiles who heard the Apostles' preaching. ^ When the same communication ' is continued by the tradition of word and writing to distant regions and ages; which is the case of the great body of the Church of God both now and of old. With respect to these, shew N That the exertion of Divine Faith is as Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. vii possible as to those of the former class (b. a.) of mediate recipients, nay of the immediate hearers thenjselves. 3 That faith in the Holy Scriptures (in which the revelation is con signed) is an essential part of Divine Faith to these. (Quote Dur- andus's definition.) Secondly. With respect to the external Confession of the faith thus explained. I. Prove this to be equally necessary to salvation with the internal principle itself, I. From the nature and purpose of the truths revealed by God : and especially those, in which we are now concerned, delivered by Christ and His Apostles to the universal Church. 2. From the separate consideration of all the parties concerned in the transmission of these truths : viz., A. The command of Him from whom they proceed.^ B. The benefit thus accruing to our brethren. C. The consideration of our own concern in the glory which is to be revealed, and which will never be ours, if we refuse this ac knowledgment of the grace that has called us to it. II. State the concern felt by the Christian Church accordingly, to secure this confession of the true faith in every one of her members, as shown I. In the framing of short symbols or confessions like this ancient one, commonly called the Apostles' Creed ; which the catechumen was to be taught and to repeat publicly before baptism, from the very first times of Christianity. 2. In the continual repetition of such symbols in the pubhc worship of the Church, particularly viii Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. when the Sacraraent of the Eucharist was to be administered. 3. In the care taken to make this confession most special and personal to each individual of her communion, by making the form of it, both in baptism and subsequently, not plural (as in all the public prayers) but singular. Thirdly. With respect to the obligation of thus believing and confessing, as declared in the word " Credo," — illustrate this I. From the requisition that our Lord made of all those who partook of His mercy when on earth. II. From the confession which was by special Divine Revela tion made by St Peter, as the chief and representative of the Apostles, on whose foundation the Church is built. Explain, therefore, finally, what we mean by these two first words " I believe." § 2. " r believe in God." The first Article of the Creed being a declaration of belief in Him, on whose Divine testimony thefaith of all the rest is founded (as above explained), consider, Whether is the necessary pre-eminence of this fundamental Article (as of the two others of which the Divine Son and Spirit are the objects) properly implied by the preposition " Credo in Deum," "I beheve in God" (as our own usual language would seem to indicate, as well as the usual language of the Latin Church since St Augustine), i.e., is it confirmed by any such significancy of the preposition thus annexed in the Scriptural Greek and Hebrew, whence it was derived to the Creed ? What, then, are the three considerations involved in the pro position " I believe in God " ? and, First. With respect to the meaning of the term " God." I. State the lower sense in which it is applied universally to the object of worship, and so to the objects of false worship, or yet more generally to beings raised above the common lot of mortality, — to angels or even men. (Quote passages of Scripture in which the wbrd is thus used.) II. Define its proper restrictive meaning as applied to the One Hving and true God. Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. ix Secondly. With respect to the existence of the Being thus declared in the Creed. I. Dispose ofthe opinion that this existence is an innate or connatural notion of the mind of man. II. Dispose ofthe idea that it is a self evident proposition incap able of being even conceived to be false, i.e., that the opinion of Atheism cannot be entertained by any mind whatever. 111. Proceed to the rational mode by which the existence of God, i.e., of' a necessary and self-existent Being is demonstrated by its connexion with other known truths — (the proper argument of Natural Theology, and as such mentioned and appealed to in Scripture) — viz., to the following considera tions, external and internal. I. External — viz. : A. That the chain of effects and causes in the universe requires us demonstratively to ascend to some. .Supreme Cause — itself more exalted than all, and, therefore, selfexistent and eternal. B. That the operative causes in the universe, each tending evidently to some end (the arrange ments of all the subordinate causes to this end being made to appear more manifestly artificial and admirable by every inquiry into nature), of which ends the proximate workers are wholly unconscious — this demonstratively leads us to ascribe the design and full intelligence of all these ends to the Supreme Cause of all. C. That this inference is so evident, so unavoid able, that no nation or tribe of men has been found altogether destitute of this first Article of Faith. D. That beside these indications, which are natural and universal, belonging to man as man — there have not been wanting extraordinary indica tions of the existence of a Supreme Cause of all things, by prophecies of future events, and contingencies which none but He could know. E. And that there have been also miraculous indications of His presence, who could alone suspend those laws of nature which are His own. X Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. 2. Internal — viz. : . _ . That every man has in his own breast a witness and representation of the Supreme Lord, I directing him (if he do not stifle its testimony) to a Power and a Judgment infinitely above his own, on which his being and happiness depend. IV. Prove the necessity of this primary truth and its acTsnaw- ledgment : — I. Because there can be no other article of faith without this. 2. In order that there may be a foundation for that religious worship and adoration, which has been thus proved by general feeling to be the common want of mankind. But as, to guard against the falsehood which has been generally 'annexed to this, we say in the singular XJadX we beheve "in God," so as to ex clude Polytheism as well as Atheism ; we there fore proceed to the next general head. Thirdly. With respect to the Unity of this Being (which though not expressly inserted in this ancient Creed of the I^atin Church, as it is in all those of the East even before that of Nice, " I believe in One God, the Father Almighty" — is equally implied in the expression of all), — I. Prove this most necessary adjunct to the assertion of the Divine existence, I. From the nature of God; A. Because the very notion of a Supreme Being implies independency. B. Because whereas the arguments of the first head compel us to ascribe all perfection to the first Cause, this can reside only in one, — because (i.) Were there two or more independent and equal, the full perfection is denied to all : and (2.) Were one above the rest, it is denied to all but that one. 2. From the government over which He presides : viz., A. Because two or more free and independent gods, would produce a confusion of causes in the universe. Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xi B. Because the absolute unity of design is evinced in the harmonious co-operation of innumerable subordinate causes in the world together, to common ends. II. Deduce from these same considerations, that the Unity of Gdd is different from any other unity in the world, as being not one oifact only but necessity. III. State the pecuhar necessity of believing this Unity. I. That we may haye a definite object of our worship and veneration, and not fluctuate among many. 2. That we may give to God that which is His, and of which He has declared Himself peculiarly jealous. Sum up, therefore, briefly, the fulness of what is meant in this an nunciation of the primary Article of the Christian Creed, " I believe in God." § 3. "/ believe in God the Father." Considering the relative term Father, ascribed to God in the first part of the Creed, either with respect to the Creation immedi ately following this, or to the correlative Son who is the subject of the second part of the Creed next following. First. With relation to the whole Creation of which we are a part, and the part principally concerned in the term as thus applied, — I. Shew that the idea of Paternity (though, as referred to the Creation, in an improper and imperfect sense), is ana logically applicable to God — I. In its natural acceptation, i.e., in respect of A. Generation or Production (which is the funda mental notion); God being thus related, though not in the highest and only proper sense of the relation, (i.) To all creation, inanimate as well as animate : as exemplified in the lan guage of Scripture, and in what the religion of Nature has truly dictated even to the heathen world. (2.) In a more peculiar, though still far from strictly proper sense, to the rational part of the creation — both xii A nalysis of Pearson on the Creed. to superhuman beings, and to man kind ; as exemplified from the same sources as above. B. Conservation (a notion consequent on the pre ceding original one of generation) : God being thus related strictly both to all creation, and specially to the rational part. C. Restoration from a state of nothingness or worse than nothingness (this being an ana logical species of generation, with conserva tion superadded) : God being thus related to any part of the rational creation who have fallen into misery of any kind. Exemplify this by the language of Scripture. D. Regeneration (or second generation) : whereby (with the same exclusion of the strictly proper sense of generation) God is thus related as a Father, — (i.) To the spirits of those among man kind who are renewed from a state of sin to a state of Grace through the Redeemer. (2.) To the whole persons, souls and bodies, of those among Christians who, having been faithful unto death, are raised up through the same Redeemer to the state of Glory. Prove this sense as well as the preceding from Scripture. 2. In the voluntary and civil acceptation — ^viz., as that which the laws have admitted to stand instead of natural Paternity — in respect of A. Adoption : whereby God is related as Father to those whom He has received into His family by grace ; after the natural paternity by generation [I. i. A. (2.)] had been set aside through the forfeitures of the Fall. B. Inheritance : which is consequent upon adop tion as upon natural generation. II. Shew the necessity of beheving in God as our Father in these several respects, I. As the ground of all that reverence and obedience Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xiii which God challenges from us expressly on account of this relation. 2. As the necessary ground of all Christian prayer, as shewn, in its perfect pattern, as well as in the other instructions of Christ. 3. As the sole foundation of Christian patience; by giving to all afflictions whatever, their best and only alleviative character. 4. As supplying the only basis of that imitation of God in which Christian obedience consists. Secondly. With relation to the " only Son " hereafter mentioned in the Creed. I. Shew that this particular of faith in God, as being the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ I. Implies a paternity eminent not only in degree but in kind — and that not only above the lowest sense of paternity arising from creation, but above those arising from regeneration and adoption — and which is also the sole foundation of these; since God could not thus be our Father, unless He were, in the eminent and only perfect sense, the Father of our Lord. [Prove this from Scripture. Quote particularly John xx. 17, with Epiphanius' Gloss upon it.] 2. Is indeed the original proper meaning of this Article of the Creed — as being the fundamental position of that faith which is properly Christian, and re quired as such to be confessed by all before baptism. Prove from the Apostolic History, and from the form of Baptism itself, that such is its rank. 3. Does not need for its support any modern distinc tion between the Father considered personally and essentially. II. Explain the Paternity thus distinctly and eminently predi cated of God the Father with respect to His Son Jesus Christ, I. In the inferior senses (which though not reaching the highest and only proper sense df Paternity, express the relation of Father to Jesus Christ in a higher degree than to any one else of mankind) : viz.. xiv Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. A. From His miraculous conception of the Virgin Mary, by the Holy Ghost, as Jesus the Saviour. B. From tJie special commissipn and authority imparted to Hini by the Father, as Christ the King of Israel. C. From His being the first begotten and first ahve from the dead, the head of the regener ation and resurrection of the sons of God to a life of immortality and incorruption. Quote Scripture for this, as for the preced ing two grounds in their place. 2. In the true and perfect sense of Paternity, as related to the Only-begotten Son antecedently to His in carnation and mediation — viz., A. From the identity of nature between the Father and the Son, in which the proper notion of that relation consists : which when applied to this Divine generation implies eternity together with other infinite attributes ' in the Son as in the Father. B. From the unity of essence, not only specific, but individual, by which this Divine pater nity and filiation stand infinitely above all created ones (in which the identity of nature between Father and Son admits of all kinds of accidental disparities). C. From the circumstance that this perfect iden tity of essence and of all Divine attributes in the Father and in the Son, nevertheless consists with that whereby one is the Father and the other is the Son : viz., that eternal communication of the same nature and attributes from the former to the latter, in which consists the great mystery of this generation. Observe here (i.) That the priority in order (not in time) of the Father, "who is of none, neither created nor begotten," is described as His essential pre rogative in the Holy Scriptures. (2.) That this original order is the ground Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xv and source of the mutual relation of these Divine Persons in the economy of human redemption, in which the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world, and is not the result of that economy [as the modern supporters of a co ordinate Trinity suppose]. (3.) That the order of the three Persons in the ever-blessed Trinity is un changeable, founded on the eternal relation of each to the other. (4.) That this priority of order in the Father as the fountain of Deity is essential — a. To vindicating the constant language of Scripture with respect to these Divine Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost ; which the Church in her Collects and Offices, as well as in all her Confessions, has faithfully observed. b. To securing the true and fundamental doctrine there taught of the "One God the Father," in whose unity there have subsisted from t all eternity the Son by Him eternally begotten, and the Spirit from both eternally proceeding — (instead of the tritheistic conception in volved in the co-ordinate view that excludes this generation and procession). III. Shew the necessity of thus believing the paternity of God the Father, as the foundation of Christian faith. I. For avoiding all confusion and approach to Poly theism in our worship. 2. For producing that access of us to the Father, to xvi Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. effect which (through one Divine Mediator and by one Divine Spirit) is the great object ofthe economy of grace in the Gospel. Sum up therefore this primary article of our Christian religion- Belief in God the Father. § 4. " / believe in God the Father Almighty." Respecting the epithet "Almighty," imniediately added tothe confession of belief in God by the Church militant, as it is to the adoration of Him above by the Church triumphant, as described in the Apocalypse, — the Greek word TlavToxpaTup here used, as by the writers of the New Testament after the Alexandrine interpreters of the Old, may be taken with reference to two different Hebrew words of which they make it severally the representative. And, First. Considering the " Lord God Almighty " as the most usual translation of the common Hebrew title " Jehovah God of Hosts " (niXDJ? or Sabaoth, — this word being frequently left untranslated), and consequently as the expression of God's absolute Dominion in the Hosts of heaven and of earth, — I. Establish this Dominion in its three several branches, which are: I. The right of making all things as it pleaseth Him, the necessary foundation of what follows : viz., 2. The right of possessing all things thus made by Him as His own : the Omnipotence of God in ' this respect consisting A. In the Independency of this Dominion, both (i.) As to the original of it; being received from none : (2.) As to its use; there being no other real proprietor, all else being but His stewards. B. In the Infinity of the Dominion, whether (i.) As to its Extent; having no boundary or termination — either in things visible or invisible. (2.) As to its Nature: which is absolute and unlimited. (3.) As to its Duration : which hath no end. Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xvii 3. The right of using all things, thus created and owned by Him, as -He will : the omnipotency of God here consisting in His directing all things for the benefit of His creatures and to His own glory as to 'the final end. II. State the use of acknowledging this supreme and absolute dominion. I. For promoting reverence and subjection. 2. For ¦ promoting equanimity and resignation, under every dispensation of the Divine will. 3. For exciting to gratitude. Secondly. Considering the word Havro-A^aria^ as the constant trans lation of another Hebrew title of God, viz., Shaddai ('"nt}'), by which is denoted His all-sufiiciency and power of Himself, without the intervention of any of the hosts of His subjects to execute His wiU, — in which His dominion stands distin guished in kind from that of all earthly potentates (which sense oi po-wer in operation is expressed more distinctly in ^ the second division of the Creed by the word Hai/roSuva/ios, though the Latin word Omnipotens is the same in both places). I. Explain the notion of Omnipotence ; implying I. Power : i.e. the ability to perform or to produce what is desired to be performed or produced. 2. The Infinity of that ppwer : viz., the ability to perform or produce everything that is thus desired. II. Prove that this absolute Omnipotence is in God, — I. By the Testimony of Scripture ascribing this attribute to Him. 2. By the Necessity of the case — evincing against all possi bility of objection, that He is Almighty. A. Because He is the sole foundation of all the power that is in the creatures, — and, there fore, the power which sustains them cannot be less than infinite. B. Because there is no resistance to His power, or effectual opposition to what He decrees. ' Bishop Pearson accordingly reserves the consideration of this second head, viz.. Omnipotence of operation, to that part'of the Creed which follows Christ's Ascension and Session at the right hand of God. But in this Analysis it is ' thought better, in this instance only, to depart from his order, and to transfer what he has there written on the subject to this, which is- undoubtedly its most natural and proper place. xviii Analysis of Pear sott ait the Creed. C. Because His active power necessarily extends to all things in the universe, i.e., to every possibility, or everything whose existence is not a contradiction. Shew here, against some heathenish objections, that the appli cation of this to whatever is abstractedly possible only, is no limitation of the uni versal power of God : — (i.) Because that which involves a contra diction in itself is a nonentity, and comes not within the description of a thing or actual existence. Give an instance. (2.) Because that which, involving no con tradiction in itself, yet involves an essential contradiction to the char acter of the Agent, would argue a defect in Him, if adraitted, instead of a perfection ; and therefore the denial of it derogates nothing from the Omnipotency \e.g., that God cannot sleep, suffer, &c., or morally, that Gpd cannot lie]. III. Prove that this absolute Omnipotence is in God only. 1. Because the power of every creature being derived from Him, and subordinate to Him, is necessarily hmited by that subordination, and therefore not universal. 2. Because this is not denied by the assertion here and in the beginning of the Creed, that God the Father is Almighty — inasmuch as the Son and the Holy Ghost are also Almighty, by being included in the Unity of the same eternal Godhead : for while it follows that we cannot say with truth that the Father only, as such, is Almighty, it yet remains eternally true that God only is Almighty. IV. Shew the necessity of a belief in this Omnipotence, I. To produce fear, reverence, and entire submission. 2. To be the ground of every other belief in revealed as well as in natural, religion. 3. To produce reliance on the Divine promises as gra ciously revealed to us— agreeably tothe great patterns of faith in Scripture, Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xix 4. To give life to our devotions : in which respect it is commonly annexed to the Lord's Prayer. Thirdly. Considering this word Tlawo%pa.rap in two furthej: senses which some ancients have ascribed to it, I. Shew how, in the original meaning of the Greek, the all- pervading and all-comprehending nature of the Divinity may be thought to be thus expressed. II. Shew how, in the same word, the all-holding with the all- sustaining and all-preserving power of Him who is the Creator of all, may be likewise understood. Sum up, therefore, what is contained in this great epithet applied to God. § 5. " Maker of Heaven and Earth." With respect to the attribute of Creation annexed to God the Father Almighty, First. As to the object of that Creation : viz., "Heaven and Earth," I. Declare its meaning and extent as including all things : I. Estabhshing this definition ofthe terms — A. From the equivalent expressions in the other ancient Confessions of Faith. B. From the use of these terms in the Scriptures, from which the words of the Creed are taken (and from which their truth can be infallibly established), both in the Old and New Testa ments. C. From the use of the same in the heathen Greek writers. 2. Adding the necessary limitation to this universality, and the only one : viz., all things beside God the Creator. 3. Illustrating this article of the Christian Faith, that all things beside 'the selfexistent Being derive their existence from Him — A. From the . analogy of the artificial works of man — fashioning according to His will the uncon scious materials in nature. B. From the pre-eminence of the meanest works xx Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. of Nature above the highest of Art, and the gradations by which the former surpass each other also in dignity and excellency. C. From the further gradations of sentient and intelligent beings, the meanest of which is vastly superior to the greatest of inanimate nature. II. Establish and defend this truth, that all besides God have but a derived and dependent being, against the errors by which the earliest and most universal tradition on the subject of the Cosmogony was darkened by the vain speculations of men : viz., I. Against Pantheism : i.e., the opinion that the universe is itself God, or of the Divine essence ; [the doctrine of the Egyptian schools, and some of the later Pythagoreans and others among the Greeks — also of the Indian Brahmanical theology, as exhibited in the Upanishads or mystical parts of the Vedas, and their commentators the Vedan tists — as well as of Spinoza and some more recent Germans ;] the fancied foundations of which opinion in the reason ing" of some ancients A. State in their several particulars : viz., (i.) The axiom of Ocellus Lucanus and Aristotle, that what begins must end, and its consequent negative. (2.) Their notion of the TO HAN, the Universe. (3.) Their imagination that all Cosmogony implies a generation of the same kind as that of the animal and vegetable world. (4.) The axiom which they lay down. Ex nihilo nihil fit. B. Refute by declaring the opposite truth — not resting upon any criticism of the word " Create," and its corresponding words in Hebrew and Greek, but upon the testi mony of God Himself as to the fact, viz., as we find it (i.) Unambiguously declared by the in spired historian of the Creation. Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xxi (2.) Received by the people of God ever after; as shewn a. In the Old Testament. b. In the testimony (though extra canonical) of those that lived between the two Testaments. c. By the Apostles of Christ in the New Testament : and then, d. On this authority, believed by all the Christian Church, who have attached this special meaning to the word "create," viz., of creating from nothing. Against the doctrine of an independent TAH, or Matter coeval with God Himself, out" of the atoms of which He merely fabricated the world, as men build houses of pre-existent materials — [the doctrine of almost all the later Theists among the Greeks, who were not Christians — of all the Indian theistical schools except the Vedantic, particularly the Nyaya, and those of the Sdnkhya that are not Atheists]. This doctrine, resting on the same arguments nearly as the Pantheistic notion above stated and refuted (which has the advantage of this in point of simplicity and apparent reverence for the Deity), refute by arguments specially belonging to it : viz., A. From its opposition to that independence of God which every argument for His existence requires. B. From its repugnancy to the equally necessary notion of God's infinite power and all- sufficiency. C. From the necessary failure of analogy between the dependent creature and the self existent Creator in this respect. D. From the failure of that analogy between the generation of the world and that of plants and animals, which is assumed in the reason i. A. (3.). E. From the equal failure of the analogy on which the supposed axiom i. A. (4.) is built. xxii Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. III. Distinguish the several kinds of created beings, as we find them in the divinely inspired Cosmogony of Moses : viz., I. Those made immediately from nothing, or created in the strictly proper sense. [Which original creation is apparently distinguished in the history of Moses from the formation of the actual world in the Six Days ; neither is it, in the construction of the text, necessarily linked to the latter in point of time.] 2. Those made out of previously created substance. Secondly. As to the nature of the Act, viz.. Creation, which has been sufficiently considered in the second division of the first head. Thirdly. As to the Agent : viz., God, considered with reference to this great act of His power ; viz., I. As moved to this production of the universe not by any external impulsive cause,^(which were a contradiction, as every pretence to consider the acts and existence of God a priori must necessarily be), but by His own infinite good ness — choosing thus to multiply and reflect itself in the creature. With respect to this — I. State how the Heathens, who saw this truth, were led from the consideration of the eternal attribute of goodness in the Creator to the pantheistical error respecting the creatures. 2. Shew how that wrong and dangerous consequence is obviated by distinguishing between what is necessary and what is not, in the consideration' of the Divine beneficence : which leads us to view God II. As free in that act : no other determinate cause existing for it but His will. With respect to this, I. Observe the stress laid by the sacred writers on this point (e.g.. Psalm xxxiii. 9) that with God simply to will is to effect ; a truth which in its mere enuncia tion by Moses as to the first expressed act of the world's creation, excited the attention and admira tion of the Heathens for its sublimity. 2. Observe, that though it is essential to this freedom that God might, if He had so pleased, have created the world at any point of duration, or even from Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xxiif all eternity, we are bound by the testimony of the Divine oracles to believe, that God did in fact make the world we inhabit at no indefinitely distant period of time, and that the creation of man cer tainly is within seven thousand years from the present time (viz., b.c. 4004, if the numbers of the patriarchal generations are correctly read in the Jewish copies; but about B.C. 5800, if the LXX reading of the Bible be true, — and somewhat between these two accounts, if the Samaritan Pentateuch exhibit the real text of Moses in those numbers). Prove this most important fact — the recent age of the world [ — or more properly of man and the world in which he dwells : since the age of these is not necessarily linked to that of the heavens and the earth universally, as may be observed in reference to certain geological objections (See III. i of the First head) — ] A. By shewing the utter want of evidence, and contradiction to known facts and history, in the pretences opposed to it, which the vanity of some ancient nations has induced them to set up, e.g., (i.) The pretended records of the Egyp tian Dynasties, as published by Manetho in the time of the Ptolemies (ascending, as they do, far above the times stated by Herodotus and others, who were inquisitive observers of Egyptian affairs long before, very soon after the long line of the indigenous Pharaohs was closed). (2.) Thepretended astronomical observa tions of the Chaldeans for many thousands of years before Alex ander (reduced on accurate in quiry to the more moderate and just period of 1903) with calcula tions of celestial phenomena for all that time (calculations of eclipses, &c., unless accompanied xxiv Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. with references to actual observa tions, proving nothing as to the actual age of the earth, sun, and moon ; inasmuch as when the astronomical elements of their position and orbits are once ac curately known, they may be cal culated for the future and past alike without limit). (3.) [The extravagant duration assigned by the Indian Brahmans to the three ages of the world preceding the present, the Cdli Yuga, which commenced 3102 B.C., and is to last according to them 432,000 years — whereas the Duapara Yuga, their brazen age, lasted double that time — the Trita Yuga, or silver age, triple — and the Sat-ya Yicga, or golden age, the period of Vishnu's earliest incarnations, quadruple — (thus making the commencement of the world b.c. 3,891,102; i.e., four millions of years from the present time, minus 107,060) ; and (4.) Still more the monstrous opinion of the same persons, which as cribes to the whole Mahd Yuga ( = 4,320,000 years), comprehend ing aU the four ages of the world, a continual repetition after suc cessive periods of destruction : all these, with the yet greater in cluding periods of the Manvan- tara and the Calpa or day of Brahma (which = 1000 Mahd Yugas = 14 Manvantaras), — go ing round in ceaseless cycles of renovation and dissolution.] B. By remarking the unequivocal signs which Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xxv the world actually exhibits of a recent origin — (quoting the remarkable verses of the Roman Epicurean Poet, by which he confutes on this ground the doctrines of endless cycles, then propounded by some Greek as well as Eastern philosophers) : viz., (i.) The novel dates of arts and sciences and all useful inventions. (2.) The fact that all genuine traditions of the several nations of the world, that ascend beyond the period of authentic history, are confined to the same period of time as the Mosaic account im plies, and are all terminated by some recollection, more or less distinct, of the Flood. (3.) The impossibility of accounting satisfactorily for this limited ex tent of the world's earliest tra ditions, by any hypothesis of endless cycles of depopulation of former tribes of men ; excepting only that to which these records do indeed wonderfully conduct us, the universal Deluge. (4.) The real agreement of the ancient cultivated nations — Egyptians, Chaldeans, Indians, and Chinese — with this great fact, when the additions of national vanity or priestly imposition are allowed for. [The commencement of the present age called Cdli Yuga, b.c. 3102 (nearly identical with the period which the LXX Chron ology assigns to the Deluge), is an instance in India : as the fable of the destruction of the world by water at the close of each Manvantara (and the de- xxvi Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. liverance of the just Manu with his seven companions in a ship prepared at the command of Brahmi), is an evidence of the tradition of the Flood itself.] III. As One in this great act of Almighty power ; being both Himself the only God, and neither receiving nor requiring aid from other beings. With respect to this — I . State the contradictory opinions which the perplexing speculations respecting the origin of evil introduced among the Gentile philosophers to corrupt the. original tradition on the subject ; and especially those which heathen influences, joined with an impatience of Christian mysteries, formed into heresies in the early Church : viz., A. The doctrine of the Persian Magi, that the evil in the universe was created by an evil Deity, as the good by the good God: whence Manes derived his heresy among the Christians. B. [The doctrine of the Indian Brahmans also, that the evil in the world presupposes evil in its Divine Creator: so that though the Divine Essence (or brahma), in its original uncreating form (in which emancipated spirits become absorbed into it) is pure frorri all qualities — yet in its connexion with matter and the world, in the triple form of Creator, Preserver, Destroyer (Brahma, Vishnu, Siva), it assumes necessarily the three qualities, viz., passion and darkness, as well as virtue: and that while virtue is especially attached to the Preserver, and its opposite to the Destroyer — the intermediate quality of Passion is ascribed as an especial characteristic to the work of the Creator.] C. The similar doctrine universally prevalent in the philosophy of Western Asia — attributing a morally imperfect, if not a positively evil, character to the Demiurgus, or Creator of the world : a doctrine by which the various Gnostic sects very early endeavoured to Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xxvii adulterate Christianity (imputing the Law and the Old Testament to this Creator of the world, the New Testament alone to the pure God). D, The very different doctrine of the Arian heresy, indigenous among Christians; which denies the Catholic faith, by declaring that in the creation of the world God used the agency of a created Being — such as is the Aoyos in their perverted theology. 2. Refute those Manichean and Gnostic errors, as did the ancient Fathers, by the declaration of the Christian truth, that there is no nature substantially evil; that moral evil, i.e., contradiction to the pur pose and will of God, is not a substance but a mode; and, consequently, that whatever becomes of the intricate and insoluble question of its origin, the great truth of natural and revealed religion, that God made " all things very good" remains unimpeached. IV. As characteristically the Father (the Father of all — and of His Son in particular) in this work of creation : though the Deity in all its plenitude of person and operation, was certainly concerned and engaged in it, as the Scripture declares, and all Catholic Christians have ever beheved. In this respect — I. Shew the propriety of the special mention of God the Father as Creator, in this and all the ancient Creeds — A. From the close accordance of this with the usual order and language of Scripture; stating the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, as such,_to be the Maker of all things. B. From the nature of the case in its apphcation to ourselves : God as the Father, being the light in which our primary relation to God as His creatures and dependents induces us to regard Him ; whereas the restitution of that relation to us, through the incarnate Son, and by the sanctifying Spirit, is espe cially the object of the Gospel revelation, as distinct from the natural theology that respects the Creator. xxviii Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. 2. Prove that the absence of that same special mention of the Son and the Spirit in this Creed (though mention is thus made of them also in the Creeds of Nice and Constantinople), is by no means in tended to deny the fundamental Christian truth, that without those sacred Persons nothing was made : inasmuch as this sole and peculiar mention arises from other grounds, both totally inconsistent with such exclusion : viz., A, From the necessity, in the early days of the Christian Church, of particularly meeting the most ancient and pernicious Oriental heresy above-mentioned : viz., that the Son of God, coming from the bosom of the pure ineffable Deity, came to redeem the spiritual part of man from the hands of the Demiurgus or material Creator : a heresy best met by stating, in the words of the Apostle, that the Father of the Redeemer was Himself the Creator, — the Creator of matter as weU as intelligence, — of things visible as well as invisible. B. From the priority of Paternity ¦ before ex plained : by virtue of which, whatever Divine property or operation is predicated thus primarily of the Father, becomes by necessary consequence true of the Word and the Spirit, who are eternally and essen tially One with Him. Fourthly. As to the importance of thus recognising God as the Creator : explain how it is necessary — I. For the conception of God's glory as reflected from all His works, and through them only made naturally intelligible to us. II. For the humiliation of man, as a part, and a small and vile part only, of this immense creation. III. For the production of willingness and universahty in our obedience to His wiU. IV. For a most fertile and never-faihng subject of meditation and study, and of comfort under every condition and circumstance. Sum up, therefore, this final clause of the first Article of our Creed. Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xxix ARTICLE II. "And in Jesus Christ His only Son, our Lord." I. " And in Jesus." In the appellation " Jesus Christ," which characterises the next great object of Christian belief, — distinguishing between the proper name and the official title, — we begin with the former, or the nomination strictly so called. And, First. Respecting the ordinary use ofthe name "Jesus," — state I. The time when, according to constant Jewish usage, the name was imparted to our Lord. II. The commonness of this particular name : mentioning some _ instances of others to whom the same proper designation belonged ; viz., I. Of persons coeval, or nearly so, to our Lord Him self, recorded in the New Testament, or by the Pharisaical historian not long after. 2. Of one eminent and pious person some few cen turies before, the author of one of the most excel lent of the extra-canonical writings of the Jews, and of one of his ancestors. 3. Of the high priest at the time of the building of the second temple by Zorobabel — (and of others in the Old Testament). 4. Of the first on record to whom this name Jesus belonged, so designated in the New Testament throughout, as by the Alexandrine interpreters of the Old, — the great leader of the people of God to the land of promised With respect to him mention, A. what was his name originally. B, By whom and on what occasion that modi fication of the former name took place which made him Jehoshua, JrtB'n'', or by contraction yW'' Ijiuous [the latter form be ing that which is given to his name and that of the subsequent Joshuas in the books of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, that were written subsequently to the captivity in Babylon]. xxx Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. Secondly. Respecting the import of the name, explain, I. Its proper signification of Saviour, belonging to the He brew root V^ [the collation of which with the Arabic » ¦:¦. shews its original signification to be that of enlarge ment from straitness or distress], and~ common to this with other names from the same root ; and particularly to that, which was the former name of that great cognominal type of our Lord, the conqueror of the earthly Canaan, — Hoshea, the son of Nun. II. The pecuharity of this form of the name, as solemnly bestowed by Moses (instead of the preceding Hoshea) on him, from whom that appellation descended as an ordinary one to the Israelites of after ages — and with reference to that event, which made him a type of the Saviour of the world : remarking particularly — I. That this was no alteration of name; as in some other similar cases. 2. That it was but the addition of one, and that pro verbially the smallest and most common, of the Hebrew letters. 3. That the letter 1 thus solemnly added (when taken in conjunction with the following n still retained in the earliest exhibitions of the name,) is not unaptly understood, as it has long been by Jews and Christians, to point to the ineffable name of God (Jah or Jehovah), as the Author of the salvation of which Joshua was the in strument. [Cf Michaelis, Supp. Lex. Hebr., p. 1177.] Thirdly. Respecting the appUcability of the name thus expres sive, though so common, to the actual Messiah or Christ, (though not describedhy this His proper name, in the ancient prophecies) : — I. Infer the importance of the application, I. From the fact of the double Angelic message by which it was prescribed, as soon as the long expected Incarnation took place : viz., A. First to the Virgin Mother at the Annunciation. B. Again to her husband, the guardian and re puted father of our Lord, shortly before the Nativity. Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xxxi 2. From the apparent stress which, on the latter of these occasions, the Angel lays on the Agent — ATT02 euxsii — thus specifying Him as the Divine Saviour, whom the substitution of this form Jehoshua for ^ Hoshea in the first bestowitl of the name by Moses is understood to denote peculiarly. 3. From the remark immediately subjoined by the evan gelist, that this interpretation of the name was the fulfilment of the prophecy, that the child of the Virgin should be called " God with us." II. Further iUustrate the propriety of this application of a name denoting a Saviour, and peculiarly a Divine Saviour, to our Lord. I. From the practice of the heathens to give the title of Saviour to their gods. 2. From the title of Saviour bestowed on those who de livered the people of God from various temporary evils. 3. From the eraphasis with vvhich this appellation is be stowed on the Eternal Deliverer, not only in the annunciation of the name to His mother, but in the promulgation of the title, on His actual birth, to those who then represented the people of- Israel. III. Prove the exact truth of the application, I. From Christ having revealed, in a more eminent manner than any other prophet or apostle, the way and means of salvation. 2. From His having not only revealed, but Himself also procured, the means of salvation by the sacrifice of Himself. 3. From His not having only preached, and meritori ously procured, the means of salvation, but from His applying and conferring it by His intercession and by His kingly power in His state of exaltation in heaven, from which the faithful expect Him as their final deliverer hereafter. IV. Confirm the truth and propriety of the application by the retrospection to the former inferior and typical saviours, and specially, I. To the great ruler and deliverer of the people of God from the bondage of Egypt. xxxiv Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. B. By the use of translations and paraphrases, when the knowledge of the old language of the sacred text was perishing. HI. The time when, according to the Divine oracles', this ex pectation should be realised : as it may be gathered I. From the prediction, before the Law, of the ancestor of Israel, concerning the coming of Him to -whom the Sceptre should rightly belong, not only over Israel, but over the gathered Gentiles. 2. From those of the Prophets, since the Law, who spake of the building of the second temple, in which Christ should appear, and whose destruction should be'shortly preceded by the accomplishment of His great mediation; all pointing, as did the earlier prophecy, to a part in the history of the world which has now been long since past. Thirdly. Respecting the fulfilment of this expectation of the Christ in the sole person of Jesus our Saviour, — prove I. The appearance of Jesus of Nazareth, "who is called Christ," the Founder of the religion since universally knowji as the Christian, at the precise time when this expectation of the Christ or Messiah was to be realised. II. The correspondence of His attributes of fortune and station with those which the Prophets assigned to the expected Messiah : viz., I. With respect to family : that He was descended A. From that tribe of Israel from which. the Jews universally, as distinct from the Samaritans, did constantly, even in the midst of their most corrupt traditions on the subject, expect their great Messiah or Christ to come, as announced by their forefather Israel expressly. B. From the particular family in that tribe, of that anointed king of Israel, whom the history and the Prophets of the holy nation describe as raised up specially for this end ; to be in this respect the great type of His anointed Son. 2. With respect'to place : that He was A. Born in the same town of Judsea with His royal type and progenitor : viz., that which of old distinguished His particular faraily and race, Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xxxv antecedently to their royalty, and possession of Jerusalem. B. Realising in this respect the description of the Prophets, who speak of the future Christ as about to illustrate more eminently even than the great king then past, the fortunes of that still humble place. 3. With respect to the mode of His birth : accomplishing in this respect also the characters assigned by the Prophet. III. The yet more remarkable correspondence of the voluntary acts and attributes of Jesus, with those which the Prophets assigned to the Christ : viz., I. With respect to His doctrine : that He was A. A Teacher, as the great Lawgiver before announced, and as the Prophets often de clared He should be. B. Higher, accordingly, both in authority and matter than all since Moses ; and even than Moses himself, to whom God spake face to face. 2. With respect to His acts : that He was A. A performer of those special works which the Prophets of old announced as marks of the coming Messiah. B. Greater in this respect than all that the world, or than, the chosen people of God, had ever seen. 3. With respect to His sufferings (in which was the great stumbling-block of the Jewish expectants), nevertheless prove, — A. That sufferings were foretold in the most express manner by the Prophets of the expected Deliverer of Israel. B. That these sufferings are predicted of the same person as the triumphs, viz., of Christ the King : as may be proved from the evident terms of those prophecies against the recent Talmudical Jews, who refer the latter alone to Messiah, the Son of David, and the former to another imaginary person, Messiah, the son of Ephraim. xxxvi Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. C. That the sufferings thus described by the Prophets of the One expected Messias, are minutely verified in what the evangelical history records of Jesus of Nazareth :¦ viz., (i.) In respect of contempt : all the pre ceding circumstances of His hfe wanting that which would procure Him external homage from the people, notwithstanding the dignity of His person and descent. (2.) In the actual pains inflicted on Him, in most minute and remarkable particulars : as displayed— ' a. Before His death ; in the several circumstances of wrong and indignity which He suf fered. b. During His death ; when they reached their utmost intensity. c. After His death ; the circum stances of humiliation extend ing even beyond it, though these were soon exchanged for triumph and exaltation. IV. The wonderful correspondence of the great fruit and effect of these acts and sufferings of Jesus Christ, with those which the prophetic Scriptures foretel as closely con comitant with the acts and sufferings they ascribe to the coming Christ or Messiah-: viz., I. With respect to the immediate effect itself: that all the heathen nations should flock to the - standard of Christ, and embrace the faith of the God of Israel in Him. Shew A. That this effect, the most unlikely to all human, apprehension, was involved in all the prophecies of the common Deliverer. B. That it did in fact follow, by immediate consequence, the passion and resurrection of our Lord : viz., the aggregation (i.) Of those devout Gentiles [called proselytes of the gate by the Rabbins] who adopted. the wor- Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xxxvii ship of the One God of Israel, without becoming subject to the Law. (2.) Of the Gentiles at large, before in volved in idolatry and super stition. 2. With respect to the fact in that consequence, which was the great stumbling-stone to the selfish Israel ites in their expectation of the gathering of the Gentiles to their anointed King : viz., the oblitera tion of the distinction between Jew and Gentile : shew A. That this effect also is distinctly ascribed by the prophets to Christ, as well as in separable from all their predictions of the conquest of the Gentiles, when spiritually and truly understood. B. That it was in fact, raost immediately and most wonderfully, the fruit of the humilia tion and exaltation of Jesus our Saviour. 3. With respect to the decisive proofs here afforded of this effect,' — and consequently all its preceding causes, and the Scriptures that told of each, — being from God alone : shew this A. From the doctrines of the new faith : which contained (i.) The condemnation of all the reli gions of the greatest part of the world, and of the highest in arts and arms among the rest, in favour of the religion of a small and despised corner of the world, and even of a Teacher rejected and crucified by them. (2.) Precepts, the most opposed to carnal inclination. (3.) Promises, which are all invisible, and addressed to higher principles than any worldly inducements could reach. (4.) Predictions of what was to be the actual fate in the world of those xxxviii Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. who personahy promulgated this religion — predictions uttered by their Lord, and accomplished in their whole lives. B. From the condition and station in the world of both the Founder and His earliest witnesses : being such as qould bring nothing but sharae to the project of converting the world, if that project could be conceived to be of raan. C. From the mode of conduct pursued by them in their undertaking; proving throughout that they depended on, and were solely maintained by, the super human power of God. Fourthly. Respecting the raanifestation of the peculiar import explained to belong to the term Messiah, or Christ, in the actual work of Him who was thus expected and announced, and who thus fulfilled the expectation. State I. The typification of the great Messiah as such, no less than the prediction of His acts, under the old dispensation : as shewn in the solemn unction I. Of Kings. 2. Of Priests. 3. Of Prophets. II. The realisation of this character of the " Anointed," in Him who alone of mankind occupied the threefold office which it denotes (while the most eminent of His types occupied, at the most, but two of the three) : when we behold Jesus Christ, as the order of our salvation requires Him to be beheld, — I. As our great Prophet : A. Anointed or commissioned to this office ex pressly by the Divine Spirit, as the Prophets of old declared. B. Prefigured as such by all inferior Prophets, who have been like Elisha anointed and commis sioned to that sacred office. C. Accredited as the great Teacher of the Divine will ;— (i.) By the preparatory tesdmony of one Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xxxix who was himself on that very account declared to be a Prophet, and more than a Prophet. (2.) By the audible voice of the Father, and the visible descent of the Holy Ghost on Himself, the incarnate Son, whom men should hear. (3.) By the testimony of His own works. D. Discharging that office, (i.) By His perfect preaching ofthe Divine counsel and will while on earth. (2.) By His Spirit teaching and informing His Church more fully than ever before, after His ascension to heaven. As our great High Priest : A. Anointed as was Aaron to that most sacred oflfice, and prefigured by him and all his de scendants, the Priests of the (Mosaic) Law : nevertheless, B. Not belonging to their order, nor even of their tribe in Israel (the tribe of Levi, which alone could minister in sacred things under the Law), but to a tribe of which the Law " said nothing as concerning the Priesthood," the royal tribe of Judah. C. Prefigured in that peculiar character, in which He was to supersede and abolish the legal and typical Priesthood of Aaron, by another and more ancient type : whose erainence is shewn, (i;) In uniting in one person (unlike thera) the offices of Priest and King. (2.) In being (unlike the Aaronic Priest hood) without recorded succession and change of sacerdotal adminis tration. (3.) In being superior to the Father of the Faithful Himself, from whom Levi and Judah and all their descendants, both priestly and royal, sprung. D. Discharging that office, (1.) By becoming a self offered sacrifice for sin, as represented and imperfectly b2 xl Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. shadowed forth in the priesthood and victims of the Mosaic Law. (2.) By continuing, by His intercession at God's right hand, the sacerdotal office of applying the merit of His sacrifice, whereby He remains a " Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek." (3.) By blessing men, which He does in turning them from their iniquities, in that immortal life to which He rose after His passion. 3. As our glorious King : A. Anointed like David, His father, to that oflfice ; as that royal Prophet and all the subsequent ones have largely foretold. B. Announced as such to the Blessed Virgin, His mother, by the Angel that bore the message of the incarnation. C. Announcing Himself in that character by words occasionally, and symbolical acts during His humiliation ; and receiving that homage from those who believed in Him. D. Actually inaugurated as such upon His ascen sion to heaven ; and taking His seat at God's right hand, where all power and majesty is His. E. Discharging that office — (i.) By ruling the heart and conduct of His people not only outwardly by precept, but inwardly by grace. (2.) By aiding them powerfully and protect ing them against all the obstacles of their salvation. (3.) By making them finally kings and priests to God and Hi* Father. (4.) By vanquishing enemies, viz., a. Temporal enemies ; as exemplified in the conquest and destruction of the Jewish state that had rejected Him from being their King. Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xH b. Spiritual enemies ; as a,. All who virtually deny Him and are opposed to His cause and kingdom. /3. Satan, Sin, and Death, the last enemy. Fifthly. Respecting the mode in which He who was thus emin ently Christ, the Messiah or Anointed, received the unction of the peculiar offices thus unfolded ; state — I. The matter of that sacred unction by which the Prophets, Priests, and Kings were designated to their respective offices : viz., I. The particular prescriptions respecting this substance in the Law. 2. The particular stress laid on it under the Theocracy, and the reference to the future Messiah. 3. The tradition of the Rabbinical Jews ; which, whether true or false as to the fact mentioned, declares their sense of its typical importance and connexion with the Messiah. II. The spiritual thing of which that oil was the type; viz., the Holy Ghost with which Christ was anointed, I. At the instant of His incarnation, i.e., on the concep tion of the blessed Virgin, as the Angel announced to her. 2. At the solemn inauguration of His baptism. On which remark, A. That this latter' unction did not supersede that former one, which is coeval with the humanity of our Christ : (according to the notion of the Nestorians, who divided His person and maintained, that Jesus was not united to the Christ before that baptism by John). B. That the double unction of His eminent type in the character of the Christ, first as designated successor to the rejected but yet reigning Saul (who had also received the royal unction froni the same minister of God) ; secondly, as his rightful actual suc cessor in the kingdom (first of Judah, then xlii Ajtalysis of Pearson on the Creed. of aU Israel) : did not in like manner pre judice the validity or fulness of either, as coming frora the same source. C. That the latter unction denoted His actual entrance on the great work of His pro phetical ministry — for which His previous life of thirty years was a preparation — and on the execution, soon after, of His further ministries as Priest and King of the Israel of God. III. The sufficiency of the spiritual unction to satisfy the object for which the anointing with oil was so carefully enjoined in the Law ; I. With reference to the end of the injunction, which was, A. To signify the Divine election of the person. B. To qualify the person for the reception of the Divine influx, which should enable him to discharge his duties. 2. With reference to the instrument eraployed ; in which the holy inspiration fuUy answers the -sig nificancy of the material substance, A. In the richness and excellency ascribed to the oil of olive by the ancient Israelites. B. In the freedom from corruption ascribed to it. C. In the aromatic substances joined with oil in the solemn unctions. D. In its being apphed to the head of the King or Priest, thus inaugurated. E. In the effusion with which the unction was to be accompanied. Sixthly. Respecting the necessity of believing and confessing this great and most distinguishing titular adjunct to the name of our Lord. Prove this. I. Because He could not be to us Jesus, i.e., a Saviour, unless He were also Christ. II. Because the confession of this character, in which He was specially designated and declared from the foundation of the world, as the Head of a chosen seed and the intro ducer of a kingdom of everlasting righteousness, is the Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xliii great engagement for us to forswear all that is inconsistent with that kingdom, which we thus profess (against the Jews) to have been already begun upon the earth. III. Because the offices which belong to Him as Christ, are thus only engaged in our behalf to lead us to salvation : viz., I. By His character of a -Prophet, to lead us to the obedience of faith. 2. By His character as Priest, to produce in us adher ence, assurance, and entire resignation of ourselves to Him, as His redeemed people. 3. By His character as King, to produce allegiance, confidence, and hope. IV. Because this alone instructs us in the extent of the obliga tion implied in the sacred name of Christian; and of that unction from the Holy One which we therefore need, to walk worthy of that caUing, in conformity to Him whose living members we are required (as we profess ourselves) to be. Sum up, therefore, in few words what is meant by confessing our Lord Jesus as the Christ. § 3. "His only Son." The appellation of our Lord in the Creed, being immediately followed by the assertion of His Filiation ; in discussing this, we must consider n First. The account of this designation : viz., I. Tracing it from the annexation of this title to that of the Messiah as an inseparable adjunct; — I. In the expectation ofthe Jews. 2. In the application of the term made by the Apostles to the true Messiah. II. Stating the only variation between this Creed and the Oriental ones, in the expression of this Article of the Catholic Faith. Secondly. The explanation of it : stating how Jesus Christ is the Son of God, — I. In several inferior senses ; to which the term is attached in several places of Scripture (to be severally quoted) : viz., I. Oh account of His conception by the more immediate and miraculous power of the Spirit of God of the Virgin Mary. xliv Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. 2. On account of His designation to His office as Christ by the will of the Father.. 3. On account of His being the first begotten of the Father from the dead by the quickening power of the same Divine Spirit. 4. On account of His exaltation and consequent in heritance of the highest title in the family of God. II. In a sense higher than aU these: which is required^as weU from the insufficiency of either of the preceding four senses, or all of them, to constitute Jesus Christ the only Son — as from the necessity of providing a foundation for them all (since as the 4th depends on the 3rd for its being, and these presuppose those Divine operations in the constitu tion of the Incarnate Son which appear in the 2nd sense, and in the ist which is the source of all the others; — so also does even that first ground of His Sonship, as Mediator, require an antecedent foundation). Now that there is such a fundamental sense, in which Jesus Christ is truly and properly the Only-begotten Son of God, ante cedently to His Incarnation and Mediation, — explain and prove in the following five particulars : viz., I. Because Jesus Christ the Son of Mary existed before He was thus miraculously formed from her by the power of God — and consequently in a nature dif ferent from that which He then for the first time received. Demonstrate this pre-existence (against the Photinians of old, and the modem Socinians, who impugn it) — A. From the fact, constantly asserted throughout the whole New Testament, that He came do-wn to earth from that heaven to which He re-ascended with the full rights of. in heritance. Prove the impossibility of re ferring this to any thing else than a higher and pre-existent state of the Son of God : inasmuch as (i.) Between the Conception and the Ascension (the extreme points of the four grounds of Christ's Son- ship as Mediator), no other nature was received by our Lord than that in which He was born of the Virgin. Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xlv (2.) What was thus derived from the Virgin had its origin and progres sive being here on earth : and could not be in heaven till it ascended thither after His resur rection from the grave. (Prove this point in particular against the monstrous fiction of Faustus Socinus, who attempted to explain those passages of our Lord being in heaven, by imagining a local as cension thither between his birth and public ministry. Shew that there was no such until His great ascension which foUowed His triumph over death, — and which for the first time exalted our humanity to the heavenly places above.) (3.) The assertion that the Son of God is thus in heaven, implies a local and actual presence there in His antecedent mode of existence. B. From the necessity of carrying back this pre- existent state of the Son of God, — (i.) Before John the Baptist: who, as a man, was our Lord's senior; but who nevertheless declared con stantly not only his inferiority in dignity, but his posteriority as to time. Shew this from Scripture. (2.) Before Abraham. Prove this in particular against all the attempts of the Socinians to distort the un equivocal assertion of our Lord to the Jews, who accused Him for blasphemy for thus speaking. (3.) Before the reproduction of the world after the Flood: which may be directly concluded from a passage of St Peter (as well as by certain consequence from the places of xliv Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. 2. On account of His designation to His office as Christ by the will of the Father. 3. On account of His being the first begotten of the Father from the dead by the quickening power of the same Divine Spirit. 4. On account of His exaltation and consequent in heritance of the highest title in the faraily of God.- II. In a sense higher than all these : which is required — as weU from the insufficiency of either of the preceding four senses, or all of them, to constitute Jesus Christ the only Son — as from the necessity of providing a foundation for them all (since as the 4th depends on the 3rd for its being, and these presuppose those Divine operations in the constitu tion of the Incarnate Son which appear in the 2nd sense, and in the ist which is the source of aU the others; — so also does even that first ground of His Sonship, as Mediator, require an antecedent foundation). Now that there is such a fundamental sense, in which Jesus Christ is truly and properly the Only-begotten Son of God, ante cedently to His Incarnation and Mediation, — explain and prove in the following five particulars : viz., I. Because Jesus Christ the Son of Mary existed before He was thus miraculously formed from her by the power of God — and consequently in a nature dif ferent from that which He then for the first time received. Demonstrate this pre-existence (against the Photinians of old, and the modem Socinians, who impugn it) — A. From the fact, constantly asserted throughout the whole New Testament, that He came do-wn to earth from that heaven to which He re-ascended with the full rights of, in heritance. Prove the impossibility of re ferring this to any thing else than a higher and pre-existent state of the Son of God : inasmuch as (i.) Between the Conception and the Ascension (the extreme points of the four grounds of Christ's Son- ship as Mediator), no other nature was received by our Lord than that in which He was born of the Virgin. Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xlv (2.) What was thus derived from the Virgin had its origin and progres sive being here on eartii : and could not be in heaven till it ascended thither after His resur rection from the grave. (Prove this point in particular against the monstrous fiction of Faustus Socinus, who attempted to explain those passages of our Lord being in heaven, by imagining a local as cension thither between his birth and public ministry. Shew that there was no such until His great ascension which followed His triumph over death, — and which for the first time exalted our humanity to the heavenly places above.) (3.) The assertion that the Son of God is thus in heaven, implies a local and actual presence there in His antecedent mode of existence. B. From the necessity of carrying back this pre- existent state of the Son of God, — (i.) Before John the Baptist: who, as a man, was our Lord's senior; but who nevertheless declared con stantly not only his inferiority in dignity, but his posteriority as to time. Shew this from Scripture. (2.) Before Abraham. Prove this in particular against all the attempts of the Socinians to distort the un equivocal assertion of our Lord to the Jews, who accused Him for blasphemy for thus speaking. (3.) Before the reproduction of the world after the Flood: which may be directly concluded from a passage of St Peter (as well as by certain consequence from the places of xlvi Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. Scripture under the following (4)th and (s)th divisions, if the words " by the Spirit " and " He went ", are rightly interpreted of a prior preaching, and not of one in Hades : i.e., if we consider — a. The Spirit as [not Christ's spirit opposed to His flesh (according to the most ob vious meaning), but as] the Holy Ghost ; and the sv before iDHMiLaTi as not local, like that before iragjc/, but potential, viz., " by." b. The persons addressed, viz., those " who were sometitne disobedient," as having been addressed at the time of their disobedience, which was while the ark was building. (4.) Before the creation itself of the old world ; which prove to be un deniably true from the Scripture : since a. He by whom we are now created after the Divine image is described as being also He by (or through) whora we were first created. b. All things are said to' be made by Him : and thence also — (5.) Lastly, before all worlds and from all eternity : which point (though denied by the Arians who admitted all the preceding four) is demon strated with equal certainty from the Scriptures. 2. Because the nature which the Son of God thus possessed antecedently to His conception in the Virgin's womb, was no created nature, but essen- Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xlvii tially Divine. Prove this against the Arian and all other adversaries — A. From the fact of His creating the world : both the reason of the case, and the Scrip tures which certify of that fact, directly assuring us that He to whom that properly Divine act is ascribed, is the Divine Aoros, the Power and Wisdom of God. B. From the manner in which His Incarnation or susception of humanity is spoken of in Scripture; the Divine nature being as dis tinctly and properly predicated of Him as the human, and in the same form of words : proving (i.) That He was in the form of a servant when He became man. (2.) That He was in the form of God before. He was in the form of a servant. (3.) That His existence in the forra of God is as true as His subsistence in the form of man ; the " form " being in both instances the nature itself C. Frora the eternity, as to all past as well as all future time, which He distinctly asserts of Himself D. From the vision of His glory as seen in past ages; being described in such a manner repeatedly, as to prove the identity of this glory with that of the self-existent and eternal Being. E, From the name of God being distinctly ascribed to the raan Christ Jesus in Scrip ture in such a manner as to exclude every improper and inferior sense of the word " God : " proving (r.) That the absence of the article in the iraportant places where this is distinctly predicated, does not prove, as is ignorantly pretended, the inferior nature of the Godhead, xlviii Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. but is grammatical, required for every predicate. (2.) That the testimony of the Apostles to their Lord's proper Divinity is marked and impregnable in many passages : [in the vast majority of which the reading is unques tioned; whUe in the passage i Tim. iii. 16, even if for 02 (^£os) we read the only other possibly admissible reading, viz., 02, it would stiU re late to ©sou tuvrot; as its antece dent — a parenthesis intervening — and thus prove the same point still: and in the passage. Acts xx. 28, the most probable of the other readings besides the received rou ®im — viz., Tm Kvpiov xa/ @iov — still proves the same.] (3.) That the circumstances annexed to the term "God" shew the one living and true God to be alone intended. 3. Because the Divine essence thus possessed by our Lord antecedently to His huraanity, is communi cated to Him through the Father. Prove this — A. From the absolute Unity of the Divine es sence ; to which the existence of more than one original hypostasis of Divinity would be repugnant. B. From the relation of the two persons of the Godhead : as attested by the constant man ner in which the Incarnate Son of God speaks of His acts, even of His Divine acts, with respect to the Father ; and of the glory in which He was with the Father before the world was. C. From the entire unalloyed communication of the whole nature and properties of the Deity : by which this ineffable mystery is distinguished from the low anthropomor- phitic conceptions of the heathens (whether Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. xlix the ordinary Pagan Theogonies or the Gnos tic emanations) ; and whereby the Son is, in respect of essence and Divinity, fully equal to the Father who begot Him. 4. Because this coramunication of the Divine essence is what is termed in the oracles of Scripture the Generation of the Son. And here, A. Prove the assertion of such an eternal Genera tion of the Son of God, (i.) In the New Testament, _which ex hibits His manifestation to man. (2.) In the ancient Scriptures, which with more or less clearness an nounced this. B. Shew that as to the essential notion of genera tion — viz., the communication of the same nature to another subject — this Generation, while it answers, transcends also, all analogy in created beings. 5. Because this Generation or communication of the Divine nature is described as being absolutely peculiar to Him as the Only-begotten Son : on which subject, A. Shew against some ancient opponents, that the " Only " here does thus refer to the person of the Son, not to that of the Father, as the only source of His being. B. Shew against the modern Socinians, and other (so called) Unitarians, that the term MovoyEi/jis cannot be explained away into " best beloved." C. Shew the application of the term, thus vindi cated doubly from misapprehension to our Lord : and here (i.) Obviate the difficulty arising from created beings being called the sons of God, frora the considera tion that this is an inferior and improper sense {i.e., not according to the strict import) of the term son. (2.) Obviate the far greater difficulty 1 Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. arising from fhe Holy Spirit, whose essence and nature is undoubtedly identical with that of the Father and of the Son, but who is never called a Son of God, appearing to interfere with the integrity of this title of Only-htgotten. On this subject, on which we cannot pro ceed a step further than Divine testimony leads us, remark, a. That the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Es sence of the Divinity is never terraed generation or production in Scripture, which the Church language constantly foUows, but pro cession merely. b. That in created things there are processions of consub- stantial things, without gen eration. c. That the procession of the Holy Spirit of God (com pared to that which is in raan the ni") 'Jtvivfta, or breath) — is referred both to the Father and to the Son, as its source. Thirdly. For the necessity of this Article of Faith ; exhibit it in its bearing — I. On the confirraation of our belief and trust in His meritorious work as our Mediator and Redeemer. IL On the due honour and estimation to be ascribed to Him as our Lord. III. On our due thankfulness to God for His infinite love in giving His only-begotten Son for our salvation ; the great argument for all Christian purity and virtue. Sum up, therefore, in few words, the momentous truth of Christian belief expressed in these words, " His only Son." Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. § 4. " Our Lord." Respecting the next name of Jesus Christ the Son of God — viz., " Our Lord," — which in the language of the Holy Scriptures is not merely a descriptive adjunct to the title of Christ, but itself a proper title or appellation ; so as singly and separately taken to mean Him only : — First. Shew the meaning of the term KTPI OS in Scripture — I. Generally with respect to all species of dominion; and peculiarly amongst men. II. In its eminence of signification as applied to the Supreme King. And here, I. As a characteristic description of God (^K El or DTIPK Elohim) with respect to Dominion and AU- sufficiency; translating respectively the titles ''JIN Adonai and ^"W Shaddai. 2. As peculiarly translating that name niiT' Jehovah under which the Selfexistent Deity was divinely revealed to Moses. Shewing, A. The peculiar expressiveness of this applica tion by the HeUenists of the term Kug;os. B. Its propriety : from the coincidence of its Greek root xu^w with that of the Hebrew name. Secondly. Shew the application of this name to Christ, — I. Even in the last most eminent meaning ; viz., as a translation of the incomraunicable name nins I. In several testimonies of the ancient Scriptures as applied in this sense ; but more particularly, 2. In the characteristic description of the Christ by Jeremiah the Prophet. 3. In that which is incidentally annexed to thS account of His forerunner by Malachi, as cited on three several occasions in the New Testament, and so as to prove in each the identity of Christ the Lord with the Lord Jehovah,-viz., A. By the father of the forerunner on his miraculous birth. B. By the Angel to that father before it. C. By our Lord Himself long after, when pointing lii Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. ¦i to the forerunner, and applying the prophecy to him. II. In the descriptive sense of Dominion ; viz., as a translation of "iJIN. And here, I. Shew that this sense is not only consistent with the higher meaning (of Jehovah), but presupposes it. 2. Pistinguish this Dominion of Christ, according to His twofold nature of God and man, into A. The Dominion actually and necessarily pos sessed by the Divine Word, Creator of all things. How confessed after the Incarna tion? B. The Dominion bestowed upon the man Christ Jesus, as such, by the Father ; of which the grant was not till the accomplish ment of His mediatorial work ; i.e., not till the resurrection. And in this also make a twofold distinction, between (i.) What is attached to the economy of redemption, and is therefore to cease at the close of the ages of this world ; and (2.) That which is inseparable from His humanity and connexion with His redeemed brethren; and which, since they are everlasting, must be everlasting also. Shew this from the Scripture. Thirdly. Shew the extent of the Lordship thus ascribed to Christ,— I. As to its objects universally, as declared in Scripture. II. As to mankind in particular, whereby He is peculiarly " our Lord." I. First by the right of Creation and Preservation ; but eminently— according to the true sense of the Creed: — 2. By Redemption : whereby we are His by a double right; viz., A. Tha.t of Conquest : having been rescued by Hira from the Adversary's povver, under which we were before detained. B. That of Purchase : having been (contrary to Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. liii the ordinary process of human conquest) obtained by Him at a price no less than in finite. Which right of purchased possession is confirmed and perpetuated further \rj pro motion and voluntary obligation : i.e., (i.) By His providing for us all that is necessary for our continuing mem bers of the household of God, of which He is the Lord and Head. (2.) By our having bound ourselves to His service in our baptismal engagement. Fourthly. Shew the necessity of believing and professing this Article of Faith. I. For the discovery of our actual state, and relation to Christ. II. To produce obedience to Him : viz., I. Enforcing it to Him, as the LordlDy right of Dominion. 2. Inviting it to Him as Christ the Lord, by sanctions and considerations that should effectually move the will to that recognition. III. To afford a rule for the adjustment of all inferior dominions on earth. IV. To supply comfort and encouragement in all conditions. Sum up, therefore, what is iraplied in this concluding circum stance of the primary Article of Christian belief ARTICLE IIL " Who -was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary." § I. " Who -ivas conceived {and bom)." State what is the difference between the older Creeds (of which we have an example in the Constantinopolitan addition to the Nicene Creed) and this of our Creed in the later editions of it, as to the conception and birth of Christ. — And what is im portant to be observed on this, that we may view the two clauses in connexion (as being both of the Virgin Mary, and both by the power of the Holy Ghost), and thus learn the whole sense of the ancient Church on this Article ? liv Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. Beginning however, with the subject of the whole Article, implied in the relative pronoun " who" prove First. That He of whom this is said, being true God from ever lasting, is nevertheless neither the Father nor the Holy Ghost, but He alone whose eternal generation and dominion and lordship have been before severally proved. Secondly. That in His being conceived and born, we iraply a true and entire participation of the same nature with other men : viz., I. Of a true human Body — and not an apparent one, as some ancient heretics (the Docetae) taught. II. Of a true human Soul: refuting that notion of some ancients and moderns, that the Aoyos or Divine nature of Christ supphed the place of a soul to His human body, and that He had no informing soul beside this ; which is the Apollinarian heresy. Thirdly. That in this entire assumption of human nature He did not cease to be, as to His Divine nature, the same as before; the two natures of perfect God and perfect man remaining in the same subject, but perfectly distinct : viz., I. Without commixture or confusion of the two [as implied in the monophysitic confessions of the Armenian, Coptic, Abyssinian, and Syrian Jacobite Churches] : which prove to be impossible. II. Without conversion or transubstantiation of oiie into the other : — either I. Of the Divine to the Human (as the first Flemish Anabaptists said — which shew to be a gross ab surdity and irapossibility) ; or 2. Of the Human to the Divine — which is the ancient Eutychian -heresy ; the vanity of which supposed transubstantiation evince as the Fathers did. Fourthly. That the doctrine proved under the preceding heads,— viz., that ofthe eternal Word made perfect man in body and soul, without affecting the distinctness either of the Divinity or the humanity — (thus preserving the personal identity against the heresy of the Nestorians, and the distinctness of natures against the opposite heresy of the Eutychians and other Monophysites — is not a bare scholastic speculation, Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. lv but a most important and fundamental truth in Christianity. Shew this from the very words of Scripture concerning our Lord ; establishing the truth of the Church ; determination in the third and fourth CEcumenical Councils. § 2. "By the Holy Ghost." With respect to the power and operation through which this con ception of our Lord by the Virgin "was effected ; viz. " By the -Holy Ghost" — prove First. That this assertion of a special Divine power excludes I. The natural agency of any human father whatever, and particularly Joseph to whom the mother of our Lord was espoused. Refute here from Scripture the assertion of Priestley and other English Socinians (called Unitarians) that Joseph was the father of Jesus. II. Any extraordinary power in her from whom the promised seed of the woman was born. Secondly. That the assertion iiicludes an extraordinary operation of Divine power, by which the Virgin was caused to be a mother, in every respect as other mothers ; and thus I. Not forming the human nature of the substance of Deity, so as to iraply any paternity whatever in the Holy Spirit, — but of the substance of the mother only : and also II. Not forming this human flesh and nature of Christ of any other substance than that of the Virgin : by which alone He is the "rod from the stem of Jesse," made of the seed of David after the flesh. Refute the strange notion of the old Polish Socinians on this head. Thirdly. That the belief in this operation of the Holy Spirit of God in the conception and birth of Jesus Christ our Lord is necessary, I. In order to prevent all suspicion of any taint of original sin in Him who knew no sin, and was therefore manifested to put away our sins. II. In order to our recognition of the freedom of the Divine grace — ^preventing all human holiness or merits. III. In order to our being made holy after the pattern of Him into whose mystical body we are engrafted by the Ivi Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. same Spirit which sanctified His all-holy Conception and nativity. And then sum up what is implied in this part of the Article. § 3. " Born ofthe Virgin Mary." With respect to her, of whom our Lord Jesus Christ was thus conceived and bom— consider First. Her name, viz., nno ; which is always exhibited by the ancient interpreters of the Old Testament Maj/a^ (the Masoretic vowel punctuation making it Miriam) — the final m being left out in the description of the Blessed Virgin in the Greek of the New Testament for the convenience^ of inflexion (though aU the ancient Eastern versions, the Syriac, Arabic, &c., retain the fuU name i^lj,^ Mariam) : a narae remarkable — I. For its apparent import, expressing exaltation ; thus answei^- ing the import of her eucharistic hymn. II. For its first recorded possessor, the sister of the first Law giver of Israel and of their first High Priest ; and coupled with them by the Prophets as an instrument of the redemption from Egypt — so as to answer in some typical respect to the connexion which this Mary bore instru mentaUy in the means of human redemption. [Observe the passage from the Koran in which the first Mariam j^j^ is absurdly confounded by the Arabian false prophet with the raother of our Lord.] III. For its being ever since a common female name in Israel — as instanced by four or five contemporary examples in the New Testament, and also by the wife of Herod the Great (whose name Josephus Hellenises by adding v»), calling her Mariamne). Secondly. Her descent : respecting which I. Nothing is directly recorded by the Evangelists — I. Even concerning her tribe in Israel; unless a very common modern mode of reconciling the genealogies in St Matthew and St Luke be adopted, which sup poses the latter of the two to contain the pedigree of Mary instead of Joseph (which cannot be without great violence to the words of the Evangelist). 2. Concerning her immediate parentage, certainly nothing. ( Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. Ivii either in Scripture or in Apostolical tradition : for the current story of her parents, Joachim and Anna, can be traced no higher than the fourth century, and was esteemed doubtful by St Augustine. II. It is notwithstanding certain that she was of the tribe of Judah — of the house and lineage of David ; which appears not only I. Antecedently — from the necessity that Christ should be of that tribe and family after the flesh : but also 2. Historically — from her being enrolled with her husband at the city of David, which proves her kindred ; though the marriage itself would not necessarily do so (her kinswoman, EUzabeth, being not only married to a Levite of the house of Aaron, but of that tribe herself, being related to Mary either by blood on the mother's side, or by alliance). Thirdly. Her condition — expressed by her inseparable and con stant designation " the Virgin." Respecting this — I. Prove from the prophetical Scriptures that Christ was to be born of a pure Virgin : viz., I. That this was indicated certainly, though obscurely, in the first promise of a Deliverer frora sin. 2. That it was intended also (though the interpretation has been questioned) in that prophecy which com forted Rachel weeping for her children — by the assurance of the birth of a Redeemer. 3. That it was stated however most certainly and ex plicitly also by Isaiah before this. Mention and refute the endeavours of the later Talmudical Jews to evade the force of this prophecy. II. Prove from fact that Mary of whom we now speak was accordingly a Virgin : viz., 1. Such at the time of the conception of Jesus Christ. 2. Such at the time of His birth, as it is most expressly asserted in Scripture. 3. And as it is most piously believed, continuing such ever afterwards ; since bearing that one Holy Seed, which removed Eve's curse and stain from man kind. Prove at least, against ancient and modern dissentients, that the comraon opinion of the Fathers on this point cannot be confuted from Scripture : viz.. lviii Analysis of Pearson on the Creed. A. That Matthew i. 25, does not contain or necessarily imply the contrary assertion, as many parallel places plainly shew, — but is merely an affirmation of the necessary truth, that Mary was a Virgin when she brought forth the Saviour. B. That the term irpuToro-Mi in St Luke's account of the Nativity does not contain any such implication. C. Much less does the circumstance of our Lord's having " brethren " denote it, as the ordinary language of the Scriptures declare : and inasmuch as those two who are most especially named as brethren of our Lord had certainly another mother than Mary the wife of Joseph. Shew this from the Gospels. III. Shew that this Virgin did become properly the mother of Jesus Christ our Saviour : viz., I. By a true conception of Him, whereby He was truly formed of her human substance, agreeably to the prophetic Scriptures, and the declarations of the Apostles, especially St Paul to the Galatians. 2. By the gestation and nutrition whereby the " Holy Thing " thus formed in her was supported, accord ing to the natural order of generation. 3. By the parturition and actual birth. IV. Shew that by virtue of the three particulars above mentioned the blessed Virgin was I. The actual mother of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Word, even beyond ordinary maternity. And moreiover 2. By virtue of the union bf the two natures of God and man in His One undivided Person who was the Mediator between God and man, she was in a true. sense the mother of our Lord and God. A truth which the ancient Church in the council of Ephesus (in order to guard against the Nestorian heresy, which denied this personal union, the source of huraan rederaption (expressed by the word Bsoroxog, translated Deipara: the Church ever meaning by this the mother of God according to His human Analysis of -Pearson on the Creed. lix nature (and guarding it in .the subsequent council of Chalcedon against the abuses which the Oriental sects that confused the natures in our Lord would fasten upon it). Fourthly. The necessity of believing this, viz., that our Lord the Only-begotten Son of God was thus born of the Virgin Mary as man. I. For our proper and due reverence to that highly favoured among women, who was thus" by the voice of the Angel of God to be called Blessed by all the generations of man kind : an honour proclairaed to be hers by the specially inspired voice of her kinsworaan even before the birth of the Holy Child; and which we should be careful to observe, and at the sarae time to guard (as the primitive Church did) against all idolatrous abuse. II. For our proper estiraation of His perspn, in whom alone the honour paid to His mother or to all His saints should terminate; viz., I. That we should be assured of His actual huraanity and participation of the nature of aU His brethren of mankind. 2. That we should be assured equally of that in which He differed from all, viz.. His iramaculate purity, and exemption from that stain which the first Adam propagated to all his other descendants beside this. 3. That we. should be assured of His being born of that tribe and stock to which the prophecies pointed that spoke of the redemption of Israel and the world. Sum up therefore what is contained in this confession of Christ our Lord as born of the Virgin. BISHOP PEARSON'S EXPOSITION OF THE CREED. To the Right Worshipful and Well-beloved, the Parishioners of ST CLEMENT'S, EASTCHEAP. Mercy unto you, and peace, and love be multiplied. TF I should be at any time unmindful of your commands, you -L might well esteem me unworthy of your continued favours ; and there is some reason to suspect I have incurred the in terpretation of forgetfulness, having been so backward in the performance of my promises. Some years have passed since I preached unto you upon such texts of Scripture as were on purpose selected in relation to the Creed, and was moved by you to make those meditations public. But you were pleased then to grant what my inclinations rather led me to, that they might be turned into an Exposition of the Creed itself : which, partly by the difficulty of the work undertaken', partly by the intervention of some other employments, hath taken me up thus long, for which I desire your pardon. And yet a happy excuse may be pleaded for my delay, meeting with a very great felicity, that as faith triumpheth in good works, so my Exposition of the Creed should be contemporary with the re-edifying of your Church. For though I can have little temp tation to believe that my book should last so long as that fabric ; yet I am exceedingly pleased that they should begin together ; that the publishing of the one should so agree with the opening of the other. This I hope may persuade you to forget my slackness, considering you were not ready to your own expectation ; your experience tells you the excuse of Church-work will be accepted in building, I beseech you let it not be denied in printing. That blessed saint, by whose name your parish is known, was a fellow^-labourer with St Paul, and a successor of St Peter ; he had the honour to be numbered in the Scripture with them " whose names are written in the book of life," and when he had sealed the Gospel with his blood, he was one of the first whose memory was perpetuated by the building a Church to bear his name. Thus was St Clement's Church faraous in Rome, when Rome was famous for the " faith spoken of throughout the whole world." He wrote an epistle to the Corinthians infested with a schism, in imitation of St Paul, which obtained so great authority in the primitive times, that it was frequently read in their public congre- Ixiv The Epistle Dedicatory. gations ; and yet had for many hundred years been lost, tiU it was at last set forth out of the library of the late King. Now as by the providence of God, the memory of that primitive saint hath been restored in our age, so my design aimeth at nothing else but that the primitive faith may be revived. And therefore in this edition of the Creed I shall speak to you but what St Jude hath already spoken to the whole Church, "Beloved, when I gave aU diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints." If it were so needful for him then to write, and for them to whom he wrote to contend for the first faith, it wiU appear as needful for me now to follow his writing, and for you to imitate their earnestness, because the reason which he rendereth as the cause of that necessity is now more prevalent than it was at that time or ever since. " For," saith he, " there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation ; ungodly men, turning the grace of God into lasciviousness, denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ." The principles of Christianity are now as freely questioned as the most doubtful and controverted points ; the grounds of faith are as safely denied, as the most unnecessary superstructions ; that religion hath the greatest advantage which appeareth in the newest dress, as if we looked for " another faith to be dehvered to the saints." Whereas in Christianity there can be no concerning truth which is not ancient; and whatsoever is truly new, is certainly false. Look then for purity in the fountain, and strive to embrace the first faith, to which you cannot have a more probable guide than the Creed, received in all ages of the Church ; and to this I refer you, as it leads you to the Scriptures, from whence it was at first deduced, that while " those which are unskilful and unstable wrest " the words of God Himself " unto their own damnation," you may receive so much instruction as may set you beyond the imputation of unskilfulness, and so much of confirmation as may place you out of the danger of instability ; which as it hath been the constant endeavour, so shall it ever be the prayer of him who after so many encouragements of his labours amongst you, doth still desire to be known as Your most faithful servant in the Lord, JOHN PEARSON. TO THE READER. IHAVE in this book undertaken an Exposition of the Creed, and think it necessary in this preface to give a brief account of the work : lest any should either expect to find that here which was never intended, or conceive that which they meet with such as they expected not. The Creed without controversy is a brief comprehension of the objects of our Christian faith, and is generaUy taken to contain all things necessary to be believed. Now whether all things necessary be contained there, concerneth not an expositor to dispute, who is obliged to take notice of what is in it, but not to inquire into what is not : whether all truths comprehended in the same be of equal and absolute necessity, we are no way forced to declare; it being sufficient, as to the design of an exposition, to interpret the words, and so deliver the sense, to demonstrate the truth of the sense delivered, and to manifest the proper necessity of ep,ch truth, how far, and in what degree, and to what purposes it is necessary. This, therefore, is the method which I proposed to rayself, and have prosecuted in every Article. First, to settle the words of each Article according to their antiquity and generality of reception in the Creed. Secondly, to explicate and unfold the terras, and to -endeavour a right notion and conception of them as they are to be understood in the same. Thirdly, to shew what are those truths which are naturally contained in those terms so explicated, and to make it appear that they are truths indeed, by such argu ments and reasons as are respectively proper to evidence the " verity of them. Fourthly, to declare what is the necessity of believing those truths, what efficacy and influence they have in the soul and upon the life of a behever. Lastly, by a re-collection of all, briefly to deliver the sum of every particular truth, so that Ixvi Tq the Reader. every one when he pronounceth the Creed may know what he ought to intend, and what he is understood to profess, when he so pronounceth it. In the prosecution of the whole according to this method I have considered that a work of so general a concernment must be exposed to two kinds of readers, which though they may agree in judgment, yet must differ much in their capacities. Some there are who understand the original languages of the Holy Scriptures, the discourses and tractates of the ancient Fathers, the determinations of the Councils and history of the Church of God, the constant profession of settled truths, the rise and increase of schisms and heresies. Others there are unacquainted with such conceptions, and incapable of such instructions : who understand the Scriptures as they are translated : who are capable of the knowledge of the truths themselves, and of the proofs drawn from thence : who can apprehend the nature of the Christian faith with the power and efficacy of the same, when it is delivered unto them out of the word of God, and in the language which they know. When I ,raake this difference, and distinction of readers, I do not intend thereby, that because one of these is learned, the other is ignorant ; for he who has no skill of the learned languages, raay notwithstanding be very knowing in the principles of Christian religion, and the reason and efficacy of them. According to this distinction I have contrived my exposition, so that the body of it containeth fully what can be delivered and madfe intelligible in the English tongue, without inserting the least sentence or phrase of any learned language, by which he who is not acquainted with it might be disturbed in his reading or in terrupted in his understanding. Not that I have selected only such notions as are common, easy, and familiar of themselves, but have endeavoured to deliver the raost material conceptions in the most plain and perspicuous manner ; as desirous to comprise the whole strength of the work, as far as it is possible, in the body of it. Now being the Creed comprehendeth the principles of our religion, it must contain those truths which belong unto it as it is a religion, and those which concern it, as if is ours. As it is a religion, it dehvereth such principles as are to be acknowledged in natural theology, such as no man who wor shippeth a God can deny, and therefore in the proof of these I have made use of such arguments and reasons as are most proper to oppose the Atheists, who deny there is a God to be To the Reader, Ixvii worshipped, a religion to be professed. As it is our religion, it is Christian and Catholic : as Christian, it containeth such truths as were delivered by Christ and , His apostles, and those especially concerning Christ Himself, which I have pro secuted constantly with an eye to the Jews, who obstinately deny them, expecting still another Messias to corae ; wherefore I shew out of the law and the prophets which they acknowledge, what was foretold in every particular concerning the Messias, and prove all those to be corapleted by that Christ in whom we believe. As our religion is Cathohc, it holdeth fast that faith which was once delivered to the saints, and since preserved in the Church ; and therefore I expound such verities in opposition to the heretics arising in all ages, especially against the Photinians, who of all the rest have most perverted the Articles of our Creed, and found out followers in these latter ages, who have erected a new body of divinity in opposition to the Catholic theology. Against these I proceed upon such principles as they themselves allow, that is upon the word of God delivered in the Old and New Testament, alleged according to the true sense, and applied by right reason : not urging the authority of the Church which they respect. In that part, which, after the demonstration of each truth teacheth the necessity of the believing it, and the peculiar efficacy which it hath upon the life of a Christian, I have not thought fit to expatiate or enlarge myself, but only to mention such effects as flow naturally and immediately from the doctrine, especially such as are delivered in the Scriptures, which I have endeavoured to set forth with all possible plainness and per spicuity. And indeed in the whole work, as I have laid the foundation upon the written word of God, so I have with much diligence collected such places of Scripture as are pertinent to each doctrine, and with great faithfulness delivered thera as they lie in the writings of those holy penmen ; not referring the reader to places named in the raargin (which too often I find in many books multiplied to little purpose), but producing and interweaving the sentences of Scripture into the body of my exposition, so that the reader may understand the strength of all my reason without any further inquiry or consultation. For if those words which I have produced, prove not what I have intended, I desire not any to think there is more in the places named to maintain it. At the conclusion of every distinct and several notion, I have Ixviii To the Reader. re-collected briefly and plainly the sum of what hath been delivered in the explication of it, and put it, as it were, into the mouth of every Christian, thereby to express more fully his faith, and to declare his profession. So that if the reader please to put those coUections together, he may at once see and perceive what he is in the whole obliged to believe, and what he is by the Church of God understood to profess, when he maketh this public, ancient, and orthodox Confession of Faith. I have nothing more to add, but only to pray that the Lord would give you and me a good understanding in all things. En iSjrposition ot tbe Creeb, Article I. /. believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of Heaven and Earth. AS the first word. Credo, " I believe," giveth a denomination to the whole Confession of Faith, from thence commonly called the Creed ; so is the sarae word to be imagined not to stand only where it is expressed, but to be carried through the whole body of the Confession. For although it be but twice actually rehearsed, yet must we conceive it virtually prefixed to the head of every article ; that as we say, " I believe in God the Father Almighty," so we are also understood to say, " I believe in -Jesus Christ His only Son, our Lord ; "- as, " I believe in the Holy Ghost," so also, " I believe the Catholic Church." Neither is it to be joined ¦with every complete Article only; but where any Article is not a single verity, but comprehensive, there it is to be looked upon as affixed to every part, or single truth contained in that article : as, for example, in the first, " I believe in God," " I believe" that " God" to be "the Father," " I believe" that "Father" to be " Alrnighty," " I believe " that " Father Alraighty " to be the " Maker of heaven and earth." So that this Credo, " I believe," rightly considered, multiplies itself to no less thafl a double number ofthe articles, and will be found at legst twent)f-four times contained in the Creed. Wherefore being a word so pregnant and diffusive, so necessary and essential to every part of our Confession of Faith, that without it we can neither have Creed nor Confession, it will require a mote, exact consideration, and more ample ex plication, and that in such a notion as is properly applicable to so many and so various truths. 2 An Exposition of the Creed. Now by this previous expression, " I believe," thus considered, every particular Christian is first taught, and then imagined, to make confession of his Faith ; and consequently this word so used, admits a threefold consideration. First, as it supposes Belief, or Faith, which is confessed. Secondly, as it is a Confes sion, or external expression of that Faith so supposed. Thirdly, as both the Faith and Confession are of necessary and particular obligation. When, therefore, we shall have clearly delivered — first, what is the true nature and notion of Belief; secondly, what the duty of confessing of our Faith ; thirdly, what obligation lies upon every particular person to beheve and confess ; then may we be conceived to have sufficiently explicated the first word of the Creed, then may every one understand what it is he says, and upon what ground he proceeds, when he professeth, "I believe." For the right understanding of the true nature of Christian faith, it will be no less than necessary to begin with the general notion of Belief; which being first truly stated and defined, then by degrees deduced into its several kinds, will at last make the nature of Christian Faith intelligible ; a design, if I mistake not, not so ordinary and usual, as useful and necessary. Belief in general I define to be an assent to that which is credible, as credible. Bythe word assent is expressed that act, or habit of the understanding, by which it receiveth, acknow- ledgeth, and embraceth anything as a truth ; it being the nature of the soul so to embrace whatsoever appeareth true unto it, and so far as it so appears. Now this assent, or judgment of any thing to be true, being a general act of the understanding, and so applicable to other habits thereof as well as to Faith, must be specified by its proper object, and so limited and determined to its proper act, which is the other part left to complete the definition. This object of faith is first expressed by that which is credible; ¦ for every one who believeth anything does thereby without ques tion assent unto it as to that which is credible ; and therefore all belief whatsoever, is such a kind of assent. But though all belief be an assent to that which is credible, yet every such assent may not be properly Faith ; and therefore those words make not the definition complete. For he who sees an action done knows it to be done, and therefore ^sents unto the truth ofthe performance ofit because he sees it; but another person to whom he relates it may assent unto the performance of the Article I. 3 same action, not because himself sees it, but because the other relates it ; in which case that which is credible is the object of Faith in one, of evident knowledge in the other. To make the definition therefore full, besides the material object or thing believed, ^e have added the formal object, or that whereby it is properly believed, expressed in the last term, as credible ; -vvhich being taken in, it then appears that — first, whosoever believes anything, assenteth to something which is to him credible, and that as it is credible : and again, whosoever assenteth to anything which is credible, as it is credible, believeth something by so assenting : which is sufficient to shew the definition complete. ,But for the explication of the same, further observations will be necessary. For if that which we believe be something which is credible, and the notion under which we believe be the credi bility of it, then must we first declare what it is to be credible, and in what credibUity doth consist, before we can understand what is the nature of Belief Now that is properly credible, which is not apparent of itself, nor certainly to be collected, either antecedently by its cause, or reversely by its effect, and yet, though by none of these ways, hath the attestation of a truth. For those things which are apparent of themselves, are either so in respect of our sense, as that snow is white, and fire is hot ; or in respect of our understanding, as that the whole of any thing is greater than any one part of the whole ; that everything imaginable either is, or is not. The first kind of which being propounded to our sense, one to the sight, the other to the touch, appear of themselves immediately true, and therefore are hot termed credible, but evident to sense ; as the latter kind -propounded to the understanding, are immediately embraced and acknowledged as truths apparent in themselves, and therefore are not called credible, but evident to the understanding. And so those things which are apparent, are not said properly to be believed, but to be known. Again, other things, though not inimediately apparent in them selves, may yet appear most certain and evidently true, by an immediate and necessary connection with something formerly known. For being every natural cause actually applied doth necessarily produce its own natural effect, and every natural effect wholly dependeth upon, and absolutely presupposeth, its own proper cause, therefore there must be an iramediate connection between the cause and its effect. From whence it follows that if the connection be once clearly perceived, the effect will be known A 2 4 An Exposition of tke Creed. in the cause, and the cause by the effect. And by these ways proceeding from principles evidently known by consequences cer tainly concluding, we come to the knowledge of propositions in mathematics, and conclusions in -other sciences; which proposi tions and conclusions are not said to be credible, but scientifical, and the comprehension of them is not Faith, but Science. Besides, some things there are, which, though not evident of themselves, nor seen by any necessary connection to their causes or effects, notwithstanding appear to most as tme, by some external relations to other truths ; but yet so, as the appearing truth still leaves a possibility of falsehood with it, and therefore does but incline to an assent. In which case whatsoever is thus apprehended, if it depend upon real arguments, is not yet called credible, but probable : and an assent to such a truth, is not properly Faith, but Opinion. But when anything propounded to us is neither apparent to our sense, nor evident to our understanding, in and of itself, neither certainly to be collected from any clear and necessary connection with the cause from which it proceedeth, or the effects which it naturally produceth, nor is taken up upon any real arguments or relations to other acknowledged truths, and yet notwithstanding appeareth' to us true, not by a manifestation, but attestation of the truth, and so moveth us to assent not of itself, but by virtue ofthe testimony given to it ; this is said properly to be credible ; and an assent unto this, upon such credibility, is in the proper notion. Faith or Belief Having thus defined and illustrated the nature of faith in general, so far as it agreeth to all kinds of belief whatsoever, our method will lead us on to descend by way of division to the several kinds thereof, till at last we come to the proper notion of Faith in the Christian's Confession, the design of our present disquisition ; and being we have placed the formality of the object of all belief in credibility, it will clearly follow that diversity of credibility in the object will proportionably cause a distinction of assent in the • understanding, and consequently a several kind of Faith, which we have supposed to be nothing else but such an assent. Now the credibihty of objects, by which they appear fit to be believed, is distinguishable according to the diversities of its foundation — thatis, accordingto the different authority ofthe testi mony on which it depends. For we having no other certain means of assuring ourselves of the truth, and consequently no other motives of our assent in matters of mere belief, than the Article I. 5 testimony upon which we believe ; if there be any fundamental distinction in the authority of the testimony, it will cause the like difference in the assent, which must needs bear a proportion to the authority of the testhnony, as being originally and essentially founded upon it. It is therefore .necessary next to consider in what the authority of a testimony consists, and so to descend to the several kinds of testimonies founded upon several authorities. The strength and validity of every testimony must bear propor tion with the authority of the testifier : and the authority of the testifier is founded upon his abUity and integrity : his ability in the knowledge of that which he delivereth and asserteth, his integrity in delivering and asserting according to his knowledge. For two several ways he which relateth or testifieth any thing ihay deceive us ; one, by being ignorant of the truth, and so upon that ignorance mistaking, he may think that to be true which is not so, and consequently deliver that for truth which in itself is false, and so deceive himself and us ; or if he be not ignorant, yet if he be dishonest or unfaithful, that which he knows to be false he may propound and assert to be a truth, and so, though hiraself be not deceived, he may deceive us. And by each of these ways, for want either of ayi:X/--6r integrity in the testifier, whoso grounds his assent unto any thing as a truth upon the testiraony of another, may equalhibe deceived. But whos&iir l.'s. so -able as certainly fo know the truth of that which he delivereth, and so faithful as to deliver nothing but what and as he knoweth, he, as he is not deceived, so deceiveth no man. So far therefore as any person testifying appeareth to be knowing of the thing he testifies, and to be faithful in the relation of what he knows, so far his testimony is acceptable, so far that which he testifieth is properly credible : and thus the authority of every testifier or relater is grounded upon these two foundations, his ability and integrity. Now there is in this case, so far as it concerns our present design, a double testimony: the testimony of man to man, re lying upon human authority ; and the testimony of God to man, founded upon divine authority : which two kinds of testimony are respective grounds of two kinds of credibility, huraan and divine ; and consequently there is a twofold Faith distinguished by this double-object, a Human and a Divine Faith. " Human faith is an assent to anything credible, merely upon the testimony of man." Such is the belief we have of the words and 6 An Exposition ofthe Creed. affections one of another : and upon this kind of Faith we proceed in the ordinary affairs of our life ; according to the opinion we - have of the ability and fidelity of him who relates or asserts anything we believe or disbelieve. By this a friend assureth him self of the affection of his friend : by this the son acknowledges his father, and upon this is his obedience wrought. By virtue of this human faith it is that we doubt not at all of those things which we never saw, by reason of their distance from us, either by time or place. Who doubts whether there be such a country as' Italy, or such a city as Constantinople, though he never passed any of our four seas ? Who questions now whether there was such a man as Alexander in the East, or Cassar in the West ? and yet the latest of these has been beyond the possibility of the knowledge of man these sixteen hundred years. There is no science taught without original belief, there are no letters learned without preceding faith. There is no justice executed, no com merce maintained, no business prosecuted without this ; all secu lar affairs are transacted, all great achievements are attempted, all hopes, desires, and inclinations are preserved by this human Faith grounded upon the testimony of man. In which case we all by easy experience may observe the nature, generation, and progress of Belief For in anything whielr belong eth to more than ordinary knowledge, we believe not him whom we think to be ignorant, nor do we assent the more for Jiis assertion, though never so confidently dehvered ; but if_w_xir0.ve. astsong opinion of the knowledge and skUl of any person, what he affirraeth - within the compass of his knowledge that we readily assent unto ; and while we have no other ground but his -affirmation, this assent is properly Belief Whereas, if it be any matter pf concernment in which the interest of him that relateth or affirraeth anything to us is considerable, there it is not the skill or knowledge of the relater which will satisfy us, except we have as strong an opinion of his fidelity and integrity : but if we think him so just and honest, that he has no design upon us, nor will affirm anything contrary to his knowledge for any gain or advantage, then we readily assent unto his affirraations ; and this assent is our Belief Seeing then our belief relies upon the abUity and integrity of the relater, and seeing the knowledge of all men is imperfect, and the hearts of all raen are deceitful, and so their integrity to be suspected, there can be no infallible universal ground of huraan Faith. But what satisfaction we cannot find in the testimony of man, we may receive in the testimony of God. " If we receive the witness of Article I. 7 men, the witness of God is greater" (i John v. 9). " Yea, let God be true," the ground of our divine, and " every man a liar " (Rom. iii. 4), the ground of our human Faith. As for the other member of the division, we may now plainly perceive that it is thus to be defined : Divine Faith is an assent unto something as credible upon the testimony of God. This .assent is the highest kind of Faith, because the object hath the highest credibility, because grounded upon the testimony of God, which is infallible. Balaam could tell Balak thus much, " God is not a man that He should lie" (Numb, xxiii. 19) ; and a better prophet confirmed the same truth to Saul, " The Strength of Israel wiU not he" (i Sam. xv. 29); and because He wUl not, because He cannot. He is the strength of Israel, even " My God, my God, my strength, in whora I wUl trust " (Ps. xviii. 2). For first, God is of infinite knowledge and wisdora, as Hannah hath taught us, " The Lord is a God of knowledge " (i Sara. n. 3), or rather, if our language will bear it, " of knowledges," which are- so plural, or rather infinite in their plurality, that the Psalraist has- said, "Of His understanding there is no number" (Ps. cxlvu. 5). He knoweth therefore all things, neither can any truth be hid from His knowledge, who is essentially truth and essentially knowledge, and as so, the cause of all other truth and knowledge. Thus the understanding of God is infinite in respect of comprehension; and net so only, but of certainty also and evidence. Some things we are said to know which are but obscurely known, we see them but as in a glass or through a cloud ; but " God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all " (i John i. 5) : He seeth without any obscurity, and whatsoever is propounded to His understanding is most clear and evident, " Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in His sight, but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of Him with whom we have to do " (Heb. iv. 1 3). Where fore being all things are within the compass of His knowledge, being all things which are so, are mPst clear and evident unto Him, being the knowledge He hath of them is most certain and infallible, it inevitably followeth that He cannot be deceived in anything. Secondly, the justice of God is equal to His knowledge, nor is His holiness inferior to His wisdom : " A God of truth," saith Moses, " and without iniquity, just and right is He " (Deut. xxxh. 4). From which internal, essential and infinite rectitude, good ness and holiness, followeth an impossibility to declare or deliver that for truth, which He knoweth not to be true. For if it be 8 An Exposition ofthe Creed. against that finite purity and integrity which is required of man, to lie, and therefore sinful, then must we conceive it absolutely in consistent with tliat transcendent purity and infinite integrity which is essential unto God. Although therefore the power of God be infinite, though He," can do all things ; " yet we may safely say, without any prejudice to His omnipotency, that He cannot speak that for truth which He knows to be otherwise. For the perfec tions of His wUl are as necessarily infinite as those of His under standing ; neither can He be unholy or unjust more than He can be ignorant or unwise. " If we believe not, yet He abideth faith ful. He cannot deny Himself" (2 Tim. i\. 13). Which words of the apostle, though properly belonging to the promises of God; yet are as true in respect of his assertions ; neither should He more "deny Hiraself" in violating His fidelity, than in contra dicting His veracity. It is true, that "God, wiUing more abund antly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath, that by two iramutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation " (Heb. vi. 17, 18) : but it is as true, that aU this con firraation is only for our consolation ; otherwise it is as "_ impos sible for God to lie " without an oath, as with one ; for seeing He can " swear by no greater. He sweareth only by Himself " (Heb. vi. 13), and so the strength even of the oath of God reUeth upon the veracity of God. Wherefore seeing God, as God, is of infinite rectitude, goodness and holiness, seeing it is manifestly repugnant to His purity, and inconsistent with His integrity, to deliver any thing contrary to His knowledge, it clearly followeth that He can not deceive any raan. It is therefore raost infallibly certain, that God being infinitely wise, cannot be deceived ; being infinitely good, cannot deceive : and upon these two immovable pillars standeth the authority of the testimony of God. For since we cannot doubt of the witness of any one, but by questioning his ability, as one who may be igno rant of that which he affirmeth, and so deceived ; or by excepting against his integrity, as one who raay affirm that which he knoweth to be false, and so haye a purpose to deceive us : where there is no place for either of these exceptions, there can be no doubt of the truth of the testimony. But where there is an intrinsical repugnancy of being deceived in the understanding, and of deceiving in the will, as there certainly is in the understanding and will of God, there can be no place for either of those excep tions, and consequently there can be no doubt of the truth of that Article I. 9 which God testifieth. And whosoever thinketh any thing comes from Him, and assenteth not unto it, raust necessarily deny Him to be wise or holy. " He that believeth not God," saith the apostle, " hath made Him a liar." That truth then which is testified by God, has a divine credibility : and an assent unto it as so credible, is Divine Faith. In which the material object is the doctrine which God delivereth, the formal object is that credibility founded on the authority of the deliverer. And this I conceive the true nature of Divine Faith in general. Now seeing the credibility of all which we believe is founded upon the testimony of God, we can never be sufficiently instructed in the notion of Faith, till we first understand how this testimony is given to those truths which we now believe. To which end it will be necessary to give notice that the testimony of God is not given unto truths before questioned or debated ; nor are they such things as are first propounded and doubted of by man, and then resolved and confirmed by interposing the authority of God ; but He is then said to witness when He does propound, and His testi mony is given by way of revelation, which is nothing else but the delivery or speech of God unto His creatures. And therefore upon a diversity of delivery must follow a difference, though not of Faith itself, yet ofthe means and manner of assent. Wherefore it wUl be further necessary to observe, that divine revelation is of two kinds, either immediate or mediate. An imme diate revelation is that by which God delivereth Himself to man by Himself without the intervention of man. A mediate revelation is the conveyance of the counsel of God unto man by man. By the first He spake unto the prophets, by the second in the prophets, and by them unto us. Being then there is this difference between - the revealing of God unto the prophets and to others, being the faith both of prophets and others relieth wholly upon divine revela tion, the difference of the raanner of assent in these several kinds of believers wUl be very observable for the explanation of the nature of our Faith. , Those then to whom God did immediately speak Himself, or by an angel representing God, and so being in His stead, and bearing His name (of which I shaU need here to make no distinction), those persons, I say, to whom God did so reveal Hiraself, did by virtue of the sarae revelation perceive, know, and assure themselves that He who spoke to them was God : so that at the same tirae, they clearly understood both what was delivered, and by whom; otherwise we cannot imagine that Abraham would have slain his IO A/i Exposition of the Creed. son, or have been commended for such a resolution, had he not been most assured that it was God who by an immediate revela tion of His will clearly commanded it. Thtis " by faith Noah being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark, to the saving of his house " (Heb. xi. 7) : which warning of God was a clear revelation of God's determination to drown the world, of His will to save him and his family, and of His comraand, for that end, to buUd an ark. And this Noah so received frora God, as that he knew it to be an oracle of God ; and was as well assured of the author, as informed of the com mand. Thus the judgments hanging over Judah were revealed in the ears of Isaiah " by the Lord of Hosts " (Isa. xxii. 14). Thus " the Lord revealed Himselfto Sarauel in Shiloh " (i Sam. iii. 21) : at first indeed he knew Him not ; that is, when the Lord spake, he knew it not to be the voice of God. " Now Samuel did not yet know the Lord, neither was the word of the Lord yet revealed unto him" (i Sam. iii. 7) : but after that he knew Him, and was assured that it was He who spake unto him, the Scripture teaching us that the " ears of Sarauel were revealed" (i Sam. ix. 15), and the word of God revealed, and God Hiraself revealed to him. By all which we can understand no less than that Samuel was so iUuminated in his prophecies, that he' fully understood the words or things theraselves which were delivered, and as certainly knew that the deliverer was God : so Samuel the Seer, so the rest of the prophets believed those truths revealed to thera by such a faith as was a firra assent unto an object credible upon the immediate testimony of God. But those faithful people to whom the prophets spake, believed the same truth, and upon the testimony of the sarae God, de livered unto them not by God, but by those prophets, whose words they therefore assented unto as certain truths, because they were assured that what the prophets spake was immediately revealed to them by God Himself, without which assurance no faith could be expected from them. When God appeared unto Moses " in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush," and there iramediately revealed to him first Himself, saying " I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob " (Exod. hi. 2), and then "His will, to bring the children of Israel out of the Land of Egypt, Moses clearly beheved God both in the revelation of Himself and of His will, and was fully satisfied that the Israehtes should be delivered, because he was assured it was God who promised their deliver- Article I. 1 1 ance : yet notwithstanding still he doubted whether the Israelites would believe the same truth, when it should be delivered to them, not immediately by God, but by Moses. "And Moses answered and said, But behold they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they wiU.say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee" (ExPd. iv. i). Which words of his first suppose, that if they had heard the voice of God, as he had, they would have assented to the truth, upon a testimony divine ; and then as rationally affirm, that it was improbable they should believe, except they were assured it was God who promised, or think that God had promised by Moses, only because Moses said so. Which rational objection was clearly taken away when God endued Moses with power of evident and undoubted rairacles ; for then the rod which he carried in his hand was as infaUible a sign to the Israelites that God had appeared unto him, as the flaming bush was to himself; and therefore they who saw in his hand God's omnipotency, could not suspect in his tongue God's veracity ; insomuch as when Aaron became to Moses " instead of a mouth,'' and Moses to Aaron "instead of God " (Exod. iv. i6), " Aaron spake all the words which the Lord had spoken unto Moses, and did the signs in the sight of the people, and the people -believed " (Exod. iv. 30, 31). For being persuaded by a lively and active preference of omnipotency that God had appeared unto Moses, and what was delivered to them by hira, came to him from God ; and being sufficiently assured out of the very sense and notion of a ' Deity, that whatso ever God should speak must of necessity be true, they presently assented, " and believed the Lord and His servant Moses " (Exod. xiv. 31) : Moses, as the immediate propounder, God, as the original revealer : they believed Moses that God had re vealed it, and they believed the promise because God had re vealed it. So that the Faith both of Moses and the Israelites was grounded upon the same testimony or revelation of God, and differed only in the proposition or application of the testimony ; Moses receiving it iramediately from God Himself, the Israelites mediately by the ministry of Moses. In the like manner the succeeding prophets were the instru ments of divine revelation, which they first believed as revealed to them ; and then the people as revealed by them ; for what they delivered was not the testimony of man, but the testimony of God delivered by man. It was "He who spake by the mouth of His holy Prophets which have been since the world began " 12 Au Exposition ofthe Creed. (Luke 1. 70) ; the mouth, the instmraent, the articulation was theirs, but the words were God's. "The spirit of the Lord spake by me," saith David, "and His word was in my tongue " (2 Sam. xxiii. 2). It was the word of the Lord, which He spake " by the hand of Moses " (i Kings vin. 53), and "by the hand of His servant Ahijah the prophet "(i Kings xiv. 18). The hand, the. general instrument of man, the mouth, the particular instrument of speech, both attributed to the prophets as merely instrumental in their prophecies. The words which Balaam's ass spake were as much the ass's words, as those which Balaam spake were his ; for "the Lord opened the mouth of the ass" (Num. xxii. 28), and "the Lord put a word in Balaam's mouth " (Num. xxiii. 5) ; and not only so, but a bridle with that word, " only the word that I shall speak unto thee that thou shalt speak " (Num. xxii. 3S). The prophets, as they did not frame the notions or con ceptions themselves of those truths which they delivered from God, so did they not loosen their own tongues of their own instinct, or upon their own motion, but as moved, impelled, and acted by God. So we may in correspondence to the antecedent and subsequent words interpret those words of St Peter, thaf "no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation" (2 Peter i. 20) ; that is, that no prophecy which is written did so proceed from the prophet which spake or wrote it, that he of himself or by his own instinct did open his mouth to prophesy ; but that all prophetical revelations came from God alone, and that whosoever first delivered them was antecedently inspired by Him, as it follows, " for the prophecy carae not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." That therefore which they delivered was the word, the revelation of God ; which they assented unto as to a certain and infallible truth, credible upon the immediate testimony of God, and to which the rest of the believers assented upon the same testimony of God mediately delivered by the hands of the prophets. Thus " God, who at sundry times, and in divers manners spake in times past unto the Fathers by the prophets " (Heb. i. i), and' by so speaking propounded the object of Faith both to the prophets and the Fathers, " hath in these last days spoken unto ms by His Son," and by so speaking hath enlarged the object of Faith to us by Him, by which means it comes to be the " Faith of Jesus " (Rev. xiv. 12). Thus the "only begotten Son, who was in the bosom of the Father " (John i. 18), " the express image Article I. 13 of His person" (Heb. i. 3), He in whom "it pleased the Father that aU fulness should dwell" (Col. i. 19), He " in whom dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily " (Col. ii. 9), revealed the wiU of God to the apostles, who being assured that He "knew aU things," and convinced that He came " forth from God " (John xvi. 30), gave a fuU and, clear assent unto those thuigs which He delivered, and grounded their Faith upon His words as upon the immediate testimony of God. " I have given unto them," saith Christ unto His Father, " the words which Thou gavest Me, and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from Thee, and they have believed that Thou didst send Me " (John xvii. 8). Beside this delivery of these words by Christ to the apostles, they received the promise of the " Spirit of truth " which should " guide them into all truth " (John xvi. 13), and " teach them all things, and bring all things into their remem brance whatsoever Christ had said unto them" (John xiv. 26). So clearly, so fully, so constantly were they furnished with divine illuminations and revelations from God, upon which they grounded their own Faith ; that each of them might well make that pro fession of St Paul, " I know whom I have believed" (2 Tim. i. 12). Thus the Faith of the apostles, as of Moses and the prophets, was grounded upon the immediate revelations of God. But those believers to whom the apostles preached, and whom they converted to the faith, believed the sarae truths which were revealed to the apostles, though they were not so revealed to them as they were unto the apostles, that is, immediately from Go3. But as the Israelites believed those truths which Moses spake, to come from God, being convinced by the constant supply of miracles wrought by the rod which he carried in his hand : so the blessed apostles, being so plentifully endued from above with the power of miracles, gave sufficient testimony that it was God who spake by their mouths, who so evidently wrought by their hands. They who heard St Peter call a lame man unto his legs, speak a dead man alive, and strike a living man to death with his tongue, as he did Ananias and Sapphira, might easily be persuaded that it was God who spake by his mouth, and conclude that where they found him in his^pmnipo- tency, they might well expect him in his veracity. These were the persons for whom our Saviour next to the apostles prayed, because by a way next to that of the apostles they believed.' " Neither pray I for these alone," saith Christ, " but for them also who shaU believe on Me through their word" (John xvii. 20), 14 An Exposition of the Creed. Thus the apostles believed on Christ through His own word, and the primitive Christians believed on the same Christ through the apostles' Word ; and this distinction our Saviour Himself has clearly made; not that the word of the apostles was really distinct from the word of Christ, but only it was called theirs, be cause delivered by their ministry, otherwise it was the same word which they had heard from Him, and upon which they themselves believed. " That which was frora the beginning," saith St John, " which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the word of life. That which we have seen and heard, declare we unto you" (i John i. i, 3). And this was the true foundation of Faith in all them which believed, that they took not the words which they heard from the apostles to be the words of the men who spoke them, no more than they did the power of healing the sick, or raising the dead, and the rest of the rairacles, to be the power of them that wrought them ; but as they attributed those miraculous works to God working by them, so did they also that saving word to the same God speaking by them. When St Paul preached at Antioch, " almost the whole city came together to hear the word of God " (Acts xiii. 44) ; so they esteeraed it, though they knew him a man whom they came to hear, speak it. This the apostle commendeth in the Thessalonians, that " when " they " received the word of God, which they heard of him, they received it not as the word of man, but as it is in truth, the word of God " (i Thess. ii. 13), and receiving it so, they erabraced it as coraing from Him who could neither deceive nor be deceived, and consequently as infaUibly true, and by so erabracing it they assented unto it, by so assenting to it they believed it, ultimately upon the testimony of God, imraedialely upon the testimony of St Paul, as .he speaks himself, " because our testimony among you was believed " (2 Thess. i. 10). Thus the Faith of those who were converted by the aposdes was an assent unto the word as credible upon the testimony of God, delivered to them by a testimony apostolical. Which being thus clearly stated, we raay at last descend into our own condition, and so describe the nature of our own Faith, that every one may know what it is to believe. )^ Although Moses was endued with the power of miracles, and conversed with God in the Mount, and spake with Him face to face at the door of the tabernacle ; although upon these grounds the Israelites believed what he delivered to them, as the word of God ; yet neither the rairacles nor Moses did for ever continue Article I. 15 with them ; aM notwithstanding his death, they and their pos terity to all generations were obliged to believe the same truths. Wherefore it is observable which St Stephen saith, " he received the lively oracles to give unto them " (Acts vii. 38); the Decalogue he received from the hand of God, "written with the finger of God," the rest of the divine patefactions he wrote himself, and so delivered them not a mortal word to die with him, but " living oracles " to be in force when he was dead, and oblige the people to a behef, when his rod- had ceased to broach the rocks and divide the seas. Neither did he only tie them to a belief of what he wrote himself, but by foretelling and describing the prophets which should be raised' in future ages, he put -a further obligation upon them to believe their prophecies as the revelations of the same God. Thus all the Israelites in all ages believed Moses, while he lived, by believing his words; after his death, by believing his writings. " Had ye believed Moses," saith our Saviour, " ye would have believed Me, for he wrote of Me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe My words ? " (John v. 46, 47.) Wherefore the faith of the Israelites in . the land of Canaan was an assent unto the truths of the law as credible upon the testimony of God deUvered unto them in the writings of Moses and the prophets. In the like manner is it now with us. For although Christ first - published the Gospel to those who " beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father " (John i. 14) ; although the apostles first converted those unto the faith, who heard them speak with tongues they never learned, they never heard before, and dis cover the thoughts of raen they never saw before; who saw the lame to walk, the blind to see, the dead to revive, and the living to expire at their comraand : yet did not these apostles prolong their Jives by virtne of that power which gave such testimony to their doctrine, but rather shortened them by their constant attestation to the truth of that doctrine further confirmed by their death. Nor did that power of frequent and ordinary miraculous operations long survive them, and yet they left as great an obligation upon the Church in all succeeding ages to believe all the truths which they delivered, as they had put upon those persons who heard their words, and saw their works ; because they wrote the same traths which they spake, assisted in writing by the same Spirit by which they spake, and therefore require the same readiness of assent 'so long as the same truths shall be preserved by those writings. While Moses lived and spake as a mediator between 1 6 An Exposition of the Creed. God and the Israelites, they believed his words, and so the prophets whUe they preached. When Moses was gone up to Mount Nebo, and there died, when the rest of the prophets were gathered to their fathers, they believed their writings, and the whole object of their Faith was contained in thera. When the Son of God came into the world to reveal the will of His Father, when He " made known unto " the apostles, as His friends, " all things that He had heard of the Father" (John xv. 15), then did the apostles believe the writings of Moses and the prophets, and the words of Christ ; and in these, taken together, was contained the entire object of their Faith, " and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said " (John ii. 22). When Christ was ascended up into heaven, and the Holy Ghost come down, when the words which Christ had taught the apostles were preached by them, and many thousand souls converted to the faith, they believed the writings of the prophets and the words of the apostles, and in these two was comprised the complete object of their faith. When the apostles themselves departed out of this life, and confirraed the truth of the Gospel preached by the last of sufferings, their death, they left the sum of what they had received in writing for the continuation of the faith in the Churches which they had planted, and the propagation thereof in other places, by those which succeeded them in their ordinary function, but were not to corae near thera in their extraordinary gifts. " These things were written," saith St John, the longest liver and the latest writer, " that ye raight believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that believing ye raight have life through His name " (John xx. 31). Those Christians then which have lived since the apostles' death, and never obtained the wish of St Augustine, to see either Christ upon earth, or St Paul in the pulpit, have beUeved the writings of Moses and the prophets, of the apostles and evan gehsts ; in which together is fully comprehended whatsoever may properly be termed matter of divine faith, and so " the household of God is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets " (Eph. ii. 20), who are continued unto us only in their writings, and by them alone convey unto us the truths which they received from God, upon whose testimony we believe. And therefore he who put their writings into the definition of Faith, considering Faith as now it stands with us, is none of the smaUest of the Schoolmen. From whence we may at last conclude that the true nature of the faith of a Christian, as the state of Christ's Church Article I. 17 now stands and sJiall continue to the end of the world, consists in this, that it is an assent unto truths credible upon the testimony of God delivered \into us in the writings of the apostles and prophets. To believe, therefore, as the word stands in thei front of the Creed, and not only so, but is diffused through every article and proposition of it, is to assent to the whole and every part of it, as to a certain and infallible truth revealed by God (who by reason of His infinite knowledge cannot be deceived, and by reason of His transcendent holiness cannot deceive) and delivered unto us in the writings of the blessed apostles and prophets immediately inspired, moved, and acted by God, out of whose writings this brief sum of necessary points of Faith was first collected. And as this is properly to believe, which was our first consideration ; so to say " I believe," is to make a confession or external expression of the faith, which is the second consideration propounded; Faith is a habit of the intellectual part pf man, and therefore of itself invisible ; and to believe is a spiritual act, and conse quently immanent and internal, and known to no man but him who believes. "For what man knoweth the things of man, save the spirit of a man which is in him?" (1 Cor. ii. 11). Wherefore Christ being not only the great Apostle sent to deliver these revealed truths, and so the author of our faith, but also the head of the Church, whose body consists of faithful members, and so the author of union and communion, which principally has relatipn to the unity of Faith, He must needs be imagined to have appointed some external expression and coraraunication of it : especially considering that the sound of the apostles was to go forth unto the ends of the ¦world, and all nations to be called to the profession of the Gospel, and gathered into the Church of Christ ; which cannot be perforraed without an acknowledgraent of the truth, and a profession of faith, without which no entrance into the Church, no admittance to baptism. " What doth hinder me to be baptised ? " saith the eunuch. " And Philip said. If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God " (Acts viii. 36, 37). So believing with all his heart, as Philip required, and making profession of that faith, he was adraitted. " For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation" (Rom. x. 10). The belief of the heart is the internal habit residing in the soul, and act of faith proceeding from it, but terminated in the same ; the confession of 1 8 An Exposition of the Creed. the mouth is an external signification of the inward habit or act of faith, by words expressing an acknowledgment of those truths which we believe or assent to in our souls. The ear receives the word, " faith coraeth by hearing ; " the ear conveyeth it to the heart, which being opened receiveth it, receiving believeth it ; and then, " Out ofthe abundance ofthe heart the mouth speaketh" (Matt. xii. 34). In the heart Faith is seated ; with the tongue con fession is made : between these two salvation is completed. " If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved" (Rom. x. 9). This faith of the heart every one ought, and is presumed to have, this confession of the mouth everyone is known to make, when he pronounces these words of the Creed, " I believe ; " and if true, he may with comfort say, " The word of faith is nigh me, even in my mouth and in my heart " (Rom. x. 8) ; first in my heart really assenting, then in my raouth clearly and sincerely professing with the prophet David, " I have beheved, therefore have I spoken" (Ps. cxvi. 10). Thus briefly from the second consideration concerning confession implied in the first words " I believe," we shall pass unto the third consideration, of the necessity and particular obligation to such a confession. If there were no other argument, yet being the object of Faith is supposed infallibly true, and acknowledged to be so by every one that believes, seeing it is the nature of truth not to hide itself,- but rather to desire the light that it might appear; this were sufficient to move us to a confession of our Faith. But beside the nature of the thing, we shall find many arguments obliging, press ing, urging us to such a profession. For first, from the same God, and by the same means by which we have received the object of our Faith, by which we came under a possibility of Faith, we have also received an express command to make a confession of the same ; " Be ready," saith St Peter, " always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you " (i Pet. hi. 15) ; and there can be no " reason of hope " but what is grounded on Faith, nor can there be answer given unto that without an acknowledgraent of this. Secondly, it is true indeed that the great promises of the Gospel are raade unto Faith, and glorious things are spoken of it , but the same promises are made to the "confession of faith" (Rom. x. 10) together with it; and we know who it is hath said, " Whosoever shall confess Me before men, him wiU I confess also before My Father which is in heaven" (Matt. X. 32). Besides, the profession of the Faith of one Christian Article I. 19 confirmeth and edifieth another in his, and the mutual benefit of aU laygth an obligation upon every particular. Again, the matters of faith contain so much purity of doctrine, persuade such holiness of life, describe God so infinitely glorious, so transcendently gracious, so loving in Himself, so merciful in His Son, so wonder ful in all His works, that the sole confession of it glorlfieth God ; and how can we expect to enter into that glory which is none of ours, if we deny God that glory which is His ? Lastly, the con cealing those truths which He has revealed, the not acknowledg ing that faith which we are thought to believe, is so far from giving God that glory which is due unto Hint, that it dishonoureth the Faith which it refuseth or neglecteth to profess, and casteth a kind of contumely upon the author of it, as if God had revealed that which man should be ashamed to acknowledge. Wherefore He that carae to save us, hath also said unto us, " Whosoever shall be ashamed of Me and of My words, of him shall the Son of Man be ashamed, when He shall come in His own glory, and in His Father's, and of the holy angels " (Luke ix. 26). Such a necessity there is of confession of faith, in respect of God, who commanded it, and is glorified in it; in respect of ourselves, who shall be rewarded for it ; and in respect of our brethren, who are edified and confirmed by it. Which necessity the wisdom of the Church iu former ages hath thought a sufficient ground to comraand the recitation of the Creed at the first initiation into the Church by baptism (for which purpose it was taught and expounded to those who were to be baptised immediately before the great solemnity of Easter), and to require a particular repetition of it publicly as often as the Sacrament of the Eucharist was administered, and a constant and perpetual inculcation of the same by the clergy to the people. And as this necessity is great, as the practice useful and advan tageous ; so is the obligation of believing and confessing particular, binding every single Christian, observable in the number and person expressed, " I believe." As if Christ did question every ' one in particular, as He did him who was born blind, after He had restored him his sight, (and we are all in his condition) " Dost thou believe on the Son of God?" (John ix. 35, 38); every single ' Christian is taught to make the sarae answer which he raade, " Lord, I believe." As if the Son of God did proraise to every one of them which are gathered together in His name, what He promised to " one of the multitude whose son had a dumb spirit " (Matt. ix. 17) ;' " If thou canst believe, all things are possible to 20 An Exposition of the Creed, him that believeth " (Mark ix. 23) ; each one for himself returneth his answer, "Lord, I beheve; Lord, help xay unbeUef" (Mark ix. 24). Not that it is unlawful or unfit to use another number, and instead of I, to say " We believe ; " for taking in of others, we exclude not ourselves ; and addition of charity can be no dispar agement to confession of Faith. St Peter answered for the twelve, " We believe, and are sure that thou art that Christ the Son of the living God " (John vi. 69). For though , Christ immediately replied that " one of them had a devil," yet is not St Peter blamed who knew it not. But every oi>e is taught to express his own Faith, because by that he is to stand or faU; " The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much" (Jam. v. 16) for the benefit of his brother, but his Faith availeth nothing for the justi fication of another. And it is otherwise very fit that our faith should be raanifested by a particular confession, because it is effectual by particular application ; therefore must it needs be proper for me to, say, "I believe," and to make profession of my "faith in the Son of God, "who loved me, and gave Himself for me " (Gal. ii. 20). Being then I have described the true nature and notion of belief, the duty of confessing our Faith, and the obligation of every particular Christian to believe and to confess ; being in these three explications all which can be imaginably contained in the first word of the Creed raust necessarily be included ; it will now be easy for me to deliver, and for every particular person to understand what it is he says, and upon what ground he proceeds, when he begins his confession with these words, " I believe," which I conceive may in this manner be fitly expressed : Although those things which I am ready to affirm, be not apparent to my sense, so that I cannot say I see them ; although they be not evident to my understanding of themselves, nor appear unto me true by the virtue of any natural and necessary cause, so that I cannot say I have any proper knowledge or science of them : yet being they are certainly contained in the Scriptures, the , writings ofthe blessed apostles and prophets; being those apostles and prophets were endued with miraculous power from above, and ' immediately inspired with the Holy Ghost, and consequently what they dehvered was not the word of man, but of God Himself; being God is of that universal knowledge and infinite wisdom that it is impossible He should be deceived ; of that indefectible holiness and transcendent rectitude, that it is not imaginable He should intend to deceive any man, and consequently whatsoever He hath Article I. 21 delivered for a truth must be necessarily and infallibly true; I readily and steadfastly assent unto them as most certain truths, and amas fully and absolutely, and more concerningly persuaded of them, than of anything I see or know. And because that God who hath revealed them hath done it, not for my benefit only, but for the advantage of others ; nor for that alone, but also for the manifestation of His own glory : being for those ends He hath commanded me to profess them, and hath promised an eternal reward upon my profession of them : being every particular person is to expect the justification of hiraself, and the salvation of his soul, upon the condition of his own Faith ; as with a certain and fuU persuasion I assent unto them, so with a fixed and undaunted resolution I will profess them, and with this Faith in my heart, and confession in my mouth, in respect of the whole body of the Creed, and every article and particle in it, I sincerely, readily, resolvedly say, " I believe." I Believe in God. HAVING delivered the nature of faith, and the act of belief common to all the Articles of the Creed, that we may understand what it is to believe ; we shall proceed to the explica tion of the Articles themselves, as the most necessary objects of our Faith, that w'e raay know what is chiefly to be believed. Where immediately we meet with another word as general as the former, and as universally concerned in every Article, which is "God," for if to believe be to assent upon the testimony of God, as we have before declared, then wheresoever belief is expressed or implied, there is also the name of God understood, upon whose testimony we believe. He, therefore, whose authority is the ground and foundation of the whole, His existence begins the Creed, as the foundation of that authority. For if there can be no divine Faith without the attestation of God, by which alone it becomes divine, and there can be no such attestation, except there were an existence of the testifier, then must it needs be proper to begin the confession of our faith with the agnition of • our God. If His name were thought fit to be expressed in the front of every action even by the heathen, because they thought no action prospered but by His approbation, much more ought we to fix it before our confession, because without Him to believe as we profess is no less than a contradiction. Now these words, " I believe in God," will require a double 22 An Exposition of the Creed. consideration : one, of the phrase or manner of speech ; another, of the thing or nature of the truth in that manner expressed. For to believe with an addition of the proposition in, is a phrase or expression ordinarily conceived fit to be given to none but to God Hiraself, as always implying, beside a bare act of Faith, an addition of hope, love, and affiance. An observation as I conceive, prevailing especially in the Latin Church, grounded .principally upon the authority of St Augustine. Whereas among the Greeks, in whose language the New Testament was penned, I perceive no such constant distinction in their deliveries of the Creed, and in the Hebrew language of the Old, from which the Jewish and Christian Greeks received that phrase of " believing in," it has no such peculiar and accumulative signification. For it is sometimes attributed to God, the Author and Original Cause ; sometiraes to the prophets, the immediate revealers, of the Faith ; sometiraes it is spoken of rairacles, the motives to beheve ; sometimes of the law of God, the raaterial object of our faith. Araong all which varieties of that phrase of speech, it is sufficiently apparent, that in this confession of Faith it is most proper to admit it in the last acception, by which it is attributed to the material object of belief For the Creed being nothing else but a brief coniprehension of the raost necessary matters of Faith, whatsoever is contained in it beside the first word, " I believe," by which we make confession of our Faith, can be nothing else but part of those verities to be believed, and the act of belief in respect of them nothing but an assent unto them as divinely credible and infallible truths. Neither can we con ceive that the ancient Greek Fathers of the Church could have any farther meaning in it, who make the whole body of the Creed to be of the same nature, as so raany truths to be believed, ac knowledged, and confessed ; insorauch as soraetiraes they use not "believing in" neither for the Father, Son, nor Holy Ghost; some times using it as to them, they continue the same to the following Articles of the Catholic Church, the Communion of Saints, &c., and generally speak of the Creed as of nothing but mere matter of Faith, without any intimation of hope, love, or any such notion included in it. So that " believing in " by virtue of the phrase or manner of speech, whether we look upon the original use of it in the Hebrew, or the derivative in the Greek, or the sense of it in the first Christians in the Latin Church, can be of no farther real importance in the Creed in respect of God, who immediately follows, than to acknowledge and assert His being or existence. Article I. 23 Nor ought this to be imagined a slender notion or small part of the first Article of our Faith, when it really is the foundation of this and all the rest ; that as the Creed is fundamental in respect of other truths, this is the foundation even of the fundamentals. " For he that cometh to God must beheve that He is." And this I take for a sufficient explication of the phrase, "I believe in God," that is, " I believe that God is." As for the matter or truth contained in these words so explained, it adraits a threefold consideration : first, of the notion of God, what is here understood by that narne. Secondly, of the existence of God, how we know or believe that He is. Thirdly, the unity of God, in that though " there be gods many, and lords raany," yet in our Creed we mention Him as but one. When therefore we shall have clearly delivered, what is the true notion of God in whom we believe, how and by what means we come to assure our selves of the existence of such a Deity, and upon what grounds we apprehend Him of such a transcendent nature that He can admit no competitor ; then raay we be conceived to have suffi ciently explicated the former part of the first Article ; then may every one understand what he says, and upon what ground he proceeds, when he professeth, " I believe in God." The name of God is attributed unto raany, but here is to be understood of Him, who by way of eminency and excellency bears that name, and therefore is styled " God of gods." " The Lord our God is God of gods, and Lord of lords" (Deut. x. 17 ; Psal. cxxxvi. 2 ; Dan. ii. 47 ; xi. 36). And in the same respect is caUed "the most high God" (Gen. xiv. 18), (others being but inferior or under Him), and "God over" or "above all" (Rom. ix. 5 ; Ephes. iv. 6). This eminency and excellency, by which these titles become propeir unto Him and incom municable to any other, is grounded upon the divine nature or essence, which all other who are caUed gods have not, and therefore are not by nature gods. "Then when ye knew not God," saith St Paul, " ye did service to them which by nature are not gods" (Gal. iv. 8.)- There is then a God by nature, and others which are called gods, but by nature are not so; for either they have no power at all, because no being, but only in the false opinions of deceived men, as the gods of the heathen ; or if they have any real power or authority, from whence some are called gods in the Scripture, yet have they it not from themselves or of their own nature, but from Him who "only hath immortality," and conse- 24 An Exposition of the Creed. quently only divinity, and therefore is the " only true " God. So that the notion of a Deity does at last expressly signify a being or nature of infinite perfection ; and the infinite perfection of a nature or being consists in this, that it be absolutely and essen tially necessary, an actual heing of itself; and potential or causa tive of all beings beside itself, independent from any other, upoii which all things else depend, and by which all things else are governed. It is true indeed, that to give a perfect definition of God is impossible ; neither can our finite reason hold any propor tion with infinity : but yet a sense of this divinity we have, and the first and common notion of it consists in these three particu lars, that it is a Being of itself, and independent from any other ; that it is that upon which all things which are made depend ; that it governs all things. And this I conceive sufficient as to the first consideration, in reference to the notion of a God. As for the existence of such a being, how it comes to be known unto us, or by what means we are assured of it, is not so unani mously agreed upon, as that it is. For although some have imagined that the knowledge of a Deity is connatural to the soul of man, so that every man has a connate inbred notion of a God ; yet I rather conceive the soul of man to have no connatural know ledge at all, no particular notion of anything in it from the be ginning, but to receive the first apprehensions of things by sense, and by thera to raake all rational collections. If then the soul of man be at the first like a fair smooth table without any actual characters of knowledge imprinted in it : if all the knowledge which we have comes successively by sensation, instruction, and rational collection : then must we not refer the apprehension of a Deity to any connate notion or inbred opinion. Again, although others do affirm, that the existence of God is a truth evident of itself ; so as whosoever hears but these terms once named, that " God is," cannot choose but acknowledge- it for a certain and infallible truth upon the first apprehension ; that as no man can deny that the whole is greater than any part, who knows only what is meant by whole, and what hy part ,- so no man can possibly deny or doubt of the existence of God, who knows but what is meant by God, and what it i% to be: yet can we not ground our knowledge of God's existence upon any such clear and immediate evidence : nor were it safe to lay it upon such a ground, because whosoever should deny it, could not by this means be convinced ; it being a very irrational way of instruction to tell a man that doubts of this truth, that he must beUeve it Article I. 25 because it is- evident unto him, when he knows that he therefore only doubts of it because it is not evident unto him. Althpugh therefore that " God is," be of itself an imniediate, certain, necessary truth, yet must it be evidenced and made apparent unto us,by its connection unto other truths; so that the being of the Creator may appear unto us by His creature, and-the dependency of inferior entities lead us to a clear acknowledgment of the Supreme and Independent Being. The wisdom of the Jews thought this method proper ; " For by the greatness and beauty of the creatures, proportionably the maker of them is seen " (Wisd. of Sol. xiii. 5) : and not only they, but St Paul hath taught us, that " the invisible things of God from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead " (Rom. i. 20); For if Phidias could so contrive a piece of his own work, as in it to preserve the memory of himself never to be obliterated without the destruction of the work ; well may we read the great Artificer of the world in the works of His own hands, and by the existence of anything demonstrate the first Cause of all things. _We find by the experience of ourselves, that sorae things in this world have a beginning, befpre which they were not ; the account of the years of our age sufficiendy infer our nativities, and they our conceptions, before which we had no being. Now ifthere be anything which had a beginning, there must neces sarily be something which had no beginning, because nothing can be a beginning to itself Whatsoever is, must of necessity either have been made, or not made ; and something there must needs be which was never made, because all things cannot be made. For whatsoever is made, is made by another, neither can anything produce itself; ptherwise it would follow that the same thing is and is not at the same instant in the same respect : it is, because a producer ; it is not, because to be produced ; it is therefore in being, and is not in being; which is a manifest contradiction. If, then, all things which are made were made by sorae other, that other which produced them, either- was itself produced, or was not ; and if not, then have we already an independent being ; if it were, we must at last corae to something which was never made, or else admit either a circle of productions, in which the effect shall make its own cause, or an infinite succession in causalities, by which nothing will be made ; both which are equaUy impossible. Something then we must confess was never made, something which never had beginning. And although these effects or de- 26 An Exposition of the Creed. pendent beings, singly considered by themselves, do not infer one supreme Cause and Maker of them all, yet the admirable order and connection of things shew as much ; and this one suprerae Cause is God. For all things which we see or know, have their existence for some end, which no man who considers the uses and utilities of every species can deny. Now whatsoever is and hath its being for sorae end, of that the end for which it is raust be thought the cause ; and a final Cause is no otherwise the cause of any thing than as it moves the efficient cause to work ; from whence we cannot but collect a prime efficient Cause of all things, endued with infinite wisdora, who having a fuU comprehension of the ends of aU, designed, produced, and disposed all things to those ends. Again, as aU things have their existence, so have they also their operations for some end ; and whatsoever worketh so, must needs be directed to it. Although then those creatures which are en-- dowed with reason, can thereby, apprehend the goodness of the end for which they work, and make choice of such means as are proportionable and proper for the obtaining of it, and so by their own counsel direct themselves unto it : yet can we not conceive, that other natural agents, whose operations flow from a bare in stinct, can be directed in their actions by any counsel of their own. The stone does not deliberate 'whether it shall descend, nor doth the wheat take counsel whether it shall grow or no. Even men in natural actions use no act of deliberation ; we do not advise how our heart shall beat, though without that pulse we cannot live ; when we have provided nutriment for our stomach, we take no counsel how it shall be digested there, or how the chyle is distributed to every part for the reparation of the whole ; the mother which conceives takes no care how that conceptus shall be framed, how all the parts shall be distinguished, and by what means or ways the child shall grow within her womb ; and yet all these operations are directed to their proper ends, and that with a greater reason, and therefore by a greater wisdom, than what proceeds from anything of human understanding. What then can be raore clear than that those natural agents which work constantly for those ends which they themselves cannot per ceive, must be directed by some high and overruling Wisdom ? and who can be their director in all their operations tending to those ends, but He who gave them their being for those ends ? and who is that, but the great Artificer who works in all of them ? For art is so far the imitation of nature, that if it were not in the Article I. 27 artificer, but in the thing itself which by art is framed, the works of Art and Nature would be the same. Were that which frames a watch within it, and all those curious wheels wrought without the hand of man, it would seem to grow intp that form ; nor would there be any distinction between the making of that watch, and the growing of a plant. Now what the artificer is to works of art, who orders and disposes them to other ends than by nature they were made, that is the Maker of all things to all natural agents, directing all their operations to ends which they cannot apprehend ; and thus appears the Maker to be the Ruler of the world, the Steerer of this great ship, the Law of this universal commonwealth, the General of all the hosts of heaven and earth. By these ways as by the testimony of the creature, we come to find an eternal and independent Being, upon which all things else depend, and by which all things else are governed ; and this we have before supposed to be the first notion of God. Neither is this any private collection or particular ratiocination, but the public and universal reason of the world. No age so distant, no country so remote, no people so barbarous, but gives a sufficient testimony of this truth. When the Roman eagle flew over most parts of the habitable world, they met with atheisra nowhere, but rather by their miscellaneous deities at Rome, which grew together with their victories, they shewed no nation was without its God. And since the later art of navigation iraproved hath dis covered another part of the world, with which no former com merce has been known ; although the customs of the people be much different, and their manner of religion hold small corre spondence with any in these parts of the world professed, yet in this all agree, that some religious observances they retain, and a Divinity they acknowledge. So much of the Creed has been the general confession of all nations, " I believe in God." Which, were it not a most certain truth grounded upon principles obvious unto all, what reason could we give of so universal a consent? or how can it be imagined, that all men should conspire to deceive theraselves and their posterity ? Nor is the reason only general, and the consent unto it uni versal, but God has still preserved and quickened the worship due unto His name, by the patefaction of Himself Things which are to come are so beyond our knowledge, that the wisest man can but conjecture ; and being we are assured of the con tingency of future things, and our ignorance of the concurrence of several free causes to the production of an effect, we may be 28 An Exposition of the Creed. sure that certain and infaUible predictions are clear Divine pate factions. For none but He who made all things, and gave them power to work ; none but He who ruleth all things, and ordereth and directeth all their operations tp their ends; none but He upon whose will the actions of all things depend, can possibly be . imagined to foresee the effects depending merely on those causes. And therefore by what means we may be assured of a pro phecy, by the same we may be secured of a Divinity. Except then aU the annals of the world were forgeries, and all remarks of history designed to put a cheat upon posterity, we can have no pretence to suspect God's existence, having so aniple testimonies ' of His influence. The works of nature appear by observation uniform, and there is a certain sphere of every body's power and activity. If then any action be performed which is not within the corapass of the power of any natural agent, if anything be wrought by the inter vention of a body which bears no proportion to it, or has no natural aptitude so to work, it must be ascribed to a cause trans cending all natural causes and disposing all their operations. Thus every miracle proves its Author, and every act of omni potency is a sufficient demonstration of a Deity. And that man must be possessed with a strange opinion of the weakness of our fathers, and the testimony of all former ages, who shall deny that ever any miracle was wrought. " We have heard with our ears, O God, our father have told us what works thou didst in their days, in the times of old" (Ps. xliv. i). "Blessed be the Lord God who only doth wondrous works" (Ps. Ixxii. i8). Nor are we only informed by the necessary dependency of all things on God, as effects upon their universal cause, or His extemal patefactions unto others, and the consentient acknowledgment of mankind ; but every particular person has a particular remem brancer in himself, as a sufficient testimony of his Creator, Lord, and Judge. We know there is a great force of conscience in all men, by which their thoughts are ever "accusing or excusing them " (Rom ii. 15) ; they feel a corafort in those virtuous actions which they find theraselves to have wrought according to their rule : a sting and secret reraorse for all vicious acts and impious machinations. Nay, those who strive most to deny a God, and to obliterate all sense of a Divinity out of their own souls, have not been least sensible of this remembrancer in their breasts. It is true, indeed, that a false opinion of God, and a superstitious persuasion which has nothing of the true God in it, may breed a Article I. ' 29 remorse of conscience in those who think it true ; and therefore some may hence collect that the force of conscience is only grounded upon an opinion of a Deity, and that opinion raay be false. But if it be a truth, as the testiraonies of the wisest writers of raosf different persuasions, and experience of all sorts of persons of most various inclinations, do agree, that the remorse of con science can never be obliterated, then it rather proves than supposes an opinion of a Divinity ; and that man which most peremptorily denies God's existence, is the greatest argument himself that there is a God. Let Caligula profess himself an atheist, and with that profession hide his head, or run under his bed, when the thunder strikes his ears, and Ughtning flashes in his eyes ; those terrible works of nature put him in mind of the power, and his own guUt of the justice of God, whom while in his wilful opinion he weakly denies, in his involuntary action he strongly asserts. So that a Deity wiU either be granted or extorted, and where it is not acknowledged it will be maniifested. Only unhappy is that man who denies Him to himself, and proves Him to others, who will not acknowledge His existence, of whose power he cannot be ignorant. " God is not far frora every one of us." The proper discourse of St Paul to the philosophers of Athens was that " they might feel after Him and find Hira" (Acts xvii. 27, 28). Some chUdren have been so ungracious as to refuse to give the honour due unto their parent, but never any so irrational as to deny they had a father. As for those who have dishonoured God, it may stand most with their interest, and therefore they may wish there were none, but cannot consist with their reason to assert there is none, when even the very poets of the heathen have taught us " that we are His offspring" (Acts xvu. 28). j^ It is necessary thus to believe there is a God, first, because there can be no Divine faith without this belief For all faith is therefore only Divine, because it relies upon the' authority of God giving testimony to the object of it ; but that which has no being can have no authority, can give no testimony. The ground of His authority is His veracity, the foundations of His veracity are His omniscience and sanctity, both which suppose His essence and existence, because what is not is neither knowing nor holy. ¦ Secondly, it is necessary to beheve a Deity, that thereby we may acknowledge such a nature extant as is worthy of, and may justly challenge from us, the highest worship and adoration. For it were vain to be religious and to exercise devotion, except there were a Being to which aU such holy applications were most justly due. 30 An Exposition of the Creed. Adoration iraplies submission and dejection, so that while we wor ship we cast down ourselves ; there raust be therefore some great eminence in the object worshipped, or else we should dishonour our own nature in the worship of it. But when a Being is pre sented of that intrinsical and necessary perfection that it depends on nothing, and all things else depend on that, and are wholly governed and disposed by it, this worthily calls us to our knees, and shews the humblest of our devotions to be but just and loyal retributions. This necessary truth has been so universally received, that we shall always find all nations of the world more prone unto idolatry than to atheism, and readier to multiply than deny the Deity. But our faith teaches us equally to deny them both, and each of them are renounced in these words, " I believe in God." First, "in God" affirmatively, "I beheve" He is, against atheisra. Secondly, " in God " exclusively, not in gods, against polytheism and idolatry. Although therefore the Existence and Unity of God be twp distinct truths, yet are they of so necessary dependence and intimate coherence, that both may be expressed by one word, and included in one Article. And that the Unity of the Godhead is included in this Article is apparent, not only because the Nicene Council so expressed it by way of exposition, but -also because this Creed in the churches of the East, before the Council of Nice, had that addition in it, . " I believe in one God." We begin our Creed then, as Plato , did his chief and prime Epistles, who gave this distinction to his friends, that the name of God was prefixed before those that were more serious and remarkable, but of gods in the plural, to such as were more vulgar and trivial. " "Unto thee it was shewed," saith Moses to' Israel, " that thou mightest know that the Lord He is God, there is none else beside Him " (Deut. iv. 35). And as the law, so the Gospel teacheth us the same, " We know that an jdol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one" (i Cor. vhi. 4). This unity of the Godhead wiU easily appear as necessary as the existence, so that it must be as impossible there should be more gods than one, as that there should be none : which will clearly be demonstrated, first, out of the Nature of G^od, to which multiplication is repugnant ; and secondly, from the government as He is Lord, in which we must not admit confusion. For first, the nature of God consists in this, that He is the ^prime an,d or^i^inal^ cause of all things, as an intendent Beings Article I. 31 upon which all things else depend, and likewise the ultimate encft or final Cause of all ; but in this sense two prime causes are inim- aginable, and for all things to depend on one, and to be more> independent beings than one, is a clear contradiction. This prima.ry God requires to be attributed to Hiraself, " Hearken' unto Me, O Jacob, and Israel my .called, I am He, I am the first, I also am the last" (Isa. xlvhi. 12). And from this primity He chaUengeth His unity ; " Thus saith the Lord the^ King of Israel, and his Redeemer the Lord of hosts ; I am the first and I am the last, and beside Me there is no God " (Isa. Ixiv. 6). Again if there were more gods than one, then were not all per fections in one, neither formally, by reason of their distinction, nor erainently and virtually, for then one should have power to produce the other, and that nature which is producible is not divine.' But all acknowledge God to be absolutely and infinitely perfect, in whom all perfections imaginable which are simply such must be contained formally, and all others which imply any mixture of imperfection, virtually. But were no arguments brought from the infinite perfections of the divine nature, able to convince us, yet were the consideration of His supreme dominion sufficient to persuade us. The will of> God is infinitely free, and by that freedom does He govern and dispose of all things, " He doth according to His will in the arm;^ of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth " (Dan. iv. 35),) said Nebuchadnezzar out of his experience ; and St Paul expresses Him as " working all things after the counsel of His own will.' i If then there were more supreme governors of the world than one, each of them absolute and free, they might have contrary' determinations concerning the same thing, than which nothing can be more prejudicial unto government. God is a God of order, not confusion ; and therefore of unity, not admitting multiplication. If it be better that the universe should be governed by one than many, we may be assured that it is so, because nothing must be conceived of God, but what is best. He, therefore, who made all things, by that right is Lord of aU, and because all power is His, He alone ruleth over all. Now, God is not only One, but has an unity peculiar to Him self by which He is the only God ; and that not only by way -.of actuaUty, but also of possibility. Every individual man is one, but so as there is a second and a third, and consequently every one is part of a number, and concurring to a multitude. The 32 An Exposition of the Creed. sun, indeed, is one ; so as there is neither third nor second sun at least within the sarae vortex : but though there be not, yet there raight have been ; neither in the unity of the solar nature is there any repugnancy to plurality ; for that God whi<:h made this world, and in this, "the sun to rule the, day," might have made another world by the same fecundity of his omnipotency, and another sun to rule in that. Whereas in the divine nature there is an intrinsical and essential singularity, because no other Being can have any existence but from that ; and whatsoever essence has its existence from another is not God. " I am the Lord," saith He, " and there is none else, there is no God besides Me : that they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none besides me; I am the Lord, and there is none else'' (Isa. xlv. 5, 6 ; Deut. iv. 35 ; xxxii. 39; Psal. xviii. 31). He who hath infinite knowledge knoweth no other God beside Himself " Is there a God besides Me ? yea there is no God, I know not any" (Isa. xlv. 18, 21, 22 ; Isa. xliv. 8). And we who believe in Him, and desire to enjoy Him, need for that end to know no other God but Him, " for this is life eternal, that they might know Thee the only true God : " as certainly one " as God " (John xvn. 3). ^ It is necessary thus to believe the unity of the Godhead, that being assured there is a nature worthy of our devotions, and chal lenging our religious subjection, we may learn to know whose that nature is to which we owe our adorations, lest our niinds should wander and fluctuate in our worship about various and uncertain objects. If we should apprehend more gods than one, I know not what could determinate us in any instant to the actual adoration of any one : for where no difference doth appear (as, if there were many, and all by nature gods, there could be none), what inclination could we have, what reason could we imagine, to prefer or elect any one before the rest for the object of our devotions ? Thus is it necessary to believe the unity of God in respect of us who are obliged to worship Hira. Secondly, it is necessary to believe the unity of God in respect of Him who is to be worshipped. Without this acknowledgment we cannot give unto God the things which afe God's, it being part of the worship and honour due unto God, to accept of no co-partner with Him. When the law was given, in the observance whereof the religion of the Israelites consisted, the first precept was this prohibition, " Thou shalt have no other gods before Me " (Ex. XX. 3) ; and whosoever violates this, denies the foundation Article I, 33 on which all the rest depend, as the Jews observe. This is the true reason of that strict precept by which all are commanded to give divine worship to God only. " Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve " (Matt. iv. 10) ; because He alone is God : Him only shalt thou fear, because He alone has infinite power; in Him only shalt thou trust, because He "only is our rock and our salvation" (Ps. Ixii. 2); to Him alone shalt thou direct thy devotions, because " He only knoweth the hearts of the children of men" (2 Chron. vi. 30). "Upon this foundation the whole heart of man is entirely required of Him and engaged to Hira. " Hear, O Israel ; The Lord our God is one God : And '' (or rather, therefore) "thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might" (Deut. vi. 4, 5). Whosoever were truly and by nature God, could not choose but challenge our love upon the ground of an infinite excellency, and transcendent beauty of holiness ; and therefore if there were more Gods than one, so our love must necessarily be terminated unto more than one, and consequently divided between them ; and as our love, so also the proper effect thereof, our cheerful and ready obedience, which like -the chUd propounded to the judgment of Solomon, as soon as it is divided, is destroyed. " No man can serve two masters : for either he will hate the one and love the other ; or else he will hold to the one and despise the other" (Matt. vi. 24). Having thus described the first notion of a God, having demon strated the existence and unity of God, and having in these three particulars comprised all which can be contained in this part of the Article, we may now clearly deliver, and every particular Christian understand, what it is he says when he makes his confession in these words, -" I believe in God," which in corre spondence with the precedent discourse may be thus expressed : Forasmuch, as by all things created is made known the " eternal power and Godhead," and the dependency of all limited beings infers an infinite and independent essence; whereas all things are for some end, and all their operations directed to it, although they cannot apprehend that end for which they are, and in pro secution of which they work, and therefore must be guided by some universal and overruling wisdom ; being this collection is so evident, that all the nations of the earth have made it, being God has not only written Himself in the lively characters of His creatures, but has also made frequent patefactions of His deity, by most infallible predictions, and supernatural operations ; there- 34 An Exposition df the Creed. fore I fully assent unto, freely acknowledge, and clearly profess this truth, thkt " there is a God." Again, being a prime and independent Being supposeth all other to depend, and consequently ho other to be God ; being the entire fountain of all perfections is incapable of a double head, and the most perfect government of the universe speaks the supreme dominion of one absolute Lord ; hence do I acknowledge that God to be but one, and in this unity or rather singularity of the Godhead, excluding all actual or possible multiplication of a Deity, " I beheve in God." I believe in God the Father. After the confession of a Deity, and assertion of the Divine unity, the next consideration is concerning God's Paternity; for that " one God is father of all," and " to us there is but one God, the Father" (Eph. iv. 5 ; i Cor. viii. 6). Now, although the Christian notion of the Divine Paternity be some way peculiar to the evangelical patefaction, yet wheresoever God has been acknowledged, He hath been understood- and worshipped as a Father : the very heathen poets so describe their gods, and their vulgar names did carry father in them, as the most popular and universal notion. This name of father is a relative ; and the proper foundation of paternity, as of a relation, is generation. As therefore the phrase of generating is diversely attributed unto several acts of the same nature with generation properly taken, or by consequence attending on it : so the title of father is given unto divers persons or things, and for several reasons unto the same God. "These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the heavens and the earth " (Gen. ii. 4), saith Moses. So that the creation or production of anything by which it is, and before was not, is a kind of generation, and consequently the creator or producer of it a kind of father. " Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops of dew?" (Job xxxviii. 28); by which words Job signifies, that as there is no other cause assignable of the rain but God, so may He as the cause be called the father of it, though not in the most proper sense, as He is the Father of His Son ; and so the philosophers of old, who thought that God did niake the world, called Him expressly, as the Maker, so the Father of it. And thus, " To us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are aU things " (i Cor. viii. 6) ; to which the Article I. - 35 words following in the Creed may seem to have relation "the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth." But in this mass of creatures and body of the universe, som'e works of the creation more properly call Him Father, as being more rightly sons : such are all the rational and intellectual offspring of the Deity. Of merely natural beings, and irrational agents He is the Creator ; of rational, as so, the Father also ; they are His creatures, these His sons. Hence He is styled the " Father of spirits " (Heb. xii. 9),' and the blessed angels," when He laid the fpundations of the earth, His sons, " When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy " (Job xxxviii. 7) ; hence man whom He created after His own image, is called His " offspring " (Acts xvii. 28) ; and Adara, the immediate work of His hands, " the son of God" (Luke iii. 38) ; hence may we all cry out with the Israelites taught by the prophet so to speak, " Have we not all one Father ? hath not one God created us " (Mai. ii. 10). Thus the first and most universal notion of God's paternity in a borrowed or meta phorical sense is founded rather upon creation than procreation. Unto this act of creation is annexed that of conservation, by which God doth uphold and preserve in being that which at first He made, and to which He gave its being. As therefore it is the duty of the parent to educate and preserve the child, as that which had its being frora him ; so this paternal education gives the name of father unto, and conservation gives the sarae to God. Again, redemption from a state of misery, by which a people has become worse than nothing, unto a happy condition, is a kind of generation, which joined with love, care, and indulgence in the Redeemer, is sufficient to found a new paternity, and give Him another title of a Father. Well might Moses tell the people of Israel, now brought out of the land of Egypt from their brick and straw, unto their quails and manna, unto their milk and honey, " Is not He thy Father that hath bought thee ? hath He not made thee, and established thee ? " (Deut. xxxii. 6). Well might God speak unto the same people as to " His son, even His first-born " (Expd. iv. 22), "Thus saith the Lord thy Redeemer, and He that formed thee from the womb. Hearken unto Me, O house of Jacob, and all the reranant of the house of Israel which are bome by Me from the belly, which are carried from the womb " (Isa. xliv. 24 ; xlvi. 3). And just is the acknowledgment made by, that people instructed by the prophet, " Doubtless Thou art our Father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknow ledge us not ; Thou, O Lord, art our Father, ouii Redeemer, from B 2 36 An Exposition of the Creed, everlasting is Thy narae " (Isa. Ixiii. 16). And thus another kind of paternal relation of God unto the sons of men is founded on a restitution or teraporal rederaption. Besides, if to be born causes a relation to a father, then to be bom again makes an addition of another : and if to generate foundeth, then to regenerate addeth a paternity. Now though we cannot " enter the second time into our mother's womb," nor pass through the same door into the scene of life again ; yet we believe and are persuaded that " except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God " (John ui 3). A double birth there is, and the world consists of two, the first and the second man. And though the incorruptible seed be the Word pf God, and the dispensers of it in some sense may say, as St Paul spake unto the Corinthians, " I have begotten you through the Gospel " (i Cor. iv. 15) : yet He is the true Father, whose word it is, and that is God, even "the Father of lights, who of His own will begat us with the word of truth" (James i. 18). Thus " whoso ever believeth that Jesus is Christ, is born of God " (i John v. 1) ; Tvhich regeneration is as it were a second creation, "for we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works " (Eph. h. to). And He alone who did create us out of nothing, can beget us again, and make us of the new creation. When Rachel called to Jacob, " Give me children or else I die ; " he answered her sufficiently with this question, " Am I in God's stead ? " (Gen. xxx. i, 2). _ And if He only openeth the womb, who else can make the soul to bear? Hence hath He the name of Father, and they of sons, who are born of Him ; and so from that internal act of spiritual regeneration another title of paternity redoundeth unto the divinity. Nor is this the only second birth, or sole regeneration in a Christian sense ; the soul, which after its natural being requires a birth into the life of grace, is also after that born again into a life of glory. Our Saviour puts us in mind of the regeneration " when the Son of Man shall sit in the throne of His glory " (Matt. xix. 28). The resurrection of our bodies is a kind of coming out of the womb of the earth, and entering upon immortality, a nativity into another Ufe. For "they which shall be accounted" worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, are the sons of God, being the sons of the resurrection " (Luke xx. 35, 36), and then as sons " they become heirs, co-heirs with Christ, re ceiving the promise and reward of eternal inheritance" (Rom. vui, 17; Col. iii. 24; Heb. ix. 15). " Beloved, now we are the Article I. 37 sons of God," saith St John, even in this life by regeneration, "and it doth not yet appear," (or, "it hath not yet been made manifest,") " what we shall be ; but we knpw, that if He appear, we shall be like Him" (i John in. 2): the manifestation of the Father being a sufficient declaration of the condition of the sons, when the sonship itself consists in a similitude of the Father. And " blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to His abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for us " (i Peter i. 3, 4). Why .may not then a second kind of regeneration be thought a fit addition of this paternal relation ? Neither is there only a natural, but also a voluntary and civil foundation of paternity : for the laws have found a way by which a man may become a father without procreation : and this imitation of nature is called adoption, taken in the general signification. Although therefore many ways God be a Father, yet lest any way might seem to exclude us from being His sons. He hath made us so also by adoption. Others are wont to fly to this, as to a comfort of their solitary condition, when either nature hath denied thera, or death bereft them of their offspring. Whereas God does it not for His own, but for our sakes ; nor is the advantage His, but ours. " Behold what manner of lov€ the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God" (i John iii. i) ; that we, the sons of disobedient and condemned Adam by natural generation, should be translated into the glorious liberty of the' sons of God by adoption ; that we, who were aliens, strangers, and enemies, should be assumed " unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom all fhe family of heaven and earth is named" (Eph. in. 15), and be made partakers of "the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints " (Eph. i. 18). For, as in the legal adoption, the father has as full and absolute power over his adopted son as over his own issue ; so in the spiritual, the adopted sons have a clear and undoubted right of inheritance. He then who hath " predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself " (Eph. i. 5), hath thereby another kind of paternal relation, and so we receive the " spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father " (Rom. viii. 15). The necessity of this faith in God as in our Father appeareth, first, in that it is the ground of all our filial fear, honour, and obedience due unto Him upon this relation. " Honour thy father is the first 38 An Exposition ofthe Creed. commandment with promise" (Eph. vi. i, 2), written in tables of stone with the finger of God; and, " Children, obey your parents in the Lord," is an evangehcal precept, but founded upon prin ciples of reason and justice; "for this is nght, saith bt Faui. And if there be such a rational and legal obligation of honour and obedience to the fathers of our flesh, how much more must we think ourselves obliged to Him whom we believe to be our heavenly and everiasting Father ! " A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master. If then I be a Father, where is Mine honour ? and if I be a Master, where is My fear, saith the Lord of Hosts? " (Mai. i. 60 If we be heirs, we must be co-heirs with Christ; if sons, we must be brethren to the only-begotten : but being He came not to do His own wiU, but the will of Him that sent Him, He acknowledgeth no fraternity but with such as do the same ; as He hath said, " Whosoever shall do' the will of My Father which is in heaven, the same is My brother " (Matt. xii. 50). If it be required of a Bishop in the Church of God to be " one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with aU gravity" (i Tira. in. 4); what obedience raust be due, what subjection must be paid, unto the father of the family ! The same relation in the object of- our faith is the life of our devotions, the expectation of aU our petitions. Christ, who taught His disciples, and us in thera, how to pray, propounded not the knowledge of God, though without that He could not hear us ; neither represented He His power, though without that He cannot help us ; but comprehended all in this relation, " when ye pray, say. Our Father " (Luke xi. 2). This prevents all " vain repetitions'" of our most earnest desires, and gives us full security to cut off all tautology ; for " our Father knoweth what things we have need of before we ask Hira " (Matt. vi. 8). This creates a clear assurance of a grant without mistake of our petition : " What man is there of us, who, if his son ask bread, will give him a stone ? or, if he ask fish, will give him a serpent ? If we then who are evil, know how to give good gifts unto our children, how much more shall our Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask Hira ! " (Matt. vh. 9-11). Again, this paternity is the proper foundation of our Christian patience, sweetening all afflictions with the name and nature of fatherly corrections. " We have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence ; shall we not much rather be in subjection to the Father of Spirits, and live?" especially considering that " they chastened us after their o'wn Article I. 39 pleasure; but He for our profit, that we might be partakers of His holiness " (Heb. xii. 9, 10) : they, as an argument of their authority, He, as an assurance of His love ; they, that we might acknowledge them to be our parents ; He, that He may persuade us that we are His sons, "For whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth ' every son whom He receiveth." And what greater incitement unto the exercise of patience is imaginable unto a suffering soul, than tp see in every stroke the hand of a father, in every affliction a demonstration of his love? Or how canst thou repine, or be guUty of the least degree of impatiency, even in the sharpest cor rections, if " thou shalt know with thine heart, that as a man chasteneth his son, sp the Lord thy God chasteneth thee ? " (Deut. viii. 5). How canst thou not be comforted and even rejoice in the midst of thy greatest sufferings, when thou knowest that He who striketh pitieth, He who afflicteth is, as it were, afflicted with it ? " for like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear Him " (Ps. ciii. 13). Lastly, the same relation strongly inferreth an absolute necessity of our imitation ; it being clearly vain to assume the title of son without any similitude of the father. What is the general notion of generation but the production of the hke ; nature, ambitious of perpetuity, striving to preserve the species in the multiplication and succession of individuals? And this similitude consists partly in essentials, or the likeness of nature ; partly in accidentals, -or the likeness in figinre or affections. " Adam begat a son in his own likeness, after his image " (Gen. v. 3), and can we imagine those the sons of God which are no way like Him ? a simUitude of nature we must not, of figure we cannot pretend unto; it remains then only that we bear some likeness in our actions arid affections. " Be ye therefore followers," saith the apostle, or rather, imitators, " of God, as dear chUdren " (Eph. v. i). What He has revealed of Himself, that we must express within ourselves. Thus God spake unto the children of Israel, whom He styled His son, " Ye shall be holy, for I ara holy " (Lev. xi. 44 ; xix. 2 ; xx. 7). And the apostle upon the same ground speaketh unto us, as to obedient children, "As He that hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation " (i Peter i. 15). It is part of the general beneficence and universal goodness of our God, that "He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust " (Matt. v. 45). These impartial beams and undistinguishing showers are but to shew us what we ought to do, and to make us fruitful in the works of God ; for no other 40. An Exposition of the Creed. reason Christ hath given us this command, " Love your -eneraies, bless thera that curse you, do good to them that hate you, that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven " (Matt. v. 44, 45). No other comraand did He give upon this ground, but, " Be ye therefore raerciful, as your Father is merciful " (Luke vi. 36). So necessary is this faith in God, as in our Father, both for direction to the best of actions, and for consolation in the worst of conditions. But although this be very necessary, yet is it not the principal or most proper explication of God's paternity ? For as we find one person in a more peculiar manner the Son of God, so must we look upon God as in a more peculiar manner, the Father of that Son. " I ascend unto My Father and your Father " (John XX. 17), saith our Saviour; the same of both, but in a dififerent manner, denoted by the article prefixed before the one and not the other ; which distinction in the original we may preserve by this translation, " I ascend unto the Father of Me, and Father of you;" first "of Me," and then "of you : " not therefore His, because ours ; but therefore ours, because His. So far we are the sons of God, as we are like unto Him ; and our similitude unto God consisteth in our conforraity to the likeness of His Son. " For whom He did foreknow. He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren" (Rom. viii. 29). He, the first-born, and- we sons, as brethren unto Him ; He " appointed heir of all things," and we "heirs of God, as joint-heirs with Hira" (Heb. i. 2). Thus God " sent forth His Son, that we might receive the adop tion of sons." And " because we are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father " (Gal. iv. 4, 5, 6). By His mission are we adopted, and by His Spirit call we God our Father. So are we no longer " servants, but " now " sons " ; " and if sons, then heirs of God," but still " through Christ "(GaL iv. 7). It is true indeed, that "both He that sanctifieth," that is, Christ, " and they who are sanctified," that is, faithful Christians, "are all ofone," the same Father, the same God : " for which cause He is not ashamed to call them brethren " (Heb. ii. 11) ; yet are they not all of Him after the same manner, not the " many sons," like the " Captain of their salvation " (Heb. ii. 10) ; but Christ the beloved, the first-born, the only-begotten, the Son after a more peculiar and more excellent manner ; the rest with relation unto, and dependence on His Sonship, as given Article I. 41 unto Him ; " Behold I and the children which God hath given me" (Isa. vni. 18 ; Heb. ii. 13) ; as being so by faith in Him : "For we are all the chUdren of God by faith in Christ Jesus" (Gal. in. 26), as recei^ving the right of sonship from Him. " For as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God" (John i. 12). Among all the sons of God there is none like to that one Son of God. And if there be so great a disparity in the filiation, we must make as great a difference in the correspondent relation. There is one degree of sonship founded on creation, and that is the lowest, as belonging unto all, both good and bad ; another degree above that there is grounded upon regeneration, or adop tion, belonging only to the truly faithful in this life ; and a third above the rest founded on the resurrection, -or collation of the etemal inheritance, and the similitude of God, appertaining to the saints alone in the world to come. For " we are now the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be ; but we know that when He shall appear we shall be like Him" (i John in. 2). And there is yet another degree of filiation, ofa greater eminency and a different nature, appertaining properly to none of these, but to the true Son of God alone, who amongst all His brethren hath only received the title of His " own Son," and a singular testimony from heaven, " This is My beloved Son" (Matt. ih. 17; xvn. 5), even in the presence of John the Baptist, even in the midst of Moses and Elias (who are certainly the sons of God by all the other three degrees of filiation) and therefore hath called God after a peculiar way " His own Father " (John V. 18). And so at last we c6me unto the most singular and eminent paternal relation, " unto the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore " (2 Cor. xi. 31); the Father of Him and of us, but not the Father of us as of Him. Christ hath taught us to say, " Our Father ; " a form of speech which He never used Himself; sometiraes He calls Him " the Father," sometiraes " My Father," sometimes " your," but never "our ; " He makes no such conjunction of us to Himself, as to make no distinction between us and Himself: so conjoining us as to distinguish, though so distinguishing as not to separate us. Indeed I conceive this, as the raost eminent notion of God's paternity, so to be the original and proper explication of this Article of the Creed ; and that not only because the ancient Fathers deliver no other exposition of it ; but also because that which I conceive to be the first occasion, rise, and original of the Creed 42 An Exposition of the Creed. itself, requireth this as the proper interpretation. Immediately before the ascension of our Saviour, He said unto His apostles, " All power is given unto Me in heaven and earth. Go ye there fore and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Matt. xxviii. 18-19). From this sacred form of baptism did the Church derive the rule of faith, requiring the profession of belief in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, before they could be baptised in their name. When the Eunuch asked PhUip, "what doth hinder me to be baptised? Philip said. If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest " (Acts viii. 36, 37) ; and when the Eunuch replied, " I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God ; he baptised Him." And before that, the Samaritans, " when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, were baptised, both men and women " (Acts viii. 1 2). For as in the Acts of the Apostles there is no more expressed than that they baptised " in the narae of Jesus Christ " (Acts ii. 38 ; vin. 16; X. 48; xix. 5); so is no more expressed of the faith required in thera who were to be baptised, than to believe in the same name. But being the Father and the Holy Ghost were likewise mentioned in the first institution, being the expressing of one doth not exclude the other, being it is certain that from the apostles' times the names of all three were used ; hence upon the sarae ground was required faith, and a profession of belief in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Again, as the Eunuch said not simply, I believe in the Son, but,' " I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God," as a brief explication of that part of the institution which he had learned before of Philip : so they who were converted unto Christianity were first taught, not the bare names, but the explications and descriptions of them in a brief, easy and famihar way ; which when they had rendered, acknowledged, and professed, they were baptised in them. And these being regularly and constantly used, made up the rule of Faith, that is, the Creed. The truth of which may sufficiently be made apparent to any, who shall seriously consider the con stant practice of the Church, from the first age unto this present, of delivering the rule of faith to those which were to be bap tised, and so requiring of themselves, or their sureties, an express recitation, profession, or acknowledgment of the Creed. From whence this observation is properly deducible; That in what sense the name of Father is taken in the form of baptism, in the Article I. 43 same it also ought to be taken in this Article. And being no thing can be more clear than that, when it is said, " In the name of the Father, and of the Son," the notion of Father has in this particular no other relation but to that Son whose name is joined with His ; and as we are baptised into no other So'n of that Father, but that only-begotten Christ Jesus, so into no other Father but the Father of that only-begotten; it followeth, that the proper explication of the first words of the Creed is this ; " I believe in God the Father of Christ Jesus." In vain then is that vulgar distinction applied unto the explica tion of the Creed, whereby the Father is considered both per sonally, and essentially : personally, as the first in the glorious Trinity, with relation and opposition to the Son ; essentially, as comprehending the whole Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. For that the Son is not here comprehended in the Father, is evident, npt only out of the original, but also frora the very letter of the Creed, which teaches us to " believe in God the Father and in His Son ; " for if the Son were included in the Father, then were the Son the Father of himself As, therefore, when I say, " I believe in Jesus Christ His Son," I must necessarily understand the Son of that Father whom I mentioned in the first Article ; so when I said, " I believe in God the Father," I must as necessarily be understood of the Father of Hira, whom I call " His Son " in the second Article. Now as it cannot be denied that God may several ways be said to be the Father of Christ : first, as He was begotten by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary (Luke i. 35) ; secondly, as He was sent by Him with special authority, as the King 'of Israel (John X. 35, 36 ; i. 49) ; thirdly, as He was raised from the dead (Acts xiii. 32, 33), out of the womb of the earth into im mortal life, and made heir of all things, in His Father's house : so must we not doubt, but beside all these, God is the Father of that Son in a more erainent and peculiar manner, as He is and ever was with God, and God (John i. i) : which shall be demon strated fully in the second Article, when we come to shew how Christ is the only-begotten Son. And according unto this paternity by way of generation totally divine, in which He who begetteth is God, and He which is begotten, the same God, do we believe in God, as the etemal Father of an etemal Son. Which relation is coeval with His essence : so that we are not to imagine one without the other; but as we profess Him always God, so must we acknowledge Him always Father, and that in a 44 ^'^ Exposition of the Creed. far more proper manner than the same title can be given to any creature. Such is the fluctuant condition of huraan generation, and of those relations which arise from thence, that he which is this day a son, the next may prove a father, and within the space of one day more, without any real alteration in hiraself, become neither son nor father, losing one relation by the death of him that begot him, and the other by the departure of him that was begotten by him. But in the Godhead these relations are more proper, because fixed, the Father having never been a Son, the Son never becoming Father, in reference to the same kind of generation. A further reason of the propriety of God's paternity appears from this, that He has begotten a Son of the same nature and essence with Himself, not only specifically, but individually, as I shall also demonstrate in the exposition of the second Article. For generation being the production of the like, and that likeness being the sirailitude of substance ; where is the nearest identity of nature there raust be also the most proper generation, and consequently, he who generateth, the most proper father. If therefore man,- who by the benediction of God, given unto him at his first creation in these words, " Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth" (Gen. i. 28), begetteth a son "inhis own likeness, after his own image " (Gen. v. 3), that is, of the same human nature, of the same substance with him (which if he did not, he should not according to the benediction multiply himself or man at all), with which simUitude of nature many accidental disparities may consist, if by this act of generation he obtaineth the narae of Father, because, and in regard, of the similitude of His nature in the Son ; Tiow much more properly must that name belong unto God Himself, who has begotten a Son of a nature and essence so totally like, so totally the same, that no accidental disparity can imaginably consist with that identity ! "That God is the proper and eternal Father of His own eternal Son is now declared ; what is the eminency or excellency of this relation followeth to be considered. In general then we may safely observe, that in the very name of father there is something of eminence which is not in that of son ; and some kind of priority we must ascribe unto him whom we call the first in respect of him whom we term the second person : and as we cannot but ascribe it, so must we endeavour to preserve it. Now that privilege or priority consisteth not in this, that the essence or attributes of the one are greater than the essence or attributes of the other (for we shall hereafter demonstrate them Article I. 45 to be the same in both) ; but only in this, that the Father has that essence of Himself, the Son by communication from the Father. From whence He acknowledgeth that He is "from Him " (John vii. 29), that He " liveth by Him " (John vi. 57), that the " Father gave Him to have life in Himself" (John v. 26), and generally re- ferreth all things to Him, as received from Hira. Wherefore in this sense some of the ancients have not stuck to interpret those words, "the Father isgrea'ter than I" (John xiv. 28), of Christ as the Son of God, as the second person in the blessed Trinity : but still with reference not unto His essence, but His generation, by which He is understood to have His being from the Father, who only has it of Himself, and is the original of all power and essence in the Son.- "I can of mine own self do nothing" (John v. 30). saith our Saviour, because He is not of Himself; and whosoever receives his being, must receive his power from another, especially where the essence and the power are undeniably the same, as in God they are. " The Son " then " can do nothing of Hiraself, but what He seeth the Father do," because He hath no power of Himself, but what the Father gave ; arid being He gave Him all the power, as communicating His entire and undivided essence, therefore " what things soever He doth, these also doth the Son likewise," by the same power by which the Father worketh, because He had received the same Godhead in which the Father subsists. There is nothing more intimate and essential to any thing than the life thereof, and that in nothing so conspicuous as in the Godhead, where life and truth are so inseparable, that there can be no living God but the true, no true God but the living. " The Lord is the true God, He is the living God, and an everiasting King " (Jer. x. 10), saith the prophet Jeremiah ; and St Paul putteth the Thessalonians in mind, how they " turned from idols to serve the living and true God " (i Thes. i. 9). Now life is otherwise in God than in the creatures ; in Him originally, in them derivatively ; in Him as in the fountain of absolute perfection, in them by way of dependence and participation : our life is in Him, but His is in Hiraself : and " as the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself" (John.v. 26) : both the same life, both in themselves, both in the same degree, as the one, so the other ; but only with this difference, the Father giveth it, and the Son receiveth it. From whence He professeth of Himself, that " the living Father sent Him, and that He liveth by the Father." We must not'therefore so far endeavour to involve ourselves in 46 An Exposition of the Creed. the darkness of this mystery, as to deny that glory which is clearly due unto the Father : whose pre-eminence undeniably consisteth in this, that He is God not of any other, but of Himself, and that there is no other person who is God, but is God of Him. It is no diminution to the Son, to say He is from another, for His very name imports as much : but it were a diminution to the Father to speak so of Him ; and there must be some pre-eminence, where there is place for derogation. What the Father is. He is from none : what the Son is. He is from Him : what the first is. He giveth ; what the second is. He receiveth. The first is a Father indeed by reason of His Son, but He is not God by reason of Him ; whereas the Son is not so only in regard of the Father, but also God by reason of the same. ^^ . Upon this pre-eminence (as I conceive) may safely be grounded the congruity of the Divine mission. We often read that Christ was sent, from whence He bears the name of an Apostle (Heb. iii. i) Himself, as well as those whom He therefore named so, because as the " Father sent Him, so sent He them " (John xx. 21). The Holy Ghost is also said to be sent, sometimes by the Father, sometimes by the Son ; but we never read that the Father was sent at aU, there being an authority in that name which seems inconsistent with this mission. In the parable " a cfertain house holder which planted a vineyard, first sent his servants to the husbandmen, and again- other servants ; but last of all he sent unto them his son" (Matt. xxi. 33) : it had been inconsistent even with the literal sense of an historical parable, as not at all con sonant to the rational customs of men, to have said, that last of all, the son sent his father to them. So God, placing man in the vineyard of His Church, first sent His servants the prophets, by whom He " spake at sundry times and in divers manners ; " but "in the last days He sent His Son" (Heb. i. i) : and it were as incongruous and inconsistent with the divine generation, that the Son should send the Father into the world. " As the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father" (John vi. 57), saith our Saviour; intimating, that by whom He lived, by Him He was sent, and therefore sent by Him, because He lived by Him, laying His generation as the proper ground of His mission. Thus He who begetteth sendeth, and He who is begotten is sent. "For I am from Him, and He hath sent Me" (John vii. 29), saith the Son : from whom I received My essence by communica tion, from Him also received I this commission. As therefore it is more worthy to give than to receive, to send than to be sent ; Article I. 47 ISO in respect of the Sonship there is some priority in the Divine /paternity, from whence divers of the ancients read that place of 1 St John with this addition, " the Father (which sent Me) is greater than I" (John xiv. 28). He then is that "God who sent forth His Son made of a woman," that " God who hath sent forth the spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father " (Gal. iv. 4). So that the authority of sending is in the Father : which therefore ought to be acknowledged, because upon this mission is founded the highest testimony of His love to man, for " herein is love," saitlrSt John, " not that we loved God, but that He loved us, and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins." Again, the dignity of the Father wUl farther yet appear from the order of the persons in the blessed Trinity, of which He is undoubtedly the first. Fpr although in some passages of the apostolical discourses the Son raay first be named (as in that of St Paul, " the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the comniunion of the Holy Ghost he with you all " (2 Cor. xiii. 14), the latter part of which is nothing but an addition unto His constant benediction) ; and in others the Holy Ghost precedes the Son (as, " Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit ; and there are differences of administrations, but the sarae Lord ; and there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all" (i Cor. xii. 4, 5, 6) : yet where the three persons are barely enuraerated, and delivered unto us as the rule of faith, there that order is observed which is proper to thera ; witness the form of baptism " in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghpst ; " which order has been perpetuated in all confessions of faith, and is for ever inviolably to be observed. For that which is not instituted or invented by the will or design of man, but founded in the nature of things themselves, is not to be altered at the pleasure of man. Now this priority does properly and naturally result from the divine paternity ; so that' the Son must necessarily be second unto the Father, from whom He receives His origination, and the Holy Ghost unto the Son. Neither can we be thought to want a sufficient foundation for this priority of the first person of the Trinity, if we look upon the numerous testimonies of the ancient "doctors of the Church, who have not stuck to call the Father the origin, the cause, the author, the root, the fountain, and the head of the Son, or the whole divinity. For by these titles it appeareth clearly, first, that they made a considerable difference between the Perspn of the Father, " of 48 An Exposition of the Creed. whom are all things," and the Person of the Son, " by whom are all things." Secondly, that the difference consisteth properly in this, that as the branch is from the root, and river from the fountain, and by their origination from them receive that being which they have : whereas the root receiveth nothing from the branch, or fountain from the river : so the Son is from the Father, receiving His subsistence by generation from Him ; the Father is not from ^ the Son, as being what He is from none. ' Some indeed of the ancients may seem to have made yet a further difference between the Persons of the Father and the Son, laying upon that relation terras of greater opposition. As if, be cause the Son hath not His essence from Himself, the Father had ; because He was not begotten of Himself,' the Father had been so ; because He is not the Cause of Himself, the Father were. whereas if we speak properly, God the Father has neither His being from another, nor from Himself: not frora another, that were repugnant to His paternity ; not from Himself, that were a contradiction in itself. And therefore those expressions are not to be understood positively and affirmatively, but negatively and exclusively, that He has His Essence from none, that He is not begotten of any, nor has He any cause of His existence. So that the proper notion of the Father in whora we believe is this, that He is a Person subsisting eternally in the one infinite essence of the Godhead, which essence or subsistence He hath received from no other person, but hath communicated the same essence, in which Hiraself subsisteth, by generation to another Person,- who by that generation is the Son. Howsoever, it is most reasonable to assert that there is but one Person who is from none ; and the very generation of the Son, and procession of the Holy Ghost undeniably prove, that neither of those two can be that Person. For whosoever is generated is from him who is the genitor, and whosoever proceedeth is from hira from whom he proceedeth, whatsoever the nature of the genera tion or procession be. It followeth therefore that this Person is the- Father, which name speaks nothing of dependence, nor supposeth any kind of priority in another. From hence it is observed that the name of God, taken abso lutely, is often in the Scriptures spoken of the Father : as when we read of " God sending His own Son ; " of " the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God" (2 Cor. xni. 14); and generally wheresoever Christ is called the Son of God, or the Word of God, the name of God is to be taken particularly for the Article I. 49 Father, because He is no Son but of the Father. From h^nce He /IS styled " one God " ( i Cor. viii. 6 ; Eph. iv. 6), " the true God " (i Thess. i. 9), "the only true God" (John xvui. 3), "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ " (2 Cor. i. 3 ; Eph. i. 3). Which, as it is most true and so fit to be believed, is also a most necessary truth, and therefore to be acknowledged, for the avoid ing multiplication and plurality of gods. For if there were more than one which were frora none, it could not be denied but there were more gods than one. "Wherefore this origination in the Divine paternity has anciently been looked upon as the assertion of the Unity : and therefore the Son and Holy Ghost have been believed to be but one God with the Father, because both from the .Father, who is One, and so the union of them. Secondly, it is necessary thus to believe in the Father, because our salvatipn is propounded to us by an access unto the Father. We are all gone away and fallen from God, and we must be brought to Him again. There is no other notion under which we can be brought to God as to be saved, but the notion of the Father ; and there is no other Person can bring us to the Father, but the Son of that Father : for, as the apostle teaches us, " Through Him we have an access by one Spirit unto the Father " (Eph. ii. 18). Having thus described the true nature and notion of the Divine paternity, in all the several degrees and eminencies belonging to it, I may now clearly deliver, and every particular Christian understand, what it is- he speaks, when he makes his confession in these words, " I beUeve in God the Father :" by which I conceive him to express thus much : As I am assured that there is an infinite and independent Being, which we call a God, and that it is irapossible there should be more infinities then one : so I assure myself that this one God is the Father of all things, especially of all men and angels, so far as the mere act of creation may be styled generation; that, He is farther yet, and in a more peculiar manner, the Father of all those whom He regenerateth by His Spirit, whom He adopteth in His Son, as heirs and co-heirs with Hira, whom He crowneth with the reward of an eternal inheritance in the heavens. But beyond and far above aU this, beside His general offspring, and peculiar people, " to whom He hath given power to become the sons of God ; " I believe Him the Father, in a more eminent and transcendent manner, of one singular and proper Son, His own, His beloved, His only begotten Son; whom He has not only 50 An Exposition of the Creed. begotten of the blessed Virgin, by the coming of the Holy Ghost, and the overshadowing of His power ; not only sent with special authority as the King of Israel ; not only raised from the dead, and made heir of aU things in His house ; but antecedently to aU this, has begotten Him by way of eternal generation in the same divinity and raajesty with Himself; by which paternity, coeval to the Deity, I acknowledge Him always Father, as much as always God. And in this relation, I profess that eminency and priority, that as He is the original cause of all things as created by Him, so is He the fountain of the Son begotten of Him, and of the Holy Ghost proceeding from Him. / believe in God the Father Almighty. After the relation of God's paternity, immediately foUows the glorious attribute of His omnipotency : that as those in heaven in their devotions, so we on earth in our confessions might acknow ledge that, " Holy, holy, holy. Lord God Alraighty, which was, and is, and is to come " (Rev. iv. 8) ; that in our soleran raeetings at the Church of God, with the joint expression and concurring language of the congregation, we raight some way imitate that " Voice of a great multitude, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying. Alleluia, for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth " (Rev. xix. 6). The notion of Almighty in the Creed, must certainly be inter preted according to the sense which the original word bears in the New Testament ; and that cannot be better understood than by the Greek writers or interpreters of the Old, especially when the notion itself belongs unto the Gospel and the Law indifferently. Now the word which we translate Almighty, the most ancient Greek interpreters used soraetimes for the title of God, " the Lord of Hosts," sometimes for His name, Shaddai, as generally in the book of Job : by the first they seem to signify the rule and dominion which God has over all ; by the second, the strength,- force, or power by which He is able to perform all things. " "The heavens and the earth were finished,'- saith Moses, " and allthe host ofthem" (Gen. ii. i) : and He which begun them, -He which finished them, is the ruler and commander of them. Upon the right of creation does He justly challenge this dominion. " I have made the earth, and created man upon it : I, even My hands, haye stretched out the heavens, and all their hosf have I commanded" (Isa. xlv. 12). And on this dominion or command \ Article I. qi I dpes He raise the title of " the Lord of Hosts ; " which though preserved in the original language both by St Paul and Sf James, yet by St John is turned into that word which we translate Almighty. Wherefore from the use of the sacred writers, from the notation of the word in Greek, and from the testimony of the ancient Fathers, we may well ascribe unto God the Father in the explication of this Article, the dominion over all, and the rule and government of all. This authority or power properly potestative is attributed unto God in the sacred Scriptures ; from whence those names or titles which raost aptly and fully express dominion, are frequently given unto Him ; and the rule, empire, or governraent of the world is acknowledged to be wholly in Him, as necessarily following that natural and eternal right of dominion. ^ What the nature of this authoritative power is, we shall the more clearly understand, if we first divide it into three degrees or branches of it : the first whereof we raay conceive, a right of making and framing anything which He wills, in any raanner as it pleases Him, according to the absolute freedom of His own will; the second, a right of having and possessing all things so made and framed by Him, as His own, properly belonging to Him, as to the Lord and Master of thern, by virtue of direct dominion; the third, a right of using, and disposing all things so in His posses sion, according to His own pleasure. The first of these we mention only for the necessity of it, and the dependence of the other two upon it. God's actual dominion being no other ways necessary, than upon supposition of a precedent act of creation ; because nothing, before it has a being, can belong to any one, neither can any propriety be imagined in that which has no entity. But the second branch, or absolute dominion of this Almighty, is farther to be considered in the independency and infinity of it. First, it is independent in a double respect, in reference both to the original, and the use thereof For God has received no authority from any, because He has all power originally in Himself, and has produced all things by the act of His own will, without any commander, counsellor, or coadjutor. Neither does the use or exercise of this dominion depend upon any one, so as to receive any direction or regulation, or to render any account of the ad ministration ofit ; as being illimited, absolute, and supreme, and so the fountain from whence all dominion in any other is derived. Wherefore He being the "God of gods," is also the "Lord of 52 An Exposition of the Creed. lords, and King of kings," the " only potentate " (Deut. x. 17; Psal. cxxxvi 3 ; i Tim. vi. 15) ; because He alone has all power of Himself, and whosoever else has any, has it from Him, either by donation or permission. The infinity of God's dominion, if we respect the object, appears in the amplitude or extension ; >if we look upon the manner, in the plenitude or perfection : if we consider the time, in the eternity of duration. The amplitude of the object is sufficiently evidenced by those appellations, which the Holy Writ ascribeth unto the Almighty, calling Hira the " Lord of heaven," the " Lord of the whole earth," the " Lord of heaven and earth " (Dan. v. 23 ; Josh. iii. II, 13 ; Ps. xcvii. 5 ; Mic. iv. 13 ; Zech. iv. 14, and vi. 5 ; Matt. xi. 25 ; Acts xvh. 24 : Deut. x. 14) : under which two are corapre hended all things both in heaven and earth. This Moses taught the distrusting Israelites in the wilderness. " Behold the heaveri and the heaven of heavens is the Lord's thy God, the earth also with all that is therein." With these words David glorifies God :" The heavens are Thine, the earth also is Thine;" so acknowledging His dominion : " as for the world and the fulness thereof. Thou hast founded them " (Psal. Ixxxix. 11) ; so expressing the foundation, or ground of that dominion. And yet more fully, at the dedication of the offerings for the building of the Temple, to shew that what they gave was of His own. He says, " Thine, O Lord, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty : for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine. Thine is the kingdom, O Lord, and Thou art exalted as head above all. Both riches and honour come of Thee, and Thou reignest over all" (i Chron. xxix. 11, 12). If then we look upon the object of God's dominion, it is of that amplitude and extension, that it includes and comprehends all things, so that nothing can be imagined, which is not His, belonging to Him as the true owner and proprietor, and subject wholly to His will, as the sole governor and disposer : in respect of which universal power we must confess Him to be Almighty. If we consider the manner and nature of this power, the pleni tude thereof or perfection will appear : for as in regard of the extension. He hath power over all things ; so in respect of the in tention. He hath all power over everything, as being absolute and suprerae. This God chaUenged to Hiraself, when He catechised the prophet Jereraiah in a potter's house, saying, " O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter, saith the Lord ; behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in My hand, Article I. 53 O hpuse of Israel " (Jer. xviii. 6). That is, God has as absolute a power and dominion over every person, over every nation and kingdom on the earth, as the potter has over the pot he makes, or the clay he moulds. Thus" are we wholly at the disposal of His will, and our present and future condition fraraed and ordered by His free, but wise and just decrees. " Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?" (Rom. ix. 21). And can that earth-artificer have a freer power , over his brother potsherd (both being made of the same metal) than God has over him, who by the strange fecundity of His omnipotent power, first made the clay out of nothing, and then him out of that ? The duration of God's dominion raust likewise necessarily be eternal, if anything which is be immortal. For, being everything is therefore His, because it received its being from Him, and the continuation of the creature is as much from Him as the first pro duction, it follows that so long as it is continued, it must be His, and consequently being some of His creatures are immortal. His dominion must be eternal. Wherefore St Paul expressly calls God "the King eternal" (i Tim. i. 15), with reference to that of David, " Thy kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and thy dominion endureth throughout all generations " (Ps. cxlv. 13). And Moses in his song has told us, " The Lord shall reign for ever and ever" (Ex. xv. 18) : which phrase " for ever and ever" in the original signifieth thus much, that there is no time to corae assignable or imaginable, but after and beyond that God shall reign. The third branch of God's authoritative or potestative power consisteth in the use of all things in His possession, by virtue of His absolute dominion. For it is the general dictate of reason, that the use, benefit, and utility of anything redounds unto him whose it is, and to whom as to the proprietor it belongs. It is true indeed, that God, who is all-sufficient and infinitely happy in and of Himself, so that no accession ever could or can be made to His original fehcity, cannot receive any real benefit and utility from the creature. " Thou art my Lord," saith David, " my good ness extendeth not to Thee " (Ps. xvi. 2) : and therefore our only and absolute Lord, because His goodness extendeth unto us, and not ours to Him, because His dominion is for our benefit, not for His own ; for us who want, and therefore may receive ; not for Himself, who cannot receive, because He wanteth nothing, whose honour standeth not in His own, but in our receiving. 54 An Exposition of the Creed. But though the universal Cause made all things for the benefit of some creatures framed by Him, yet has He raade them ulti mately for Himself; and God is as universally the final as the efficient cause of His operations. The apostle has taught us, that not only "of Him," and "by Him" (Rora. xL 6 ; Heb. ii ii), as the first author; but also "to Hira," and "for Him" (i Cor. vhi.6), as the ultimate end, "are aU things." And it is one ofthe proverbial sentences of Soloraon, " The Lord hath made all things for Himself; yea, even the wicked for the day of evU " (Prov. xvi. 4). For though He cannot receive any real benefit or utility from the creature, yet He can and doth in a manner receive that which hath some similitude or affinity with it. Thus God "rejoiceth" (Ps. civ. 31) at the effects of His wisdom, power, and goodness, and takes delight in the works of His hands. Thus doth He order and dispose of all things unto His own glory, which redoundeth from the demonstration of His attributes. An explicit belief of this authoritative power and absolute dominion x>i the Almighty is necessary, first for the breeding in us an awful reverence of His majesty, and entire subjection to His will. For to the highest excellency the greatest honour, to the supreme authority the most exact obedience is no more than duty. If God be our absolute Lord, we His servants and vassals, then is there a right in Him to require of us whatsoever we can perform, and an obligation upon us to perform whatsoever He commands. Whosoever doth otherwise, while he confesseth, denieth Him ; while he acknowledgeth Him with his tongue, he sets his hand against Him. "Why call ye me Lord, Lbrd," saith our Saviour, " and do not the things which I say ? " (Luke vi. 46). Secondly, this belief is also necessary to breed in us equanimity and patience in our sufferings, to prevent all murmuring, repining, and objecting against the actions or determinations of God, as knowing that He who is absolute Lord, cannot abuse His power ; He whose will is a law to us, cannot do anything unwisely or unjustly. " Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to hira that fashioneth it. What makest thou ? " (Isa. xlv. 9). But let the man after God's own heart rather teach us hurable and religious silence. " I was durab," saith he, "and opened not my raouth; because Thou didst it" (Ps. xxxix. 9). When Shimei cast stones at him, and cursed him, let us learn to speak, as he then spake : " The Lord hath said unto him. Curse David. Who shall then say, Wherefore hast thou done so ? " (2 Sairi. xvi. 10). ^ Article I. 55 Thirdly, the belief of God's absolute dorainion is yet further necessary to make us truly and sufficiently sensible of the benefits we receive from Him, so as by right value and estimation of them to understand how far we stand obliged to Him. No man can duly prize the blessings of heaven, but he who acknowledgeth they might justly have been denied him • nor can any be suffi ciently thankful for them, except it be confessed that He owed him nothing, who bestowed them. But as the original word for Almighty is not put only for the " Lord of Hosts," but often also for the " Lord Shaddai ; " so we must not restrain the signification to the power authoritative, but extend it also to that power which is properly operative and executive. In the title of the " Lord of Sabaoth " we understand the rule and dominion of God, by which He has a right of governing all : in the name " Shaddai " we apprehend an infinite force and strength, by which He is able to work and perform all things. For whether we take this word in coraposition, as signifying the All-sufficient ; whosoever is able to suppeditate all things to the sufficing all, must have an infinite power : or whether we deduce it from the root denoting vastation or de struction ; whosoever can destroy the being of all things, and reduce them unto nothing, must have the same power which originally produced all things out of nothing, and that is infinite. Howsoever, the first notion of Almighty necessarily inferreth the second, and the infinity of God's dominion speaketh Him infinitely powerful in operation. Indeed, in earthly dominions, the strength of the governor is not in himself, butjn those whom he gov erns : and he is a powerful prince, whose subjects are numerous. But the King of kings has in Himself all power of execution, as well as right of dominion. Were all the force and strength of a nation in the person of the king, as the authority is, obedience wouM not be arbitrary, nor could rebellion be successful : whereas experience teacheth us that the most puissant prince is compeUed actually to submit, when the stronger part of his own people hath taken the boldness to put a force upon him. But we must not imagine that the Governor of the world ruleth only over tbem who are willing to obey, or that any of His creatures may dispute His commands with safety, or cast off His yoke with impunity. And if His dominion be uncontrollable, it is because His power is irresistible. For man is not more inclinable to obey God than man, but God is more powerful to exact subjection, and to vindi cate rebeUion. In respect of the infinity and irresistibility of 56 Au Exposition of the Creed. which active power we raust acknowledge Him Almighty ; and so according to the most vulgar acception, give the second explication of His omnipotency. But because this word Almighty is twice repeated in the Creed, once in this first Article, and again in the sixth, where Christ is represented "sitting at theright hand of God the Father Almighty;" and although in our English and the Latin the same word be expressed in both places, yet in the ancient Greek copies there is a manifest distinction ; being the word in the first Article may equally comprehend God's power in operation, as well as authority in doininion, whereas that in the sixth speaketh only infinity of power, without relation to authority or dominion : I shall therefore reserve the explication of the latter unto its proper place, design ing to treat particularly of God's infinite power where it is most peculiarly expressed ; and so conclude briefly with two other interpretations, which some of the ancients have made of the original word, belonging rather to philosophy than divinity, though true in both. For sorae have stretched this word Almighty, according to the Greek notation, to signify that God holdeth, encircleth, and containeth all things. " Who "hath gathered the wind in His fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth ? " (Prov. xxx. 4) ; who but God ? " Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of His hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and coraprehended the dust of the earth in a raeasure?" (Isa. xl. 12) ; who but He? Thus then may He be called Almighty, as holding, containing, and comprehending all things. Others extend it farther yet, beyond that of containing or com prehension, to a more iramediate influence of sustaining or pre servation. For the same Power which first gave being unto all things, continueth the same being unto aU.- " God giveth to all, life, and breath, and all things. In Him we live, move, and have our being" (Acts xvu. 25, 28), says the strangest phUosopher that ever entered Athens, the first expositor of that blind inscription, " To the unknown God." " How could anything have endured, if it had not been Thy wiU ? or been preserved if not called by Thee?" (Wisd. xi. 25), as the wisdom of the Jews confesseth. Thus did the Levites stand and bless, "Thou, even Thou art Lord alone. Thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth and all things that are therein, the sea and all that is therein, and Thou preservest them-aU" (Neh. ix. 6). Where the continual conservation of the creature is in an equal Article I. 57 latitude attributed unto God with their first production. Be cause there is as absolute a necessity of preserving us from re turning unto nothing by annihilation, as there was for first bestowing an existence on us by creation. And in this sense God is undoubtedly Almighty, in that He doth sustain, uphold, and constantly preserve all things in that being which they have. From whence we may at last declare, what is couched under this attribute of God^ how far this omnipotency extends itself, and what every Christian is thought to profess, when he adds this part of the first Article of his Creed, " I believe in God the Father ALMIGHTY." As I am persuaded of an infinite and independent essence which I term a God, and of the mystery of an eternal generation . by which that God is a Father : so I assure myself that Father is not subject to infirmities of age, nor is there any weakness attend ing on the "Ancient of days;" but on the contrary, I believe omnipotency to be an essential attribute of His deity, and that not only in respect of operative and active power (concerning which I shall have occasion to express my faith hereafter), but also in regard of power authoritative, in which I must acknow ledge His antecedent and eternal right of making what, and when, and how He pleased, of possessing whatsoever He maketh by direct dominion, of using and disposing as He pleaseth all things which He so possesseth. This dominion I believe most absolute in respect of its independency, both in the original, and the use or exercise thereof : this I acknowledge infinite for amplitude or extension, as being a ppwer over all things without exception ; for plenitude or perfection, as being all power over everything with out limitation ; for continuance or duration, as being eternal, without end or conclusion. \Thus " I believe in God the Father Almighty." Maker of heaven and earth. Although this last part of the first Article were not expressed in the ancient Creeds, yet the sense thereof was delivered in the first mles of faith, and at last these particular words inserted both in the Greek and Latin Confessions. And indeed the work of crea tion most properly follows the attribute of omnipotency, as being the foundatipn of the first, and the demonstration of the second explication of it. As then we believe there is a God, and that God Almighty ; as we acknowledge that same God to be the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in Him of us : so we also cpnfess that 5 8 An Exposition of the Creed. the same God the Father made both "heaven and earth." For the full explication of which operation, it will be sufficient, first to declare the latitude of the object, what is comprehended under the terms of " heaven and earth ; " secondly, to express the nature of the action, the true notion of creation, by which they were made; and thirdly, to demonstrate the Person, to whom this operation is ascribed. For the first, I suppose it cannot be denied as the sense of the Creed, that under the terms of " heaven and earth " are compre hended aU things ; because the first rules of faith did so express it, and the most ancient Creeds had either instead of these words, or together with thera, " the Maker of all things visible and in visible," which being terras of immediate contradiction, must con sequently be of universal comprehension ; nor is there anything, imaginable which is not visible or invisible. Being then these were the words of the Nicene Creed ; being the addition of " heaven and earth " in the ConstantinopoUtan could be no diminution to the former, which they stUl retained together with them, saying, " I believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible ; " it follows that they which in the Latin Church made use only of this last addition, could not choose but take it in the full latitude of the first expression. And well may this be taken as the undoubted sense ofthe Creed, because it is the known language of the sacred Scriptures. " In six days,"says Moses," the Lord made heaven and earth" (Ex. xxxi. 1 7) ; in, the same time, saith God Himself, "the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is" (Ex. xx. 11). So that all things by those two must be understood which are contained in them : and we know no being which is made or placed without them. When God would call a general rendezvous, and make up an universal auditory, the prophet cries out, " Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth" (Isa. i. i). When He would express the full splendour of His majesty, and utmost extent of His actual do minion : " Thus saith the Lord, The heaven is My throne, and the earth is My footstool" (Isa. Ixvi. i). When He would challenge unto Himself those glorious attributes of immensity and omnipresence : " Do not I fill heaven and earth ? saith the Lord " (Jer. xxiii. 24). These two then taken together signify the universe, or that which is called the world. St Paul has given a clear exposition of these words in his explication of the Athenian altar : " God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that He is Lord of heaven Article I. 59 and earth, dweUeth not in temples made with hands " (Acts xvii. 24). For being God is necessarily the Lord of all things which He made (the right of His direct dominion being clearly grounded upon the first creation), except we should conceive the apostle to exempt some creature from the authoritative power of God, and so take some work of His hand out of the reach of His arm ; we must confess that " heaven and earth " are of as large extent and ample signification as the " world and all things therein." Where it is yet further observable that the apostle hath con joined the speech pf both Testaments together. For the ancient Hebrews seem to have had no word in use araongst thera which singly of itself did signify the world as the Greeks had, in whose language St Paul did speak ; and therefore they used in con junction the " heaven and earth," as the grand extremities within which all things are contained. Nay, if we take the expositions of the later writers in that language, those two words will not only as extremities comprehend between them, but in the exten sion of their own significations contain all things in thera. For when they divide the universe into three worlds, the inferior, superior, and the middle world, the lower is wholly contained in the name of Earth, the other two under the name of Heaven. Nor do the Hebrews only use this raanner of expression, but even the Greeks theraselves ; and that not only before, but after Pythagoras had accustomed thera to one narae. As therefore under the single name of World or Universe, so also under the conjunctive expression of " heaven and earth " are contained all things material and immaterial, visible and invisible. But as the apostle hath taught us to reason, " When He saith, all things are put under Hira, it is manifest that He is excepted which did put all things under Him" (2 Cor. xv. 27); so when We say, all things were made by God, it is as manifest that He is excepted who made all things. And then the proposition is clearly thus delivered : all beings whatsoever beside God were riiade. As we read in St John concerning the Word, " that the world was made by Hira " (John i. 3) ; and in more plain and express words before, "All things were made by Him, and without Hira was not anything made that was made" (John i. 3). Which is yet further illustrated by St Paul: "For by Him were all things created that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and in visible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers, all things were created by Him" (Col. i. 16). If then there be nothing imaginable which is not either in heaven or in 6o An Exposition of the Creed. earth, nothing which is not either visible or invisible, then is there nothing beside God which was not made by God. This then is the unquestionable doctrine of the Christian faith : That the vast capacious frarae of the world, and everything any way contained and existing in it, hath not its essence frora or of itself, nor is of existence absolutely necessary, but what it is, it hath not been, and that being which it hath was made, fraraed, and constituted by another. And as "every house is builded by some man " (Heb. iii. 4) J for we see the earth bear no such creature of itself; stones do. not grow into a wall, or first hew and square, then unite and fasten themselves together, in their generation ; trees sprout not cross-like dry and sapless bearas, nor do spars and tUes spring with a natural uniformity into a roof, and that out of stone and mortar ; these are not the works of Nature, but superstructions and additions to her, as the supplies of art, and the testimonies of the understanding of man, the great artificer on earth. So if the world itself be but a house, if the earth, "which hangeth upon nothing" (Job xxvi. 7), be the foundation, and the glorious Spheres of heaven the roof, if this be the habitation of an infinite intelligence, the temple of God ; then must we acknowledge the world was built by Him, and conse quently, that " He which built aU things is God." From hence appears the truth of that distinction. Whatsoever has any being is either raade or not made : whatsoever is not made, is God ; whatsoever is not God, is made. One uncreated and independent essence ; all other depending on it, and created by it. One of eternaLand necessary existence ; all other indifferent, in respect of actual existing, either to be or not to be, and that indifferency determined only by the free and voluntary act of the first cause. Now because to be thus made includes some imperfection, and araong the parts of the world some are raore glorious than others ; if those which are raost perfect presuppose a Maker, then can we not doubt of a creation where we find far less perfection. This house of God, though uniforra, yet is not all of the same materials, the footstool and the throne are not of the same mould; there is a vast difference between the heavenly expansions. This first aerial heaven, where God sets up His pavilion,, where " He maketh the clouds His chariot, and walketh upon the wings of the wind " (Ps. civ. 3), is not so far inferior in place, as it is in glory to the riext, the seat of the sun and moon, the two great lights, and stars innumerable, far greater than the one of them. And yet that second heaven is not so far above the first, as Article I. 6i beneath the third, into which St Paul was caught. The bright ness of the sun doth riot so far surpass the blackness of a wandering cloud, as the glory of that heaven of presence sur mounts the fading beauty of the starry firmament. For in this great Temple of the world in which the Son of God is the High Priest, the heaven which we see is but the Veil, and that which is above, the Holy of Holies. This veil, indeed, is rich and glorious, but one day to be rent, and then to admit us into a far greater glory, even to the Mercy-seat and Cherubims. For this third heaven (2 Cor. xii. 2) is the "proper habitation" of the blessed angels, which constantly attend upon the throne. And if those raost glorious and happy spirits, those " morning stars " which " sang together," those "sons of God" which "shouted for joy" when "the foundations of the earth were laid " (Job xxxviii. 7), if they and their habitation were made ; then can we no ways doubt of the production of all other creatures so much inferior unto them. Forasmuch then as the angels are terraed the " sons of God," it sufficiently denoteth that they are from Him, not of themselves, all filiation inferring sorae kind of production : and being God has but one proper and only-begotten Son, whose propriety and singularity consists in this, that He is of the sarae uncreated essence with the Father, all other offspring must be raade, and consequently even the angels created sons ; of whom the Scrip ture speaking saith, " Who maketh His angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire" (Ps. civ. 4). For although those words, at first spoken by the Psalmist, do rather express the nature of the wind and lightning ; yet, being the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews hath applied tlie same to the arigels properly so called, we cannot but conclude upon his authority, that the same God who " created the wind," and " made a way for the lightning of the thunder" (Amos iv. 13 ; Job xxviu. 26), has also produced those glorious spirits ; and as He furnished them with that activity there expressed, so did He frame the subject of it, their immaterial and immortal essence. If then the angels and their proper habitation, the far most eminent and illustrious parts of the world, were made ; if to be only made be one character of iraperfection ; much more must we acknowledge all things of inferior nature to have dependence on their universal cause, and consequently this great universe, or all things, to be made, beside that one who made them. This is the first part of our Christian faith, against sorae of the ancient philosophers, who were so wildly fond of those things 62 An Exposition of the Creed. they see, that they imagined the universe to be infinite and eternal, and, what will follow from it, to be even God Himself It is true that the most ancient of the heathen were not of this opinion, but all the philosophy for many ages delivered the world to have been made. When this tradition of the creation of the world was delivered in all places down successively by those which seriously con sidered the frame of all things, and the difference of the most ancient poets and philosophers from Moses was only in the manner of expressing it ; those which in after ages first denied it, made use of very frivolous and inconcluding arguraents, grounding their new opinion upon weak foundations. For that which in the first place they take for granted as an axiom of undoubted truth, that " Whatsoever hath a beginning, must have an end, and consequently, whatsoever shall have no end, had no beginning ; " is grounded upon no general reason, but only upon particular observation of such things here below, as from the ordinary way of generation tend in sorae space of time unto corruption. From whence, seeing no tendency to corrup tion in several parts of the world, they conclude that it was never generated, nor had any cause or original of its being. Whereas, if we would speak properly, future existence or non-existence has no such relation unto the first production. Neither is there any contradiction that at the same tirae one thing may begin to be, and last but for an hour, another continue for a thousand years, a third beginning at the sarae instant remain for ever : the differ ence being either in the nature of the things so made, or in the deterrainations of the will of Hira that made thera. Notwith standing then their universal rules, which are not true but in some limited particulars, it is most certain the whole world was made, and of it part shall perish, part continue unto all eternity ; by which something which had a beginning shall have an end, I and something not. The second fallacy which led them to this novelty was tbe very narae of universe, which eoraprehends in it all things; from whence they reasoned thus : If the world or universe were made, then were all things made ; and if the world shall be dissolved, then all things shall come to nothing : which is impossible. For if all things were made, then must either all, or at least some thing have made itself, and so have been the cause of itself as of the effect, and the effect of itself as of the cause, and conse quently in the same instant both have been and not been ; which Article I. 63 is a contradiction. But this fallacy is easUy discovered : for when we say the universe or all things were made, we must be" always understood to except Him who made all things, neither can we by that name be supposed to comprehend raore than the frame of heaven and earth, and all things contained in them ; and so He which first devised this argument has Himself acknowledged. Far more gross was that third conceit, that if the world were made, it must be after the vulgar way of ordinary natural genera tions ; in which two mutations are observable, the first from less to greater, or from worse to better; the second from greater to less, or from better to worse. (The beginning of the first muta tion is called generation, the end of it perfection : the beginning of the second is from the same perfection, but concludes in cor ruption or dissolution.) But none has ever yet observed that this frame of the world did ever grow up from less to greater, or improve itself from worse to better : nor can we now perceive that it becomes worse or less than it was, by which decretion we might guess at a former increase, and from a tendency to corruption collect its original generation. This conceit, I say, is far more gross. For certainly the argument so raanaged proves nothing at all, but only this (if yet it prove so much), that the whole frame of the world, and the parts thereof which are of greater perfection, were not generated in that manner in which we see sorae other parts of it are : which no man denies. But that there can be no other way of production beside these petty generations, or that the world was not some other way actually produced, this argu ment does not endeavour to infer, nor can any other prove it. The next foundation upon which they cast off the constant doctrine of their predecessors, was that general assertion. That it is impossible for anything to be produced out of nothing, or to be reduced unto nothing : from whence it will inevitably follow, that the matter of this world hath always been, and must always be. The clear refutation of which difflculty requires an explication of the manner how the world was made: the second part before propounded for the exposition of this Article. Now that the true nature and manner of this action may be so far understood as to declare the Christian faith, and refute the errors of all opposers, it wiU be necessary to consider it first with reference to the object or effect; secondly, in relation to the cause or agent ; thirdly, with respect unto the time or origination of it. 64 An Exposition of the Creed. The action by which the heaven and earth were made, con sidered in reference to the effect, I conceive to be the production of their total being ; so that whatsoever entity they had when made, had" no real existence before they were so made, and this manner of production we usually term creation, as excluding all concurrence of any material cause, and all dependence of any kind of subject, as presupposing no privation, as including no motion, as signifying a production out of nothing; that is, by which soraetbing is made, and not anything out of which it is made. This is the proper and peculiar sense of the word creation : not that it signifies so much by virtue of its origination or vulgar use in the Latin tongue, nor that the Hebrew word used by Moses, " In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth," has of itself any such peculiar acception. For it is often used synonymously with words which "signify any kind of production or formation, and by itself it seldom denotes a pro duction out of nothing, or proper creation, but- most frequently, the making of one substance out of another pre-existing, as the fishes of the water (Gen. i. 21), and man of the dust of the earth (Gen. ii. 7) ; the renovating or restoring anything to its former perfection (Ps. h. 10; Isa. Ixv. 17), for want of Hebrew words in composition ; or lastly, the doing some new or wonderful work, the producing some strange and adrairable effect, as the opening the mouth of the earth (Num. xvi. 30), and the signal judgments on the people of Israel. We must not therefore weakly collect the true nature of creation from the force of any word which by some may be thought to express so much, but we riiust collect it from the testimony of God the Creator in His Word, and of the world created in our reason. The opinion of the Church of the Jews will sufficiently appear in that zealous mother to her seventh and youngest son : " I beseech thee, my son, look upon the heaven and the earth, and all that is therein, and consider that God raade them of things that were not" (2 Mac. vn. 28), which is a clear description of creation, that is, production out of nothing. But because this is not by all received as canonical, we shall therefore evince it by the undoubted testimony of St Paul, who, expressing the nature of Abraham's faith, propoundeth " Him whom he believed " as " God who quickeneth the dead, and caUeth those things which be not, as though they were." For as " to- be caUed " in the language of the Scriptures is " to be " (" Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, thajt we should be called the sons ., Article R 65 of God," saith St John in his epistle (i John ni. i), who in his gospel told us, " He had given us power to become the sons ©f God" (John i. 12) : so "to call" is "to make" or "cause to be." As where the Prophet Jereraiah says, "thou hast caused aU this evil to come upon them" (Jer. xxxii 23), the original may be thought to speak no more than this, "^thou hast called this evil to them." He therefore " calleth those things which be not, as if they were," who raakes those things which were not, to be, and produceth that which has a being out of that which had not, that is, out of nothing. This reason, generally persuasive unto faith, is more peculiarly applied by the apostle to the belief of the creation : for "through faith," saith he, "we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear" (Heb. xi. 3). Not as if the earth, which we see, were made of air, or any more subtle body, which we see not ; nor as if those " things which are seen," were in equal latittide commensurable with the worlds vvhich were framed : but that those "things which are seen," that is, which are, were made of those " which did not appear," that is, which were not. "' Vain therefore was that opinion of a real matter coeval with God, as necessary for production of the world by way of subject, as the Eternal and Almighty God by way of efficient. For if some real and material being must be presupposed by in dispensable necessity, without which God could not cause any thing to be, then is not He independent in His actions, nor of infinite power and absolute activity ; which is contradictory to the divine perfection. Nor can any reason be alleged why He should be dependent in His operation, who is confessed independent in His being. And as this co-eternity of matter opposeth God's independency, the proper notion of the Deity, so doth it also contradict His all-sufficiency. For if without the production of soraething beside Hiraself He cannot raake a deraonstration of His attributes, or cause any sensibUity of His power and will for the illustration of His own glory; and if without something distinct wholly from Hiraself He cannot produce anything ; then must He want some thing external : and whosoever wants anything is not all-sufficient. And certainly he must have a low opinion and poor conception of the infinite and eternal God, who thinks He is no otherwise known to be omnipotent than by the benefit of another. Nor were the framers of the Creed so wise in prefixing the " Alraighty " before " Maker of heaven and earth," if out of a necessity, of 66 An Exposition of the Creed. material concurrence, the making of them left a mark of im potency rather than omnipotency. The supposition then of an eternal matter is so unnecessary where God works, and so derogatory to the infinity of His power, and all-sufficiency of Himself, that the later phUosophers, some thing acquainted with the truth which we profess, though rejecting Christianity, have reproved those of the school of Plato, who delivered as the doctrine of their master, an etemal companion, so injurious to the Father and Maker of all things. Wherefore, to give an answer unto that general position, that out of nothing nothing can be produced, which Aristotle pretends to be the opinion of aU natural phUosophers, I must first observe, that this universal proposition was first framed out of particular considerations of the works of art and nature. For if we look upon all kinds of artificers, we find they cannot give any specimen of their art without raaterials. Being then the beauty and uni formity of the world shews it to be a piece of art most exquisite, hence they concluded that the Maker of it was the most exact Artificer, and consequently bad His matter from all eternity pre pared for-Him. Again, considering the works of nature, and all parts of the world subject to generation and corruption, they also observed that nothing is ever generated but out of something pre-existent, nor is there any mutation wrought but in a subject, and with a presupposed capability of alteration. From hence they presently coUected, that if the whole world were ever gene rated, it raust have been produced out of sorae subject, and consequently there must be a matter eternally pre-existing. Now what can be more irrational than from the weakness of some creature to infer the same imbecility in the Creator, and to measure the arm of God by the finger of man? Whatsoever speaketh any kind of excellency or perfection in the artificer may be attributed unto God : whatsoever signifieth any infirmity, or involveth any imperfection, must be excluded from the notion of Him. That wisdom, prescience, and preconception, that order and beauty of operation which is required in an artist, is most eminently contained in Hira, who hath " ordered all things in measure, and nuraber, and weight" (Wis. xi. lo); but if the most absolute idea in the artificer's understanding be not sufficient to produce his design without hands to work, and materials to make use of, it will follow no more that God is necessarily tied unto pre existing matterthan that He is reaUy compounded of corporeal parts. _— Again,^it is as incongruous to judge of the production of the Article I. 67 world by those parts thereof which we see subject to generation and corruption, and thence to conclude that if it ever had a cause of the being which it has, it must have been generated in the same manner which they are, and if that cannot be, it must never have been made at all. For nothing is more certain than that this manner of generation cannot possibly have been the first production even of those things which are now generated. We see the plants grow from a seed ; that is their ordinary way of generation : but the first plant could not be so generated, because all seed in the same course of nature is from the pre-existing plant. We see from spawn the fishes, and from eggs the fowls, receive now the original of their being : but this could not at first be so, because both spawn and egg are as naturally from precedent fish and fowl. Indeed because the seed is separable from the body of the plant, and in that separation may long contain within itself a power of germination ; ^because the spawn and egg are sejungible from the fish and fowl, and yet still retain the prolific power of generation ; therefore some might possibly conceive that these seminal bodies might be originally scattered on the earth, out of which the first of all those creatures should arise. But in vivi parous animals, whose offspring is generated within themselves, whose seed by separation from thera^ loses all its seminal or prolific power, this is not only improbable but inconceivable. And, therefore, being the philosophers themselves confess that whereas now all animals are generated by the means of seed, and that the animals themselves must be at first before the seed proceeding from them ; it followeth that there was some way of production antecedent to, and differing from, the common way of generation, and consequently what we see done in this generation can be no certain rule to understand the first production. Being then that universal maxira, that " nothing can be raade of nothing," is merely calculated for the meridian of natural causes, raised solely out of observation of continuing creatures by successive generation, which could not have been so continued without a being antecedent to all such succession, it is raost evident it can have no place in the production of that antecedent or first being, which we call creation. Now when we thus describe the nature of creation, and under the name of " heaven and earth " comprehend all things contained in them, we must distinguish between things created. For some were made immediately out of nothing, by a proper, some only mediately, as out of something forraerly made out of nothing, by c 2 68 An Exposition of the Creed. an improper kind of creation. By the first were made all im material substances, all the orders of angels, and the souls of men, the heavens and simple or elemental bodies, as the earth, the water, and the air. "^In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth " (Gen. i. i) ; so " in the beginning," as without any pre-existing or antecedent matter ; this earth, when so " in the beginning" made, was "without form and void" (i. 2), covered with waters likewise made not out of it, but with it, the same which, " when the waters were gathered together unto one place, appeared as dry land" (i 9) : by the second, all the "hosts ofthe earth," the fowls of the air, and the fishes of the sea. "Let the earth," said God, "bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind " (i. 11). " Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth" (i. 20) ; and more expressly yet ; " Out of the ground God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air " (n. 19). And well may we grant these plants and animals to have their origination from such principles, when we read, " God formed man of the dust of the ground " (ii 7) ; and said unto him whom He created in His own image, ^^" Dust thou art " (iii. 19). Having thus declared the notion of creation in respect of those things which were created, the next consideration is of that action in reference to the agent who created all things! Him therefore we raay look upon first as raoved ; secondly, as free under that raotion ; thirdly, as determining under that freedom, and so per forraing of that action : in the first we may see His goodness, in the second His will, in the third His power. I do not here introduce any external impulsive cause, as mov ing God unto the creation of the world ; for I have presupposed aU things distinct from Him to have been produced out of nothing by Him, and consequently to be posterior not only to the motion but the actuation of His will. Being then nothing can be ante cedent to the creature beside God Himself, neither can anything ' be a cause of any of His actions but what is in Him ; we must not look for anything extrinsical unto Him, but wholly acquiesce in His infinite goodness, as the only moving and impelling cause. " There is none good but One, that is God " (Matt. xix. 17), saith bur Saviour ; none originally, essentially, infinitely, independently good, but He. Whatsoever goodness is found in any creature is but by way of emanation • from that fountain, whose very being is diffusive, whose nature consists in the coramunication of itself Article L 69 In the end of the sixth day " God saw everything that He had made, and -behold it was very good " (Gen. i. 31) : which shews the end of creation of all things thus good, was the communica tion of that by which they were, and appeared, so. The ancient heathens have acknowledged this truth, but with such disadvantage, that from thence they gathered an undoubted error. For from the goodness of God, which they did not unfitly conceive necessary, infinite, and eternal, they collected that what soever dependeth of it must be as necessary and etemal, even as light must be as ancient as the sun, and a shadow as an opacous body in that light. If then there be no instant imaginable before which God was not infinitely good, then can there likewise be none conceivable before which the world was not raade. And thus they thought the goodness of the Creator must stand or fall with the eternity of the creature. For the clearing of which ancient mistake we must observe, that as God is essentially and infinitely good without any mixture of deficiency, so is He in respect of all external actions or emanations absolutely free without the least necessity. Those bodies which do act without understanding or preconception of what they do, as the sun and fire give light and heat, work always to the utmost of their power, nor are they able at any- time to suspend their action. To conceive any such necessity in the divine operations, were to deny all knowledge in God, to reduce Him into a condition inferior to sorae of the works of His own hands, and to fall under the censure contained in the Psalmist's question, " He that planted the ear, shall He not hear ? He that formed the eye, shall he not see ? He that teacheth man know ledge, shall He not know?" (Ps. xciv. 9, 10). Those creatures which are endued with understanding, and consequently with a will, may not only be necessitated in their actions by a greater power, but also as necessarily be deterrained by the proposal of an infinite good : whereas neither of these necessities can be acknowledged in God's actions, without supposing a power beside and above om nipotency, or a real happiness beside and above all-sufficiency. Indeed, if God were a necessary agent in the works of creation, the creatures would be of as necessary being as He is ; whereas the necessity of beirig is the undoubted prerogative of the first cause. " He worketh all things after the counsel of His own will " (Eph. i. 11), saith the apostle: and wheresoever counsel is, there is election, or else it is vain ; where a wUl, there must be freedom, or else it is weak. We cannot imagine that the all-wise God should 70 An Exposition ofthe Creed. act or produce anything but whaf He determineth to produce ; and aU His determinations must flow from the immediate principle of His wUl. If then His determinations be free, as they' must be coming from that principle, then must the actions which follow thera be also free. Being then the goodness of God is absolutely perfect of itself, being He is in Himself infinitely and eternaUy happy, and this happiness as Uttle capable of augmentation as of diminution ; He cannot be thought to look upon anything without Himself as determining His will to the desire, and necessitating to the production of it. If then we consider God's goodness. He was raoved ; if His all-sufficiency. He was not necessitated : if we look upon His will. He freely determined ; if on His power, by that deterraination He created the world. Wherefore that ancient conceit of a necessary emanation of God's goodness in the eternal creation of the world will now easily be refuted, if we make a distinction in the equivocal notion of goodness. For if we take it as it signifies a rectitude and excellency of all virtue and holiness, with a negation of all things morally evil, vicious, or unholy ; so God is absolutely and neces sarily good : but if we take it in another sense, as indeed they did which made this argument, that is, rather for beneficence, or comraunicativeness of sorae good to others ; then God is not necessarily, but freely good, that is to say, profitable and bene ficial. For He had not been in the least degree evil or unjust, if He had never raade the world or any part thereof, if He had never communicated any of His perfections by framing any thing beside Himself Every proprietary therefore being accounted master of his own, and thought freely to bestow whatever he gives ; much raore raust that one eternal and independent being be wholly free in the comraunicating His own perfections without any necessity or obligation. We must then look no farther than the determination of "God's will in the creation of the world. For this is the adrairable power of God, that with Hira to will is to effect, to determine is to perform. So the elders speak before Hira that sitteth upon the throne ; " Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure " (that is, by Thy wUl) " they are, and were created" (Rev. iv. ii). Where there is no resistance in the object, where no need of preparation, application, or instrumental advantage in the agent, there the actual determination of the will is a sufficient production. Thus God did make the heavens and the earth by wiUing them to be. This was His first command unto the creatures, and their existence was their first obedience. Article I. 71 " Let there be light," this is the injunction ; " and there was light," that is the creation. Which two are so intimately and immediately the same, that though in our and other translations those words, " let there be," which express the comraand of God, differ from the other, " there was," which denote the present existence of the creature ; yet in the original there is no difference at aU, neither in point nor letter. And yet even in the diversity of the translation the phrase seems so expressive of God's infinite power, and immediate efficacy of His wUl, that it hath raised some admiration of Moses in the enemies of the religion both of the Jews and Christians. " God is in the heavens. He hath done whatsoever he pleased,!' saith David ; yea in the making of the heavens, He therefore created them because " He pleased ; " nay more. He thereby created them, even by wUling their creation. Now although some may conceive the creaturemight have been produced from all etemity by the free determination of God's wiU, and it is so far certainly true, that there is no instant assignable before which God could not have made the world ; yet as this is an article of our faith, we are bound to believe the heavens and earth are not eternal. " Through faith we understand the worlds were fraraed by the word of God " (Heb. xi. 3). And by that faith we are assured, that whatsoever possibility of an eternal existence of the creature raay be imagined, actually it had a teraporal beginning ; and therefore all the arguments for this world's eternity are nothing but so many erroneous misconceptions. " The Lord possessed me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old," saith Wisdom. " I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was" (Prov. viii 22, 23). And the same wisdom of God being made man reflecteth upon the same priority, saying, " Now, O Father, glorify Thou Me with Thine own self, with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was" (John xvii. 5). Yea, in the same Christ are we " blessed with all spiritual blessings, according as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world." The impossibility of the origination of a circular motion, which we are sure is either in the heaven or earth, and the impropriety of the beginning of time, are so poor exceptions, that they deserve not the least labour of refutation. The actual eternity of this world is so far from being necessary, that it is of itself most improbable, and without the infallible certainty of faith, there is no single person carries more evidences of his youth, than the world of its novelty. It is trae, indeed, some ancient accounts there are which Would 72 An Exposition of the Creed. persuade us to imagine a strange antiquity of the world, far beyond the annals of Mpses, and account of the same spirit which made it. The Egyptian priests pretended an exact chronology for some myriads of years, and the Chaldeans or Assyrians far out-reckon them, in which they delivered not only a catalogue of their kings, but also a table of the eclipses of the sun and moon. But for their number of years nothing is more certain than their forgery; for the Egyptians did preserve the antiquities of other nations as well as their own, and by the evident fallacy in others have betrayed their own vanity. When Alexander entered Egypt with his victorious army, the priests could shew him out of their sacred histories an account of the Persian Empire, which he gained by conquest, and the Macedonian, which he received by birth, of each for 8000 years ; whereas nothirig can be more certain out of the best historical account, than that the Persian Empire, whether begun in Cyrus or in Medus, was not then 300 years old, and the Macedonian, begun in Coranus, not 500. They then which made so large additions to advance the anti quity of other nations, and were so bold as to present them to those which so easily might refute them (had they not delighted to be deceived to their own advantage, and took much pleasure in an honourable cheat) may without any breach of charity be suspected to have extended the account much higher for the honour of their own country. Beside, their catalogues must - needs be ridiculously incredible, when the Egyptians make their first kings' reigns above 1200 years a-piece, and the As_syrians theirs above 40,000 ; except ye take the Egyptian years for months, the Assyrians' for days ; and then the account wiU not seem so formidable. Again, for the calculation of eclipses, as it may be made for many thousand years to come, and be exactly true, and yet the world may end to-raorrow ; because the calculation must be made with this tacit condition, if the bodies of the earth, and sun, and moon, do continue in their substance and constant motion so long ; so may it also be made for many miUions of years past, a:nd all be true, if the world have been so old, which the calculat ing doth not prove, but suppose. He then which should in the Egyptian temples see the description of so many eclipses of the sun and moon, could not be assured that they were all taken from real observation, when they might be as well described out of proleptical supposition. Beside, the motions of the sun, which they mention together Article I. 73 and with authority equal to that of their other observations, are so incredible and palpably fabulous, that they take off all credit and esteem from the rest of, their narrations. For with this wild account of years, and seemingly accurate observations of the heavens, they left it written to posterity, that the whole course of the celestial motions were four times changed ; so that the sun has twice risen in the east and set in the west, as now it does ; and on the contrary, twice risen in the west and set in the east. And thus these prodigious antiquaries confute themselves. What then are these feigned observations and fabulous de scriptions for the world's antiquity, in respect not only of the infallible annals of the Spirit of God, but even of the constant testimonies of more sober men, and the real appearances and face of things, which speak them of a far shorter date ? If we look into the historians which give account of ancient times, nay, if we peruse the fictions of the poets, we shall find the first to have no footsteps, the last to feign no actions, of so great antiquity. If the race of raen had been eternal, or as old as the Egyptians and the Chaldees- fancy it ; how should it come to pass that the poetical inventions should find no actions worthy their heroic verse before the Trojan or the Theban war, or that great adventure of the Argonauts ? For whatsoever all the muses, the daughters of memory, could rehearse before those times, is nothing but the creation of the world, and the nativity of their gods. If we consider the necessaries of life, the ways of freedom and coraraerce amongst raen, and the inventions of all arts and sciences, the letters which we use, and languages which we speak ; they have all known originals, and may be traced to their first authors. The first beginnings were then so known and acknowledged by all, that the inventors and authors of them were reckoned amongst their gods, and worshipped by" those to whom they had beeri so highly beneficial : which honour and adoration they could not have obtained, but from such as were really sensible of their former want, and had experience of a present advantage by their means. If we search into the nations themselves, we shall see none without sorae original : and were those authors extant which have written of the first plantations and raigrations of people, the fouridations and inhabiting of cities and countries, their first rudiments would appear as evident as their later growth and presettt condition. "We know what ways within 2000 years people have made through vast and thick woods for their habitations. 74 An Exposition ofthe Creed. now as fertile, as populous as any. The Hercynian trees, in the time of the Caesars, occupying so great a space, as to take up a journey of sixty days, were thought even then coeval with the world. We read without any show of contradiction, how this western part of the world has been peopled from the east ; and all the pretence ofthe Babylonian antiquity is nothing else, but that we all came from thence. Those eight persons saved in the ark, descending from the Gordi^an raountains, and multiplying to a large coUection in the plain of Sinaar, made their first division at that place : and that dispersion, or rather dissemination, has peopled all other parts of the world, either never before inhabited, or dispeopled by the flood. These arguments have always seemed so clear and undeniable, that they have put not only those who made the world eternal, but them also who confess it raade (but far more ancient than we believe it) to a strange answer, to themselves uncertain, to us irrational. For to this they replied, That this world has suffered many alterations, by the utter destructions of nations and depopulations of countries, by which all monuments of antiquity were defaced, all arts and sciences utterly lost, all fair and stately fabrics ruined, and so mankind reduced to paucity, and the world often again returned into its infancy. This they conceived to have been done oftentimes in several- ages, soraetiraes by a deluge of water, some times by a torrent of fire ; and lest any of the eleraents raight be thought not to conspire to the destruction of mankind, the air must sweep away whole empires at once, with infectious plagues, and earthquakes swallow up all ancient cities, and bury even the very ruins of thera. By which answer of theirs they plainly afford two great advantages to the Christian faith. First, because they manifestly shew that they had an universal tradition of Noah's flood, and the overthrow of the old world ; secondly, because it was evident to them that there was no way to salvet he eternity or antiquity of the world, or to answer this argument drawn from his tory andthe appearances of things themselves, but by supposing in numerable deluges and deflagrations. Which being merely feigned in themselves, not proved (and that first by them which say they are not subject themselves unto them, as the Egyptians did, who by the advantage of their peculiar situation feared neither perishing by fire nor water), serve only for a confirmation of Noah's flood so raany ages past, and the surer expectation of St Peter's fire, we know not how soon to come. Article I. 75 It remaineth then that we steadfastly believe, not only that the " heavens and earth and all the host of them " were made, and so acknowledge a creation, or an actual and immediate dependence of all things on God ; but also that aU things were created by the hand of God, in the sarae manner, and at the same time, which are delivered unto us in the books of Mosas by the Spirit of God, and so acknowledge a novity, or no long existence of the creature. >* Neither will the novity of the world appear more plainly unto our conceptions, than if we look upon our own successions. The vulgar accounts, which exhibit about 5600 years, though sufficiently refuting an eternity, and allaying all conceits of any great antiquity; are not yet so properly and nearly operative on the thoughts of men, as a reflection upon our own generations. The first of men was but six days younger than the being, not so many, than the appearance, of the earth : and if any particular. person would consider how many degrees in a direct line he probably is removed from that single person Adam, who bare together the name of man and of the earth from whence he came, he could not choose but think himself so near the original fountain of mankind, as not to conceive any great antiquity of the world. For though the ancient heathens did imagine innumerable ages and generations of men past, though Origen did fondly seem to collect so much by some misinterpretations of the Scriptures : yet if we take a sober view, and make but rational collections from the chronology of the sacred writ, we shaU find no man's pedigree very exorbitant, or in his Une of generation descent of many score. When the age of man was long, in the infancy of the world, we find ten generations extend to 1656 years, according to the shortest, which is thought, because the Hebrew, therefore the best account; according to the longest, which, because the Septuagint's, is not to be conteraned, 2262, or rather 2256. From the flood, brought at that time upon the earth for the sins of men who polluted it, unto the birth of Abraham, the father of the faithful, not above ten generations, if so many, took up 292 years according to the least, 1132 according to the largest account. Since which time the ages of men have been very much alike pro- - portionably long; and it is agreed by all that there have not passed since the birth of Abraham 3700 years. Now by the experience of our families which for their honour and greatness have been preserved, by the genealogies delivered in the sacred y6 An Exposition of the Creed, Scriptures, and thought necessary to be presented to us by the blessed evangelists, by the observation and concurrent judgment of forraer ages, three generations usually take up a hundred years. If then it be npt yet 3700 years since the birth of Abrahara, as certainly it is not, if allraen which are or have been since have descended frora Noah, as undoubtedly they have, if Abraham were but the tenth from Noah, as Noah from Adam, which Moses hath assured us, then is it not probable that any person now alive is above 130 generations removed from Adam. And indeed thus admitting but the Greek account of less than 5000 years since the flood,, we may easily bring all sober or probable accounts of the Egyptians, Babylonians, and Chinese, to begin since the disper sion at Babel. Thus having expressed at last the time, so far as it is necessary to be known, I shall conclude this second considera tion of the nature and notion of creation. Now being under the terms of " heaven and earth " we have proved all things beside God to be contained, and that the making of all these things was a clear production of them out of nothing ; the third part of the explication must of necessity follow, that He -which made all things is God. This truth is so evident in itself, and so confessed by all men, that none did ever assert the world was made, but, withal affirmed that it was God who made it. There remains therefore nothing more in this particular, than to assert God so the Creator of the world, as He is described in this Article. Being then we "believe in God the Father, Maker of heaven and earth," and by that God we expressed already a singularity of the Deity ; our first assertion which we must make good, is, that the one God did create the world. Again, being whosoever is that God cannot be excluded from this act of creation, as bei-rig an emanation of the Divinity, and we seem by these words to appro priate it to the Father, beside whom we shall hereafter shew that we believe some other persons to be the same God ; it will be likewise necessary to declare the reason why the creation of the world is thus signally attributed to God the Father. The first of these deserves no explication of itself, it is so obvi- otis to aU which have any true conception of God. But because it has been forraerly denied (as there is nothing so senseless, but some kind of heretics have embraced, and may be yet taken up in times of which we have no reason to presume better than of the former) I shall briefly declare the creation ofthe world to have been performed by that one God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Article I. yj \ As for the first, there is no such difference between things of the world, as to infer a diversity of makers of them, nor is the least oi; worst of creatures in their original any way derogatory to the Creator. " God saw everything that He had made, and behold it was very good" (Gen. i. 31), and consequently like to come from the fountain of all goodness, and fit always to be ascribed to the same. Whatsoever is evil, is not so by the Creator's action, but by the creature's defection. In vain then did the heretics of old, to remove seeming incon venience, renounce a certain truth ; and whilst they feared to make their own God evU, they made him partial, or but half the Deity, and even so a companion with an evil god. For dividing all things of this world into natures substantially evil, and substanti ally good, and apprehending a necessity of an origination conforraable to so different a condition, they imagined one God essentially gopd, as the first principle of the one, another God essentially evil, as the original of the other. And this strange heresy. began upon the first spreading of the Gospel; as if the greatest light could not appear without a shadow. Whereas there is no nature originally sinful, no substance in itself evil, and therefore no being which may not come from the same fountain of goodness. " I form the light, and create dark ness, I make peace, and create evil, I the Lord do all fhese things," saith He who also said, " I ara the Lord, and there is none else, there is no God besides Me" (Isa. xlv. 5, 7). Vain then is that conceit which fraraed two Gods, one of them called light, the other darkness ; one good, the other evil, refuted in the first words of the Creed, " I believe in God, Maker of heaven and earth." But as we have already proved that one God to be the Father, so must we yet farther shew that one God the Father to be the Maker of the world. In which there is no difficulty at all : the whole Church at Jerusalem has sufficiently declared this truth ia their devotions : " Lord, Thou art God which hast made heaven and earth, and the sea, and all that in thera is ; against Thy holy child Jesus, whom Thou hast anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and the people of Israel were gathered together " (Acts iv. 24). Jesus then was the child of that God which made the heaven and the earth, and consequently the Father of Christ is the Creator of the worlds We know that Christ is the light of the Gentiles, by His own interpretation : we are assured likewise that His Father gave 78 An Exposition of the Creed. Him, by His frequent assertion ; we may then as certainly con clude that the Father of Christ is the Creator ofthe world, by the prophet's express prediction : for, " Thus saith God the Lord, He that created the heavens and stretched them out. He which spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it ; I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and wUl hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people for a light of the Gentiles " (Isa. xlii. 5, 6). And now this great facUity may seem to create the greater diffi culty; for being the apostles teach us that the Son made all things, and the prophets, that by the Spirit they were produced, how can we attribute that peculiarly in the Creed unto the Father, which in the Scriptures is assigned indifferently to the Son, and to the Spirit? Two reasons raay particularly be rendered of this pecuUar attributing the work of creation to the Father. First, in respect of those heresies arising in the infancy of the Church, which endeavoured to destroy this truth, and to introduce another creator of the world, distinguished frora the Father of our Lord j esus Christ. An error so destructive to the Christian religion, that it raiseth even the foundations of the Gospel, which refers itself wholly to the proraises in the Law, and pretends to no other god, but that God of Abrahara, of Isaac, and of Jacob ; acknowledgeth no other speaker by the Son, than Him that spake by the pro phets ; and therefore whom Moses and the prophets call Lord of heaven and earth, of Him our blessed Saviour signifies Himself to be the Son, rejoicing in spirit, and saying, " I thank Thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth" (Luke x. 21). Secondly, in respect of the paternal priority in the Deity, by reason whereof that which is common to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, may be rather attributed to the Father, as the first Person in the Trinity. In which respect the apostle has made a distinction in the phrase of emanation or production, " To us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him, and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him " (i Cor. viii. 6). And our Saviour hath acknowledged, "The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do ; " which speaketh some kind of priority in action, according to that of the Person. And in this sense the Church did always profess to believe in God the Father, Creator of heaven and earth. The great necessity of professing our faith in this particular appeareth several ways, as indispensably tending to the illustration of God's glory, the humUiation of mankind, the provocation to Article I. 79 obedience, the aversion from iniquity, and all consolation in our dity. God is of Himself infinitely glorious, because His perfections are absolute. His excellences indefective : and the splendour of this glory appeareth unto us in and through the works of His hands. " Tlie invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are ¦ clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead " (Rom. i. 20). For " He hath made the earth by His power. He hath established the world by His wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by His discre tion" (Jer. x. 12; H. 15). After a long enumeration of the wonderful works of the creation, the psalraist breaks forth into this pious meditation, " O Lord how manifold are Thy works ! in wisdom hast Thou made thera all " (Ps. civ. 24). If then the glory of God be made apparent by the creation, if He have " made aU things for Himself" (Prov. xvi. 4), that is, for the mani festation of His glorious attributes, if the " Lord rejoiceth in His works," because "His glory shall endure for ever" (Ps. civ. 31) ; then is it absolutely necessary we should confess Him " Maker of heaven and earth," that we may sufficiently praise and glorify Him. " Let them praise the name of the Lord," saith David, " for His name alone is excellent. His glory is above the earth and heaven " (Ps. cxlviii. 13). Thus did the Levites teach the children of Israel to glorify God. " Stand up, and bless the Lord your God for ever and ever : and blessed be Thy glorious name which is exalted above all blessing and praise. Thou, even Thou art Lord alone. Thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their hosts, the earth and all things that are therein " (Neh. ix. 5, 6). And the same hath St Paul taught us. " For of Him, and through Him, and to Him are all things, to whom be glory for ever, Araen" (Rom. xi. 36). Furthermore, that we may be assured that He who made both heaven and earth, will be glorified in both, the prophet calls upon all those celestial hosts to bear- their part in this hymn, " Praise ye Hira all His angels, praise ye Him all His hosts. Praise ye Him sun and moon, praise Hirii all ye stars of light. Praise Him ye heavens of heavens, arid ye waters that be above the' heavens. Let them praise the name of the Lord, for He commanded and they were created" (Ps. cxlviii. 2-5). And the twenty-four elders in the Revelation of St John " Fall down before Him that sitteth on the throne, and worship Him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns," the emblems of their borrowed and derived glories. 8o An Exposition of the Creed. " before the throne," " the seat of infinite and eternal raajesty, " saying, Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power, for Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure they are, and were created'! (Rev. iv. lo, ii). Wherefore, "If the heavens declare the glory of God" (Ps. xix. i), and " AU His works praise Hira," then " shaU His saints bless Hira, they shaU speak of the glory of His kingdora, and talk of His power " (Ps. cxlv. 'lo, ii). And if raan be silent, God wiU speak; while we, through ingratitude wiU not celebrate. He Himself wiU declare it, and promulgate : " I have made the earth, the man and the beast that are upon the ground, by My great power, and by My out stretched arm" (Jer. xxvh. 5). Secondly, the doctrine of the world's creation is most properly effectual towards man's humihation. As there is nothing more destructive to humanity than pride, and yet not anything to which, we are more prone than that ; so nothing can be more properly applied to abate the swelling of our proud conceptions,- than a due consideration of the other works of God, with a sober re flection upon our original. " When I consider the heavens the work of Thy fingers, the moon and the stars which Thou hast ordained" (Ps. viii. 3); when I view those glorious apparent bodies with my eye, and by the advantage of a glass find greater numbers, before beyond the power of my sight, and from thence judge there may be many miUions more which neither eye nor instrument can reach ; when I contemplate those far more glorious spirits, the inhabitants of the heavens, and attendants on Thy throne; I cannot but break forth into that admiration of the prophet, " What is man that Thou art mindful of him ? " What is that offspring of the earth, that dust and aShes? "What is that son of man that Thou visitest hira ? " What is there in the progeny of an ejected and conderaned father, that Thou shouldest look down from heaven the place of Thy dwelling, and take care or notice of hira. But if our original ought so far to humble us, how should our fall abase us ? That of all the creatures which God made, we should comply with him who first opposed his Maker, and would be equal unto Him from whom he new received his being. All other works of God, which we think inferior to us, because not furnished with the light of understanding, or endued with the power of election, are in a happy impossibility of sinning, and so offending of their Maker : the glorious spirits which attend upon the throne of God, once in a condition of themselves to fall, now by the grace of God preserved, and placed " ^ Article I. 8f beyond all possibility of sinning, are entered upon the greatest happiness of which the workmanship of God is capable : but men, the sons of fallen Adam^ and sinners after the sirailitude of him, of all (the creatures are the only companions of those "Angels which left their own habitations " (Jude 6), and are " delivered into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment " (2 Peter ii. 4). How should a serious apprehension of our own corruption raingled with the thoughts of our creation, hurable us in the sight of Hira, ¦whora we alone of all the creatures by our unrepented sins drew unto repentance ? How can we look without confusion of face upon that monument of our infamy, recorded by Moses, who first penned the original of humanity, " It repented the Lord that He had made man on the earth, and it grieved Him at His heart " ? (Gen. vi. 6). Thirdly, this doctrine is properly efficacious and productive of most cheerful and universal obedience. It made the prophet call for the commandments of God, and earnestly desire to know what he should obey. " Thy hands have made me and fashioned rae ; give me understanding that I may learn. Thy commandments" (Ps. cxix. 73). By virtue of our first production, God has un deniably absolute dominion over us, and consequently there must be due unto Him the most exact and coraplete obedience from us. Which reason will appear more convincing, if we consider, of aU the creatures which have been derived from the same fountain of God's goodness, none ever disobeyed His voice but the devil and man. "Mine hand," saith He, "hath laid the foundation of the earth, and My right hand hath spanned the heavens ; when I call unto them they stand up together" (Isa. xlviii. 13). The raost loyal and obedient servants who stand continually before the most illustrious prince, are not so ready to receive and execute the commands of their sovereign lord, as all the hosts of heaven and earth attend upon the .will of their Creator. " Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who has created these things, that bringeth out their hosts by number : He calleth thera all by names, by the greatness of His might, for that He is strong in power, not one faUeth" (Isa. xl. 26), but everyone makes his appearance, ready pressed to observe the designs of their Commander-in-chief Thus the Lord commanded, and " They fought from heaven, the stars in their courses fought against Sisera" (Judges v. 20). "He commanded the ravens to feed Elias, and they brought hira bread and flesh in the morning, and bread and flesh in. the evening" (i Kings xvii. 4, 6) ; and so one prophet lived merely upon the; 82 An Exposition of the Creed. obedience of the fowls of the air. He spake to the devouring whale, "and it vomited out Jonah upon the dry land" (Jonah ii. lo); and so another prophet was delivered from the jaws of death by the obedience of tbe fishes of the sea. Do we not read of "Fire and hail, snow and vapour, stormy wind fulfilling His word"? (Ps. cxlviii. 8). Shall there be a greater coldness in man than in the snow ? more vanity in us than in a vapour ? more inconstancy than in the wind ? If the universal obedience of the creature to the wUl of the Creator cannot move us to the same affection and desire to serve and please Him, they will all conspire to testify against us and condemn us, when God shall call unto them, say ing, " Hear O heavens, and give ear O earth, for the Lord hath spoken : I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against Me " (Isa. i. 2). - Lastly, the creation of the world is of most necessary meditation for the consolation of the servants of God in all the variety of their conditions. " Happy is he whose hope is in the Lord his God, which made heaven, and earth, the sea and all that therein is " (Ps. cxlvi 5, 6). This happiness consisteth partly in a full assurance of His power to secure us. His ability to satisfy us. " The earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof, the world and they that dwell therein. For He hath founded it upon the seas, and established it upon the floods" (Ps. xxiv. i, 2). By virtue of the first production He hath a perpetual right unto; and power to dispose of all things : and He who can order and dispose of all must necessarily be esteemed able to secure and satisfy any creature. " Hast thou not known ? hast thou not heard that the everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary?" (Isa. xl. 28). There is no ex ternal resistance or opposition where omnipotency works, no internal weakness or defection of power where the Almighty is the agent, and consequently there reraains a full and firra persuasion of His ability in all conditions to preserve us. Again, this happi ness consisteth partly in a comfortable assurance, arising from this meditation, of the will of God to protect and succour us, of His desire to preserve and bless us. " My help cometh from the Lord, who made heaven and earth ; He will not suffer thy foot to be moved" (Ps. cxxi. 2, 3), saith the prophet David; at once ex pressing the foundation of his own expectancy and our security. God " will not despise the work of His hands " (Job x. 3), neither wiu He suffer the rest of His creatures to do the least injury to His own image. " Behold," says He, " I hav.e created the smith , Article I, 83 that bloweth the coals in the fire, and that bringeth forth an in strument for his work. No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord " (Isa. liv. 16, 17). Wherefore to conclude our explication of the first Article, and to render a clear account of the last part thereof, that every one may understand what it is I intend, when I make confession of my faith in the " Maker of heaven and earth," I do truly profess that I really believe, and ara fully persuaded, that both heaven and earth and all things contained in them have not their being of themselves, but were made in the beginning ; that the raanner by which all things were raade was by mediate or imraediate crea tion ; so that antecedently to all things beside, there was at first nothing but God, who produced most part of the world merely out of nothing, and the rest out of that which was formerly made of nothing. This I believe was -done by the most free and volun tary act of the will of God, of which no reason can be alleged, no motive assigned, but His goodness ; performed by the deter mination of His will at that time which pleased Hira, most pro bably within one hundred and thirty generations of men, most certainly within not more than six thousand years. I acknowledge this God, Creator of the world, to be the sarae God who is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ : and in this full latitude, " I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth." ARTICLE II. And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord. THE second Article of the Creed presents unto us, as the object of our faith, the second Person of the blessed Trinity ; that as in the Divinity the're is nothing intervening between the Father and the Son, so that immediate union might be perpetually ex pressed by a constant conjunction in our Christian confession. And that upon no less authority than of the " Author and Finisher of our faith," who in the persons of the apostles gave this command to us, " Ye believe in God, believe also in Me " (John xiv. i). Nor speaketh He this of Himself, but from the Father who sent Him ; " for this is His commandment, that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ" (i John iii 23). According therefore to the Son's prescription, the Father's injunction, and the sacramental institution, as we are baptised, so do we believe in the narae of the Father and the Son.. .Our blessed Saviour is here represented under a threefold de scription ; first, by His nomination, as " Jesus Christ ; " secondly, by His generation, as the " only Son " of God ; thirdly, by His dominion, as " our Lord." But when I refer "Jesus Christ" to the nomination of our Saviour, because He' is in the Scriptures promiscuously and in differently sometimes' called " Jesus," sometiraes " Christ," I would be understood so as not to raake each of them equally, -or in hke propriety, His name. "His name was called Jesus, which was so named of the angel before He was conceived in the womb " (Luke U. 21) ; " who is also called Christ " (Matt. i. 16), not by name, but by office and title. Which observation, seem ingly trivial, is necessary for the full explication of this part of the Article : for by this distinction we are led unto a double notion and so resolve our faith into these two propositions : I believe Article II. 85 there was and is a. Man, whose name was actually, and is truly iiv the most high importance, " Jesus," the Saviour of the world. I believe the Man who bare that name to be the "Christ," that is, the Messias promised of old by God, and expected by the Jews. For the first, it is undoubtedly the proper name of our Saviour given unto Him, according to the custom of the Jews, at His cir cumcision : and as the Baptist was called John, even so the Christ was called Jesus. Besides, as the imposition was after the vulgar manner, so was the narae itself of ordinary use. We read in the Scriptures of " Jesus which was called Justus, a fellow-worker " (Col. iv. 11) with St Paul, and ofa " certain sorcerer, a Jew, whose name was Bar-jesus " (Acts xiu. 6), that is, the son of Jesus. Josephus in his History mentions one Jesus the son of Ananus, another the son of Saphates, a third the son of Judas, slain in the Teraple : and many of the high priests, or priests, were called by that name, as the son 0/ Damnseus, of Gamaliel, of Onias, of Phabes, and of Thebuth. Ecclesiasticus is called the Wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach, and that Sirach the son of another Jesus. Stephen speaks of the " tabernacle of witness brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles '' (Acts vii. 45) : and the apostle, in his explication of those words of David, " To-day, if ye will hear His voice " (Heb. iv. 8), observeth, that " if Jesus had given them rest, then would He not afterwards have -spoken of another day." "Which two scriptures being undoubtedly understood of Joshua the son of Nun, teach us infallibly that " Jesus " is the sarae name with " Joshua." Which being at the first imposition in the full extent pf pronunciation " Jehoshua," in process of time contracted to " Jeshuah," by the omission of the last letter (strange and difficult to other languages) and the addition of the Greek termination, became "Jesus." Wherefore it will be necessary, for the proper interpretation of " Jesus," to look back upon the first that bare that name, who was the son of Nun, of the tribe of Ephraim, the successor of Moses, and so named by him, as it is written, " And Moses called Oshea the son of Nun, Jehoshua " (Nurab. xin. 16). His first narae then imposed at his circumcision was Oshea or Hoseah, the same with the name of the " son of Azaziah, ruler of Ephraim "^ ( 1 Chron. xxvn. 20), of the "son of Elah, king of Israel" (2 Kings xvii. i), of the " son of Beeri, the prophet " (Hosea i. i) ; and the interpre tation of this first name " Hoseah " is " Saviour." Now we must not imagine this to be no mutation, neither must we look upon it as a total alteration, but observe it as a change not trivial nor in- 86 An Exposition ofthe Creed. considerable. And being Hoseah was a name afterwards used by some, and Jehoshua, as distinct, by others, it wUl necessarily fol low, there was some difference between these two naraes ; and it wiU be fit to inquire what was the addition, and in what the force of the alteration does consist. First therefore we observe, that all the original letters in the narae " Hoseah " are preserved in that of " Joshua : " from whence it is evident that this alteration was not made by a verbal muta tion, as when Jacob was called Israel, nor by any literal change, as when Sarai was named Sarah, nor yet by diminution or mutila tion; but by addition, as when Abram was called Abraham. Secondly, it must be confessed, that there is but one literal addi tion, and that of that letter which is most frequent in the Hebrew names; but being thus solemnly added by Moses, upon so re markable an occasion as the viewing of the land of Canaan was, and that unto a narae already known, and after used ; it cannot be thought to give any less than a present designation of his person to be a saviour of the people, and future certainty of salvation included in his narae unto the Israelites by his raeans. Thirdly, though the nuraber of the letters be augmented actuaUy but to one, yet it is not iraprobable that another may be virtually added, and in the signification understood. For being the first letter of " Hoseah " will not endure a duplication, and if the same letter were to be added, one of them must be absorbed ; it is possible another of the same might be by Moses intended, and one of them suppressed. If then unto the name " Hoseah " we join one ofthe titles of God, which is "Jah," there" wiU result from both, by the custom of that Hebrew fongue, " Jehoshua ; " and so not only the instrumental, but also the original cause of the Jews' de liverance will be found expressed in one word : as if Moses had said, this is the person by whom God - will save His peoole from their enemies. Now being we 'have thus declared that "Jesus" is the same name with " Josuah ;" being the name of " Josuah" was first ira posed by Divine designation, as a certain prediction of the fulfil ling to the Israelites by the person which batre the name, all which was signified by the name ; being Jesus was likewise named by a more immediate imposition from Heaven, even by the ministration of an angel ; it followeth, that we believe He was infallibly designed by God to perform unto the sons of men whatsoever is implied in His nomination. As therefore in " Hoseah " there was expressed salvation, in "Josuah "at least was added the designation of that Article II. 87 single person to save, with certainty of preservation, and probably even the name of God, by whose appointment and power he was made a saviour ; so shall we find the same in " Jesus." In the first salutation, the angel Gabriel told the blessed Virgin, she should "conceive in her womb, and bring forth a son," and should "call His name Jesus" (Luke i. 3r). In the dream of Joseph the angel of the Lord informed him not only of the nomina tion, but of the interpretation or etymology ; " Thou shalt call His name Jesus, for He shall save His people from their sins." In which words is clearly expressed the designation of the person, " He," and the futurition of salvation certain by Him, " He shall save." Beside that other addition of the name of God propounded in Josuah as probable, appears here in some degree above probabUity, and that for two reasons. First, because it is not barely said that He, but as the original raises it, " He Himself shall save." Josuah saved Israel not by his own power, not of hiraself, but God by hira ; neither saved he his own people, but the people of God : whereas Jesus Himself, by His own power, the power of God, shall save His own people, the people of God. Well, therefore, may we understand the interpretation of His name to be "God the Saviour." Secondly, immediately upon the prediction of the name of Jesus, and the interpretation given by the angel, the evangelist expressly observes, " All this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying. Behold a Virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, 'and they shall call his name Eraraanuel, which, being interpreted, is, God with us" (Matt. i. 22, 23). Several ways have been invented to shew the fulfilling of that prophecy, notAvithstanding our Saviour was not called Emmanuel ; but norie can certainly appear more proper, than that the sense of Emmanuel should be comprehended in the narae of Jesus ; and what else is "God with us," than "God our Saviour"? Well, therefore, has the evangelist conjoined the prophet and the angel, asserting Christ was therefore named Jesus, because it was foretold He should be called Emmanuel, the angelical " God the -Saviour" being in the highest propriety the prophetical "God with us." However, the constant scripture-interpretation of this name is " Saviour." So said the angel of the Lord to the araazed shepherds, " Unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord" (Luke ii. 11). So St Paul to the Jews and Gentile proselytes at Antioch : " Of this man's seed hath God, 88 An Exposition ofthe Creed. according to His promise, raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus " (Acts xiii. 23). Which explication of this sacred name was not more new or strange unto the world, than was the name itself so often used before. For the ancient Grecians usually gave it at first as a title to their gods, whoro after any remarkable pre servations they styled "saviours," and under that notion buUt temples, and consecrated altars to them. Nor did they rest with their mistaken piety, but made it stoop unto their baser flattery, caUing those men their saviours, for whom they seemed to have as great respect and honour as for their gods. Nor does it always signify so much as that it may not be attributed to raan : for even in the Scriptures the judges of Israel were called no less than their saviours. " When the children of Israel cried unto the Lord, the Lord raised up a deliverer to the children of Israel, who delivered them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz." And again, " when they cried unto the Lord, the Lord raised them up a deliverer, Ehud the son of Gera " (Judges iii. 9 ; iii. 15). Where though in our translation we call Othniel and Ehud deliverers, yet in the original they are plainly termed saviours. Now what the full import and ultimate sense of the title ot Saviour might be, seemed not easy to the ancients, and the best of the Latins thought the Greek word so pregnant and coraprehen sive, that the Latin tongue had no single word able to express it. But whatsoever notion the heathen had of their gods or men, which they styled saviours, we know this name belongs unto Christ in a more sublime and peculiar manner. " Neither is there salvation in any other ; for there is none other name under heaven given araong men whereby we must be saved" (Acts iv. 12). It remains,T;herefore, that we should explain how, and for what reasons Christ truly is, and properly is called, our "saviour." First, then, I conceive one sufficient cause of that application to consist in this, that He has opened and declared unto us the only true way for the obtaining eternal salvation, and by such patefaction can deserve no less than the name of Saviour. For if those apostles and preachers of the Gospel, who received the way of salvation from Hira which they delivered unto others, may be said to save those persons who were converted by their preach ing ; in a far more eminent and excellent manner must He be said to save thera, who first revealed all those truths unto themi' St Paul " provoked to emulation thera which were his flesh, fhat Article IL 89 he might save some of them" (Rom. xi. 14); "and was made all things to all men, that he might by all means save some." (i Cor. ix. 22.) He exhorted Timothy to "take heed unto himself, and unto the doctrine, and continue in thera ; for in doing" this, he should both save himself and them that heard him" (i "Tim. iv. 16). And St James speaks in more general terms. , " Brethren, if any of you do err frora the truth, and one convert him, let him know that he which converteth a sinner frora the error ofhis way, shall save a soul from death " (James v. 19, 20). Now, if these are so expressly said to save the souls ofthem which are converted by the doctrine which they deliver, with much more reason must Christ be said to save them, whose ministers they are, and in whose name they speak. For it was He " which came and preached peace to them which were afar off, and to them that were nigh" (Eph. ii. 17). The will of God concerning the salvation of man was revealed by Him. " No man hath seen God at any tirae : the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom ofthe Father, He hath declared Him" (John i. 18). Being then " the Gospel of Christ is the power of God into salva tion to every one that believeth" (Rom. i. 16), being they which preach it at the command of Christ are said to save the souls of such as believe their word, being it was Christ alone "who brought life and immortality to light through the, Gospel" (2 Tim. i. 10); therefore He must in a most eminent and singular manner be acknowledged thereby to save, and consequently must npt be denied, even in this first respect, the title of Saviour. Secondly, this Jesus hath not only revealed, but also procured the way of salvation ; not pnly delivered it to us, but also wrought it out for us : and so " God sent His Son into the wprld, that the wprld thrpugh Him might be saved " (John iii. 17). We were all concluded under sin, and being the wages of sin is death, we were obliged to eternal punishment, from which it was impossible to be freed) except the sin were first remitted. Now this is the constant rule, that " without shedding of blood is no reraission. It was therefore necessary that Christ should appear to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself" (Heb. ix. 22, 23, 26) And so He did, for He " shed His blood for many, for the remission of sins " (Matt. xxvi. 28), as Himself professeth in the sacramental - institution : He " bare our sins in His own body on the tree, (i Peter ii. 24), as St Peter speaks, and so in Him "we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins" (Col. i. 14). And if " while we were yet sinners, Christ died for 90 ' An Exposition of the Creed. us : much more then being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath by Him " (Rom. v. 8, 9). Again, we were all enemies unto God, and having offended Him, there was no possible way of salvation, but by being reconciled to Him. _ If then we ask the question, as once the PhiUstines did concerning David, "wherewith should we reconcile ourselves unto oiir master?" (i Sam. xxix. 4); we have no other narae to answer it but Jesus. For " God was in Christ reconcUing the world unto Hiraself, not imputing their trespasses unto them " (2 Cor. v. 1 9). And as under the law " the blood of the sin-offering was brought into the tabernacle of the congregation to reconcUe withal in the holy place ;" so it pleased the Father through the Son, "haying made peace by the blood of His cross, by Him to reconcile aU things unto Hiraself" And thus it comes to pass, that " us, who were enemies in our mind by wicked works, yet now hath He reconcUed in the body of His flesh through deatii " (Col. i. 20-22). And upon this reconcUiation of our persons must neces sarily follow the salvation of our souls. " For if when we were enemies, we were reconciled unto God by the death of His Son ; much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life" (Rom. V. 10). Furthermore, we were all at first enslaved by sin, and brought into captivity by Satan, neither was there any possi bility of escape but by way of redemption. Now it was the law of Moses, that if "any were able he might redeem himself" (Lev. xxv. 49) : but this to us was impossible, because absolute obedience in all our actions is due unto God, and therefore no act of ours can make any satisfaction for the least offence. Another law gave yet more liberty, that he which "was sold might be redeeraed again ; one of his brethren might redeem him " (Lev. xxv. 48). But this in respect of all the mere sons of men was equally impossible, because they were all under the same captivity. Nor could they satisfy for others, who were wholly unable to redeem themselves. Wherefore there was no other brother, but that Son of Man which is the Son of God, who was like unto us in all things, sin only excepted, which could work this redemption for us. And what He only could, that He freely did perform. " For the Son of Man came to give His life a ransom for raany " (Matt. xx. 28) : and as He came to give, so He "gave Himself a ransom for all" (i Tira. ii 6). So that in Him " we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins " (Eph. i. 7). For we are " bpught with a price," for we are " redeemed, not with corruptible things, as silver and gold ; Article TI. 91 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot" (i Peter i 18, 19). He then which hath obtained for us remission of sins. He who through Himself hath reconcUed us unto God, He who hath given Himself as a ransom to redeem us. He who hath thus wrought out the way of salvation for us, raust necessarily have a second and a far higher right unto the name of Jesus, unto the title of our. Saviour. Thirdly, beside the promulgating and procuring, there is yet a further act, which is conferring- of salvation on us. All which we mentioned before, was wrought by virtue of His death, and His appearance in the holy of holies : but we must still believe. He " is able also to save them to the uttermost that corae unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them" (Heb. viii. 25). For now being set down at the right hand of God, He has received all power both in heaven and earth ; and the end of this power which He has received, is to con fer salvation upon those which believe in Him. For the Father gave the Son "this power over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as He hath given Him " (John xvii. 2) ; that He should raise our bodies out of the dust, and cause our corruptible to put on incorruption, and our mortal to put on immortality : and upon this power we are to expect salvation from Him. For we must " look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ from heaven, who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body, according to the working whereby He is able even to subdue all things unto Hiraself" (Phil. iii. 20, 21). And "unto them that thus look for Him shall He appear the second time without sin unto salvation " (Heb. ix. 28). Being then we are all to endeavour that our " spirits may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus" (i Cor. v. 5); being St Peter has taught us, that " God hath exalted Christ with His right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour " (Acts v. 31) ; beingthe conferring of that upon us which He promised to us, and obtained for us, is the reward of what He suffered ; therefore we must acknowledge that the actual giving of salvation to us, is the ultimate and conclusive ground of the title " Saviour." Thus by the virtue of His precious blood Christ hath obtained remission of our sins by the power of His grace, hath taken away the dominion of sin, in the life to come will free us from all possibihty of sinning, and utterly abolish death, the wages of sin : wherefore well said the angel of the Lord, "Thou shalt call His name Jesus, for He shall s^ve His people from their sins " (Matt. 92 An Exposition of the Creed. i. 2i); weU did Zacharias caU him "an horn of salvation," (Luke i. 69); Simeon, " the salvation of God " (Luke ii. 30) ; St Paul, " the Captain and Author of eternal salvation" (Heb. ii 10; v. 9); St Peter, "a Prince and a Saviour" (Acts. v. 31), correspondent to those judges of Israel, raised up by God Hiraself to deliver His people from the hands of their enemies, and for that reason called " saviours." " In the time of their trouble," say the Levites, "when they cried unto Thee, Thou heardest them from heaven ; and, according to Thy raanifold mercies Thou gavest them saviours, who saved them out of the hand of their enemies " (Neh. ix. 27). The correspondency of Jesus unto those temporal saviours will best appear, if we consider it particularly in Josuah, who bare that salvation in his name, and approved it in his actions. For as the son of Sirach saith, "Jesus the son of Nave was valiant in the wars, and was the successor of Moses in prophecies, who, according to his name was made great for the saving of the elect of God" (Ecclus. xlvi. i). Although therefore, Moses was truly and really " a ruler and deliverer " (Acts vii. 35), which is the same with "saviour;" although the rest ofthe Judges were also bytheir office rulers and deliverers, and therefore styled " saviours," as ex pressly Othniel and Ehud are ; yet Josuah, far more particularly and exactly than the rest, is represented as a type of our Jesus, and that typical singularity manifested in his name. For first, he it was alone of all which passed out of Egypt who was designed to lead the chUdren of Israel into Canaan, the land of promise, flowing with mUk and honey. Which land as it was a type of the heaven of heavens, the inheritance of the saints, and eternal joys flowing from the right hand of God ; so is the person which brought the Israelites into that place of rest, a type of Hira who only can bring us into the presence of God, and there prepare our raansions for us, and assign thera to us, as Josuah divided the land for an inheritance to the tribes. Besides, it is further observ able, not only what Josuah did, but what Moses could not do. The hand of Moses and Aaron brought thera out of Egypt, but left them in the wUderness, and could not seat thera in Canaan. Josuah the successor, only could effect that in which Moses failed. Now nothing is more frequent in the phrase of the Holy Ghost, than to take Moses for the doctrine delivered, or the books written by him, that is, the Law ; from whence it follows, that the death of Moses and the succession of Josuah presignified the ' continuance ofthe Law till Jesus came, "by whom all that believe are justified from all things, from which we could not be justified Article II. 93 by the law of Moses " (Acts xiii. 39). " The law and the prophets were until John : since that the kingdom of God is preached " (Luke xvi. 16). Moses raust die, that Josuah may succeed : "by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified ; for by the law is the knowledge of sip ; but the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, even the righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe" (Rora. iii. 20-22). Moses indeed seems-to have taken Josuah with him up into the mount ; but if he did, sure it was to enter the cloud which covered the raount where the glory of the Lord abode : for without " Jesus, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge," there is no looking into the secrets of heaven, no approaching to the presence of God. The command of circtimcision was not given unto Moses, but to Josuah ; nor were the Israehtes circumcised in the wilderness, under the conduct of Moses and Aaron, but in the land of Canaan, under their suc cessor. " For at that time the Lord said unto Josuah, Ma!ke thee sharp knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel the second time " (Joshua v. 2). Which speaketh Jesus to be the true circumciser, the author of another circuracision than that of the flesh coramanded by the law, " even the circumcision of the heart in the spirit, and not in the letter" (Rom. h. 29); that which " is made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh" (Col. u. 11), which is therefore called the "circumcision of Christ." Thus if we look upon Josuah as the minister of Moses, he is even in that a type of Christ, the " minister ofthe circumcision for the truth of God " (Rom. xv. 8). If we look on him as the suc cessor of Moses, in that he represents Jesus, iriasrauch as " the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth carae by Jesus Christ " (John i. 17). If we look on him as now judge and ruler of Israel, there is scarce an action which is not clearly predictive of our Saviour. He begins his office at the banks of Jordan, where Christ is baptised, and enters upon the public exercise of his pro phetical office. He chooses there twelve men out of the people, to carry twelve stones over with thera ; as our Jesus thence began to cTioose His twelve apostles, those foundation-stones in the Church of God, whose "names are in the twelve foundations of the wall of the holy city, the new Jemsalem " (Rev.' xxi. 14). It hath been observed, that the saving Rahab the harlot alive, fore told what Jesus once should spea.k to the Jews, " Verily I say unto you, that the publicans and harlots go into the kingdom pf 94 -^n Exposition of the Creed. God before you " (Matt. xxi. 31). " He said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou stiU upon Gibeon : and the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day" (Joshua X. 12, 13); which great miracle was not only wrought by the power of Him whose narae he bare, but did also signify that in the latter days, toward the setting of the sun, when the light of the world was tending unto a night of darkness, " the sun of righteousness should arise with healing in His wings," and giving a check to the approaching night, become "the true light whicli lighteth every man that cometh into the world " (John i. 9). But to pass by more particulars, Josuah smote the Amalekites, and subdued- the Canaanites ; by the first making way to enter the land, by the second giving possession of it. And Jesus our " Prince and Saviour, whose kingdom was not of this world," in a spiritual manner, goes in and out before us against our spiritual enemies, subduing sin and Satan, and so opening and clearing our way to heaven ; destroying the last enemy, death, so giving us possession of eternal life. Thus do we believe the man called Jesus, to have fulfiUed in the highest degree imaginable, all which was but typified in him who first bare the name, and in all the rest which succeeded in his office, and so to be the Saviour of the world, " whom God hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of His servant David, that we should be saved from our enemies, and the hands of all that hate us " (Luke i. 69, 71). The necessity of the behef of this part of the Article is not only certain, but evident : because there is no end of faith without a Saviour, and no other name but this by which we can be saved, and no way to be saved by Him, but by believing in Hira. For " this is His commandment, that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ : and he that keepeth His coramand raents dwelleth in Him, and He in him" (i John in. 23, 24). From Hira then, and frora Him alone must we expect salvation,- acknowledging and confessing freely, there is nothing in ourselves which can effect it, or deserve it for us, nothing in any other creature which can prom erit or procure it to us. For " there is but one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus " (i Tira. ii 5). It is only " the beloved Son in whora God is well pleased ; " He is " clothed with a vesture dipped in blood ; He hath trod the wine-press alone : " " we like sheep have gone astray, and the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all " (Isa. liii. 6). " By Him God hath reconcUed all things to Hiraself," by Hira, I say, " whether they be things in Article II. 95 earth or things in heaven " (Col. i. 20). By Him alone is our salvation wrought : for His sake then only can we ask it, from Him alone expect it. Secondly, this belief is necessary, that we may delight and rejoice in the name of Jesus, as that in which aU our happiness is involved. At His nativity an angel frora heaven thus taught the shepherds" the first witnesses of the blessed incarnation : " Behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is bom this day in the city of David, a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord" (Luke ii. 10, 11). And what the angel delivered at present, that the prophet Isaiah, that old evangehst, foretold at distance. When " the people which walked in darkness" should "see a great light," when "unto us a chUd should be born, unto us a son should be given ;" then "should they joy before God, according to the joy of harvest, and as men rejoice when they divide the spoil" (Isa. ix. 2,^3, 6). When " God shall come with recorapence," when " He shall come and save us ; " then " the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come to- Zion with songs, and everlasting joy upon their heads " (Isa. xxxv. 4, 10). Thirdly, the belief in Jesus ought to inflame our affection, to kindle our love toward Him, engaging us to hate all things in respect of Him, that is, so far as they are in opposition to Him, or pretend to equal share of affection with Him. " He that loveth father or mother raore than Me, is not worthy of Me ; and he that loveth son or daughter more than Me, is not worthy of Me " (Matt. x. 37), saith our Saviour; so forbidding all prelation of any natural affection, because our spiritual union is far beyond all such relations. Nor is a higher degree of love only debarred us, but any equal pretension is as much forbidden. " If any man come to Me," saith the same Christ, "and hate not his father and mother, and wife and children, and brethren and sisters, yea and ' his own life also,-he cannot be My disciple " (Luke xiv. 26). Is it not this Jesus, in whora the love of God is demonstrated to us, and that in so high a degree as is not expressible by the pen of raan ? " God so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son " (John iu. 16). Is it not He who shewed His own love unto us,' far beyond all possibility of parallel ? for " greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends " (John XV. 13); but "while we were yet sinners," that is, enemies, " Christ died for us " (Rom. v. 8), and so became our " Jesus." Shall thus the Father shew His love in His Son ? shall thus the An Exposition of the Creed. Son shew His love in Himself? and shall we no way study a requital? or is "there any proper return of love but love? The *voice of the Church, in the language of Solomon, is, "my love" (Cant. ii. 7 ; iii. 5 ; viii. 4) : nor was that only the expression of a spouse, but of Ignatius, a man, after the apostles, most remarkable. And whosoever considers the infinite benefits to the sons of men flowing from the actions and sufferings of their Saviour, cannot choose but conclude with St Paul, " If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema, maran-atha " (i Cor. xvi. 22). Lastly, the confession of faith in Jesus is necessary to breed in us a correspondent esteera of Him, and an absolute obedience to Him. That we raay be raised to the true temper of St Paul, who "counted all things but loss for the excellency of the know ledge of Christ Jesus our Lord, for whom he suffered the loss of all things, and counted them but dung that he might win Christ " (Phil. iii. 8). Nor can we pretend to any true love of Jesus, except we be sensible, of the readiness of our obedience to Him : as knowing what language He used to His disciples, " If ye love Me, keep. My commandments " (John xiv. 15) ; and what the ^postie of His bosora spake, " This is the love of God, that we keep His coramandraents " ( i John v. 3). His own disciples once marvelled, and said, " What manner of Man is this, that feven the winds and the sea obey Him? " (Matt. vi. 27.) How much more should we wonder at all disobedient Christians saying, What manner ofmen are these, who refuse obedience unto Him, whom the sense less creatures, the winds and the sea, obeyed ? Was the name of Jesus at first sufficient to cast out devils ; and shall man be more re- refractory than they ? Shall the " exorcist say to the evil spirit, I adjure thee by the name of Jesus," and the devil give place ? Shall anapostle speak unto us in the samenarae, and we refuse ? Shall they obey that name which signifies nothing unto them ; for He took not on Him the nature of angels, and so is not their Saviour ; and can we deny obedience unto Him, who took on Him " The seed of Abrahara, and became obedient to death, even the death of the cross " for us (PhU. ii. 8), that He might be raised to full power, and absolute dominion over us, and by that power be enabled at last fo save us, and in the meantime to rule and govern us, and exact the highest veneration from us? "For God 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 " (Phih Article II. 97 Having thus declared the original of the name Jesus, the raeans and ways by which He who bare it, expressed fully the utmost signification of it ; we raay now clearly deliver, and every particular Christian easily understand what it is he says, when he makes his confession in these words, " I beUeve in Jesus," which may be not unfitly in this manner described : — I believe not only that there is" a God who made the world ; but I acknowledge and profess that I am fully persuaded of this, as of a certain and infallible truth, that there was and is a man, whose name by the ministry of an angel was called Jesus, of whom particularly Josuah the first of that narae, and all the rest of the judges and saviours of Israel, were but types. I believe that Jesus, in the highest and utmost importance of that name, to be the Saviour of the world ; inas much as He has revealed to the sons of men the only way for the salvation of their souls, and wrought the same way out for them by the virtue of His blood ; obtaining remission for sinners, making reconciliation for enemies, paying the price of redemption for captives ; and shall at last Himself actually confer the sarae salvation, which He has proraulged and procured, upon all those who unfeignedly and steadfastly believe in Hira. I acknowledge there is no other way to heaven beside that which He has shewn us, there is no other means which can procure it for us but His blood, there is no other person which shall confer it on us but Himself And with this full acknowledgment, "I believe in Jesus." And in Jesus Christ. Having thus explained the proper name of our Saviour, Jesus, we corae unto that title of His office usually joined with His name, which is therefore the more diligently to be exarained, because the Jews, who always acknowledged Hira to be Jesus, ever denied Him to be Christ, " and agreed together, that if any man did confess that He was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue" (John ix. 22). For the full explication of this title, it will be necessary, first, to deliver ^the signification of the word ; secondly, to shew upon what grounds the Jews always expected a Christ or Messias; thirdly, to prove that the Messias promised to the Jews is already come ; fourthly, to demonstrate that our Jesus is that Messias ; and fifthly, to declare in what that unction, by which Jesus is Christ, doth consist, and what are the proper effects thereof Which five particulars being clearly discussed, I cannot see what 98 An Exposition of the Creed. should be wanting for a perfect understanding that '^ Jesus is Christ." For the first, we find in the Scriptures two several names, Messias and Christ, but both of the same signification ; as appears by the speech of the woman of Samaria, " I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ " (John iv. 25) ; and more plainly by what Andrew spoke unto his brother Simon, " We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ" (John i. 41)^ " Messias " in the Hebrew tongue, " Christ " in the Greek. " Mes sias," the language of Andrew and the woman of Samaria, who spoke in Syriac ; " Christ," the interpretation of St John, who wrote his gospel in the Greek, as the most general language in those days : and the signification ofthem both is, "the Anointed." St Paul and the rest of the apostles writing in that language, used the Greek name, which the Latins did retain, caUing Him constantly Christus, and we in EngUsh have retained the same, as universally naming Him Christ. Nor is this yet the full interpretation of the word, which is to be understood not simply according to the action only, but as it involveth the design in the custom of anointing. For in the law whatsoever was anointed, was thereby set apart as ordained to some special use or office, and therefore under the notion of unction, we must understand that promotion and ordination. "Jacob poured oil on the top of a pillar" (Gen. xxviii. 18), and that anointing was the consecration of it. Moses anointed the tabernacle and aU the vessels, and this anointing was their dedica tion. Hence " the priest that is anointed " signifies in the phrase of Moses the High Priest, because he was invested in that office at and by his unction. When, therefore, Jesus is called the " Messiah " or " Christ," and that so long after the anointing oil had ceased, it signified no less than a person set apart by God, anointed with most sacred oil, advanced to the highest office, of which all those employments under the law, in the obtaining of which oil was used, were but types and shadows. And this may suffice for the signification of the word. That there was among the Jews an expectation of such a Christ to corae, is most evident. The woman of Samaria could speak with confidence, "I know that Messias cometh" (John iv. 25). And the unbeUeving Jews, who will not acknowledge that He is already come, e.xpect Him still. Thus we find " all men musing in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ or not " (Luke iii. 15). When Jesus taught in the temple, those who doubted Article II. 99 • said, "When Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence He is" (John vii. 27); those who believed said, "When Christ cometh, will He do more miracles than these which this, man hath done ? " , (John vii. 31). Whether therefore they doubted, or whether they ' believed in jesus, they all expected a Christ to come ; and the greater their opinion was of Him, the more they believed He was* that Messias. " Many of the people said. Of a truth this is the prophet : others said. This is the Christ " (John vii. 40). As soon as John began to baptise, the "Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou ? " (John vii. 41) ; that is, whether he was the Christ or no, as appears out of his answer. , " And he confessed and denied not, but confessed, I am not the Christ" (John i. 19). For as they asked him after, "What then? art thou Elias ? and he said I am not. Art thou that prophet ? • and he answered, No " (John 1. 20) : so without question their first demand was. Art thou the Christ ? and he answered, I am not. From whence it clearly appears that there was a general expecta tion among the Jews of a Messias to come ; nor only so, but it was always counted amongst them an article of their faith, which air were obliged to believe who professed the law of Moses, and who soever denied that, was thereby interpreted to deny the law andv the prophets. Wherefore it will be worth our inquiry to look into the grounds upon which they built that expectation. It is most certain that the Messias was promised by God, both befpre and under the law. God said unto Abraham, " In Isaac shall thy seed be called " (Gen. xxi. 12), and we know that was a promise of a Messias to come, because St Paul has taught us, " Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not. Unto seeds, as of many, but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ" (Gal. iii. 16). "The Lord said unto Moses, "I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren like unto thee " (Acts in. 22). And St Peter has sufficiently satisfied us, that this prophet promised to Moses, is Jesus " the Christ." Many are the prophecies which concern Hira, many promises which are made of Him ; but yet some of them very obscure ; others, though plainer, yet have relation only to the person, not to the notion or the word Messias. Wheresoever He is spoken of as the'Anointed, it may well be first understood of sorae other person; except one place in Daniel, where Messias is foretold "to be cut off" (Dan. ix. 26) : and yet even there the Greek translation has not the Messiah, but the Unction. It may therefore seem something strange, how so universal an expectation of a Redeemer 0,2 loo An Exposition of the Creed. under the name of the Messias should be spread through the Church of the Jews. But if we consider that in the space of seventy years of the Babylonish captivity, the ordinary Jews had lost the exact under standing of the old Hebrew language before spoken in Judea ; and therefore when the scriptures were read unto them, they found it necessary to interpret them to the people in the Chaldee language, which they had lately learned ; as when Ezra the scribe brought the book of the Law of Moses before the congrega tion, the Levites are said to have caused the people to understand the Law, because " they read in the book, in the law of God dis tinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading" (Neh. vhi. 8). Which constant interpretation begat at last a Chaldee translation of the Old Testament to be read every Sabbath in the synagogues ; and that being not exactly made word for word with the Hebrew, but with a hberty of a brief exposition by the way, took in together with the text, the general opinion of the learned Jews ; by which means it came to pass that not only the doctrine, but the name also of the Messias was very frequent and familiar with them, insomuch that even in the Chaldee paraphrase now extant, there is express mention of the Messias in seventy places, beside that of Daniel. The Jews then informed by the plain words of Daniel, instructed by a constant interpretation of the law and the prophets read in their synagogues every Sabbath day, relying upon the infallible predictions and pro mises of God, did all unaniraously expect out of their own nation, - of the tribe of Judah, of the faraily of David, a Messias, or a Christ to come. Now this being granted, as it cannot be denied, our next con sideration is of the time in which this proraise was to be fulfilled : which we shall demonstrate out of the Scriptures to be past, and consequently that the proraised Messias is already come. The prediction of Jacob on his death-bed is clear and pregnant : " The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver frora between his feet, until ShUoh come, and to Him shall the gathering of the people be " (Gen. xlix. lo). But the sceptre is departed ffom Judah, neither is there one lawgiver left between his feet : there fore ShUoh, that is, the Messias, is already come. That the • Jewish government has totally failed, is not without the greatest folly to J)e denied ; and therefore that Shiloh is already come, except we should deny the truth of divine predictions, must be granted. There remains then nothing to be proved, but that by Article II. lOl Shiloh is to be understood the Messias; which is sufficiently manifest both from the consent of the ancient Jews, and from the description immediately added to the narae. For all the old paraphrasts call him- expressly the Messias, and the words which foUow, " to Him shall the gathering of the people be," speak no less ; as giving an explication of His person, office, or condition, who was but darkly described in the name of Shiloh. For this is the same character by which He was signified unto Abraham, "In thy seed shall all the nations ofthe earth be blessed," by which He is decyphered in Isaiah ; " In that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people ; to it shall the Gentiles seek, and His rest shall be glorious " (Isa. xi. lo) ; and in Micah, " The mountain of the house of the Lord shall be estabhshed on the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills, and people shall flow unto it" (Micah iv. i). And thus the blessing of Judah is plainly inteUigible. " Judah, thou art he whora thy brethren shall praise, thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies, thy father's chUdren shall bow down before thee " (Gen. xhx. 8). Thou shalt obtain the primogeniture of thy brother Reuben, and by virtue thereof shalt rule over the rest of the tribes, the government shall be upon thy shoulders, tnci all thy brethren shall be subject unto thee. And that you may understand this blessing is not to expire until it make way for a greater, know that this government shall not fail, until there come a son out of your loins, who shall be far greater than yourself: for whereas your dominion reacheth only over your brethren, and so is confined unto the tribes of Israel ; his kingdom shall be universal, and all nations of the earth shall serve him. Being then this _Shilok is -s&-d^;^bed- in .thejtext3_ajndacknowledged by the ^ncient Jews .., -^e the Messias7being~God'Tia3~pIOIBisedby Jacob the government of Israel should not fail until Shiloh came : bemg that govemment is visibly and undeniably already failed ; it follows inevitably, that the Messias is already come. ^ In the same manner the prophet Malachi has given an express signification of the coming of the Messias while the temple stood. " Behold, I will send My messenger, and he shall prepare the way before Me, and the Lord whom ye seek shall suddenly come to His temple, even the messenger of the covenant whom ye delight in" (Mai. iii. i). And Haggai yet more clearly ; " Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, Yet once it is a little whUe, and I will shake the heavens, and the earth, and the sea, and the dry land ; and I wUl shake all nations, and the desire of I02 An Exposition of the Creed. all nations shaU come, and I wUl fiU this house with glory, saith the Lord of Hosts. The glory of this latter house shall be greater than the glory of the former, saith the Lord of Hosts " (Hag. ii. 6, 7, 9). It is then most evident from these predictions that the Messias was to corae while the second temple stood. It is as certain that the second temple is not now standing. Therefore except we contradict the veracity of God, it cannot be denied but the Messias is already corae. Nothing can be objected to enervate this argument, but that these prophecies concern not the Messias ; and yet the ancient Jews confessed they did, and that they do so cannot be denied. For first, those titles, " the Angel ofthe Covenant," the "delight ofthe Israelites," " the desire of aU nations," are certain and known characters of the Christ to come. And secondly, it cannot be conceived how the glory of the second temple should be greater than the glory of the first, without the coming of the Messias to it. For the Jews themselves have ob served that five signs of the divine glory were in the first temple, which were wanting to the second : as the Urim and Thummim, by which the High Priest was miraculously instructed of the wUl of God ; the Ark of the Covenant, from whence God gave His answers by a clear and audible voice; the fire upon the altar, which came down frora heaven, and iramediately consumed the sacrifice ; the divine presence or habitation with thera, represented by a visible appearance, or given as it were to the King and High Priest by anointing with the oU of unction; and lastly, the spirit of prophecy, with which those especially who were called to the prophetical office were indued. And there was no coraparison between the beauty and glory of the structure or buUding of it, as appeared by the tears dropped frorn Jhosfi-eyegiA^ch .hadJt!£hel4_ the formej:(fQr-'iriai^"orthe^ries'ts and Levit^^d chief of the fathers, who were ancient men that had seen the first house, when the foundation of this house was laid before their eyes, wept with a loud voice," Ezra iii. 12), and by those words which God com manded Haggai to speak to the people for the introducing of this prophecy, " Who is left among you that saw this house in her first glory? and how do ye see it now? is it not in your eyes in comparison ofit as nothing?" (Hag. ii. 3). Being then the structure of the second teraple was so far inferior to the first, being, all those signs of the divine glory were wanting in it, with which the former was adorned, the glory of it can no other way be imagined greater, than by the coming of Him into it, in whom all those signs of the divine glory were far more eminently contained ; and this person Article II. 103 alone is the Messias. For He was to be the glory of the people Israel, yea even of the God of Israel; He the Urim and Thummim, by whom_ the will of God, as by a greater oracle, was revealed; He the true Ark ofthe Covenant, the only Propitiatory by His blood ; He who was to baptise with the Holy Ghost and with fire, the true fire which came down from heaven ; He who was to take up His habitation in our flesh, and to dwell among us, that we might behold His glory; He who received the Spirit without measure, and from whose fulness we do all receive. In Him were all those signs of the divine glory united, which were thus divided in the first temple, in Him they were all more eminently contained than in those : therefore His coraing to the second temple was as the sufficient, so the only means, by which the glory of it could be greater than the glory of the first. ' If then the Messias was to come while the second temple stood, as appears by God's prediction and proraise; if that temple many ages since has ceased to be, there being not one stone left upon a stone ; if it certainly were before the destruction of it in greater glory than ever the former was ; if no such glory could accrue unto it but by the coming of the Messias : then is that already come. Having thus demonstrated out of the promises given to. the Jews, that the Messias who was so promised unto them must be already come, because those events which were foretold to follow His coming, are already past, we shall proceed unto the next particular, and prove that the man Jesus, in whom we believe, is that Messias who was promised. First, it is acknowledged both by the Jew and Gentile, that this Jesus was born in Judea, and lived and died there before the comraonwealth of Israel was dispersed, before the second Teraple was destroyed, that is, at the very time when the prophets foretold the Messias sh©'iiM- eofflg,- And there was no other beside Him that did with any shew of probability pretend to be, or was accepted as, the Messias. Therefore we must confess He was, and only He could be, the Christ. Secondly, all other prophecies belonging to the Messias were fulfilled in Jesus, whether we look upon the famUy, the place, or the manner of His birth ; neither were they ever fulfilled in any person beside Hira ; He therr is, and no other can be, the Messias. That He was to come out of the tribe of Judah and family of David is everywhere manifest. The Jews, who mention Messias as a son pf Joseph or of Ephraim, do not deny, but rather 104 An Exposition of the Creed. dignify the Son of David or of Judah, whom they confess to be the greater Christ. " There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shaU grow out of his roots, and the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him," saith the prophet Isaiah. And again, " In that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people, to it shall the GentUes seek, and his rest shall be glorious " (Isa. xi. i, lo). Now who was it but Jesus of whom the elders spake, " Behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David " ? (Rev. v. 5) ; who but He said, " I am the root and offspring of David, and the bright and morning star"? (Rev. xxii. 16). The Jews did aU acknowledge it, as appears by the question of our Saviour, " How say the scribes that Christ is the son of David? " (Mark xn. 35). " What think ye of Christ ? whose son is He ? They say. unto Him, The son of David " (Matt. xxii. 42) ; and that of the people araazed at the seeing of the blind, and speaking of the dumb : " Is this the son of David?" (Matt. xii. 23). The blind cried out unto Him, " Jesus, thou son of David, have mercy on us ; " and the multi tude cried, " Hosanna to the son of David " (Matt. xxi. 9). The genealogy of Jesus shews His family : the first words of the Gospel are, " The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David " (Matt. i. i). The prophecy therefore was certainly fulfilled in respect of His lineage, " for it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah " (Heb. vii. 14). Beside, if we look upon the place where the Messias was to be bom, we shall find that Jesus, by a particular act of providence, was born there. When Herod " gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born. And they said unto him. In Bethlehem of Judea " (Matt. ii. 4j 5). The people doubted whether Jesus was the ,jCferi!t, bgCa'SS^They thought Jtie haa'Teen'1juar-ia-6a!4lee,--whcre Joseph and Mary lived ; wherefore they said, " Shall Christ come out of GalUee ? Hath nof the scripture said. That Christ coraeth of the seed of David, and out of the town of Betblehera, where David was? " (John vn. 41, 42.) That place of Scripture which they meant was cited by the scribes to Herod, according to the interpretation then current among the Jews, and still preserved in the Chaldee paraphrase. " For thus it is written in the prophet. And thou, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, art not the least among the princes of Judah, for out of thee shall corae a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel " (Matt. ii. 5, 6). This prediction was most manifestly and remarkably fulfiUed in the birth of Jesus, Article II. 105 when by the providence of God it was so ordered that Augustus should then tax the world, to which end every one should go up into his own city. Whereupon Joseph and Mary his espoused wife left Nazareth of Galilee their habitation, and went unto Bethlehem of Judea, the city of David, there to be taxed, " because they were of the house and lineage of David " (Luke U. 4). And while they were there, as the days of the virgin Mary were ac complished, so the prophecy was fulfiUed, for there she brought forth her first-born son, and so " unto us was born that day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord " (Luke ii. 11). But if we add unto the family and place, the manner of His birth also foretold,' the argument must necessarily appear con clusive. The prophet Isaiah spake thus unto the house of David : " The Lord Himself shall give you a sign ; Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name, Immanuel " (Isa. vii. 14). What nativity could be more congruous to the greatness of a Messias than that of a Virgin, which is most miraculous ? what name can be thought fitter for Him than that of Immanuel, God with us, whose land Judea is said to be ? The Immanuel then thus born of a virgin was without question the true Messias. And we know Jesus was thus born of the blessed virgin Mary, " that it might be fulfiUed which was " thus " spoken of the Lord by the prophet " (Matt. i. 22). Wherefore being all the prophecies concerning the family, place, and manner of the birth of the Messias were fulfilled in Jesus, and not so much as pretended to be accomplished in any other, it is again from hence apparent that this Jesus is the Christ. Thirdly, He who taught what the Messias was to teach, did what the Messias was to do, suffered what the Messias was to suffer, and by suffering obtained all which a Messias could obtain, must be acknowledged of necessity to be the true Messias. But all this is raanifestly true of Jesus. Therefore we raust confess He is the Christ. For, first, it cannot be denied but the Messias was . proraised as a Prophet and Teacher of the people. So God pro mised Him to Moses ; " I wUl raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren like unto thee " (Deut. xviii. 18). So Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Hosea have expressed Him, as we shaU hereafter have further occasion to shew. And not only so, but as a greater Prophet and more perfect doctor than ever any was who preceded Him, more universal than them all. " I have put My Spirit upon Him," saith God, " He shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles, and the isles shall wait for His law" (Isa. xUi. i, 4). Now it is as io6 An Exposition of the Creed. evident that Jesus of Nazareth was the most perfect Prophet, the Prince and Lord of aU the prophets, doctors, and pastors, who either preceded or succeeded Him. For He has revealed unto us the most perfect wiU of God, both in His precepts and His promises. He has delivered the sarae after the most perfect manner, ^yith the greatest authority ; not like Moses and the prophets, saying, " Thus saith the Lord," but, " I say unto you " (Matt. v. often) ; nor Uke the interpreters of Moses, for " He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes " (Matt. vii. 29) : with the greatest perspicuity, not as those before Him, under types and shadows, but plainly and clearly ; from whence both He and His doctrine are frequently caUed " Light : " with the greatest uni versality, as preaching that Gospel which is to unite all the nations of the earth into one Church, that there might be one shepherd and one flock. Whatsoever, then, that great Prophet the Messias was to teach, that Jesus taught ; and whatsoever works he was to do, those Jesus did. When John the Baptist had heard the " works of Christ, he sent two of his disciples " with this message to Hira, " Art Thou He that should come, or do we look for another ? " And Jesus returned this answer unto hira, shewing the ground of that raessage, " the works of Christ," was a sufficient resolution of the question sent : " Go and shew John again those things which ye do hear and see. The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up" (Matt. xi. 2-5). And as Jesus aUeged the works which He wrought to be a sufficient testimony that He was the Messias, so did those Jews acknowledge it, who said, " When Christ cometh, will He do more miracles than these which this Man doth ? " (John vu. 31). And Nicodemus, a ruler among thera, confessed little less : " Rabbi, we know that Thou art a teacher corae from God : for no man can do these miracles that Thou doest, except God be with him " (John iii. 2). Great and many were the miracles which Moses and the rest of the prophets wrought for the ratification of the law, and the demonstration of God's constant presence with His people: and yet all those wrought by so many several persons in the space of above three thousand years, are far short of those which this one Jesus did perform within the compass of three years. The ambitious dihgence of the Jews ha reckoned up seventy-six miracles for Moses, and seventy-four for all the rest of the prophets, and supposing that they were so many (though indeed they were not) Article II. 107 how few are they in respect of those which are written of our Saviour ! how inconsiderable if compared with all which He wrote, when St John testifieth with as great certainty of truth, as height of hyperbole, " That there are many other things which Jesus did, the which if they should be written every one, he supposed that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written !" (John xxi. 25). Nor did our Saviour excel all others in the number of His miracles only, but in the power of working. Whatsoever miracle Moses wrought, he either obtained by his prayers, or else consulting with God, received it by command frora Hira ; so that the power of miracles cannot be conceived as iraraanent or inhering in Hira. Whereas this power must of necessity be in " Jesus, in whom dwelt all the fulness of the God head bodily " (Col. ii. 9), and " to whom the Father had given to have life in Himself" (John v. 26). This He sufficiently shewed by working with a word, by comraanding the winds to be still, the devils to fly, and the dead to rise : by working without a word or any intervenient sign ; as when the woraan which " had an issue of blood twelve years touched His garment, and straight way the fountain of her blood was dried up" (Mark v. 29) by the virtue which flowed out from the greater fountain of His power. And lest this example should be single, we find that the " raen of Gennesaret," the " people out of all Judea and Jerasalem, and from the sea-coast of "Tyre and Sidon " (Matt. xiv. 34, 36), even " the whole multitude sought to touch Him, for there went virtue out of Hira, and healed them aU" (Luke vi. 17, 19). Once, indeed, Christ seems to have prayed before He raised Lazarus from the grave, but even that was done "because of the people which stood by " (John xi. 42) : not that He had not power within Hiraself to raise up Lazarus, who was afterward to raise Himself; but " that they raight believe the Father had sent Hira." The iraraanency and inherency of this power in Jesus is evident in this, that He was able to communicate it to whora He pleased, and actually did confer it upon His disciples : " Behold I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy" (Luke x. 19). Upon the apostles: "Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils ; freely ye have received, freely give " (Matt. x. 8). Upon the first believers : " These signs shall follow them that believe ; in My name they shall cast out devils" (Mark xvi. 17). "He that beheveth on Me, the works that I do shall he do also ; and greater works than these shaU he do" (John xiv. 12). He then who did more io8 An Exposition of the Creed, actions divine and powerful than Moses and all the prophets ever did ; He who performed thera in a raanner far raore divine than that by which they wrought, has done aU which can be expected the Messias, foretold by thera, should do. Nor has our Jesus only done, but suffered, all which the Messias was to suffer. For we must not with the Jews deny a suffering Christ, or fondly of our own invention make a double Messias, one to suffer and another to reign. It is clear enough by the prophet Isaiah what His condition was to be, whom He calls the " servant of God" (Isa. hi. 13) ; and the later Jews cannot deny but their fathers constantly understood that place of the Messias. Now the sufferings of Christ spoken of by the prophet raay be reduced to two parts ; one in respect of conterapt, by which He was despised of men, the other in respect of His death, and all those indignities and pains which preceded and led unto it. For the first, the prophet has punctually described His condition, saying, " He hath no form or comeliness, and when we shall see Him, there is no beauty that we should desire Him. He is despised and rejected of men'' (Isa. liii 2, 3). He seems to describe a personage no way amiable, an aspect indeed rather uncomely : and so the most ancient writers have interpreted Isaiah, and confessed the fulfilling of it in the body of our Saviour. But what the aspect of His outward appearance was, because the Scriptures are silent, we cannot now know ; and it is enough that we are assured, the state and condition of His life was in the eye of the Jews without honour and inglorious. For though " being in the forra of God, He thought it not robbery to be equal with God"; "yet He made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant " (Phil. ii. 6, 7). For thirty years He lived with His mother Mary, and Joseph his reputed father, of a mean profession, "and was subject to them" (Luke ii. 51). When He left His mother's house, and entered on His prophetical office, He passed from place to place, sometimes received into a house, other times lodging in the fields : for while " the foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests, the Son of Man had not where to lay His head " (Matt. vin. 20). , From this low estate of life and condition seemingly inglorious, airose in the Jews a neglect of His works, and contempt of His doctrine. " Is not this the carpenter's son?" (Matt. xin. 55); nay, further, "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary? and they were offended at Him" (Mark vi. 3). Thus was it fulfiUed in Him, " He was despised and rejected of men, and they esteemed Him not." Article II. 109 This contempt of His personage, condition, doctrine, and works, was by degrees raised to hatred, detestation, and persecu tion, to a cruel and ignominious death. All which, if we look upon in the gross, we must acknowledge it fulfilled in Him to the highest degree imaginable, that He was "a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief" (Isa. liii. 3). But if we compare the particular predictions with the historical passages of His suffer ings, if we join the prophets and evangelists together, it wiU most manifestly appear the Messias was to suffer nothing which Christ has not suffered. If Zechariah say, " They weighed for ray price thirty pieces of silver" (Zech. xi 12); St Matthew will shew that Judas sold Jesus at the sarae rate ; for the chief priests "covenanted with him for thirty pieces, of sUver" (Matt. xxvi. 15). If Isaiah say, "that He was wounded" (Isa. liii 5); if Zechariah, " They shall look upon Me whom they have pierced " (Zech. xii. 10) ; if the prophet David yet more particularly " they pierced my hands and my feet" (Ps. xxn. 16); the evangelist will shew how He was fastened to the cross, and Jesus Himself, " the print of the naUs " (John xx. 25). If the Psalmist teUs us, they should " laugh him to scorn, and shake their head, saying. He trusted in the Lord that He would deliver hira ; let Him deliver hira, seeing He delighted in him'' (Ps. xxh. 7, 8). St Matthew will describe the same action, and the same expression, for " They that passed by reviled Him, wagging their heads, and saying. He trusted in God, let Him deliver Hira now, if He will have Him ; for He said I am the Son of God " (Matt, xxvii. 39, ¦43). Let David say, "My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken rae?" (Ps. xxii. i); and the Son of David will shew in whose person the Father spake it, " Eli Eli lama sabachthani " (Matt. xxvii. 46). Let Isaiah foretell, " He was numbered with the transgressors" (Isa. hii. 12) ; and you shall find Him "crucified between two thieves, one on His right hand, the other on His left" (Mark xv. 27). Read in the Psalraist, " In ray thirst they gave me vinegar to drink" (Ps. Ixix. 21); and you shall find in the evangelist, " Jesus, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, said, I thirst" (John xix. 28) ; " and they took a sponge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave it Hira to drink " (Matt. XXVU. 48). Read further yet, " They part My garraents araong them, and cast lots upon my vesture" (Ps. xxii. 18); and to fulfil the prediction, the soldiers shall make good the distinction, " who took His garments and made four parts, to every soldier a part, and also His coat; now the coat was without seam, woven IIO An Exposition of the Creed. from the top throughout ; they said therefore among themselves. Let not us rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be " (John xix. 23, 24). Lastly, let the prophets teach us, that He "shaUbe brought like a lamb to the slaughter, and be cut off out of the land ofthe living" (Isa. liii 7, 8); all the evangehsts wUl declare how hke a lamb He suffered, and the very Jews will acknowledge that He was cut off. And now may we well conclude, " Thus it is written, and thus it behoved the Christ to suffer;" and what it so be hoved Him to suffer, that He suffered. Neither only in His passion, but after His death all things were fulfiUed in Jesus which were prophesied conceming the Messias. "He made His grave with the wicked, and with the rich in His death " (Isa. lin. 9), saith the prophet of the Christ to corae ; and as the thieves were buried with whom He was cruci fied, so was Jesus, but laid in the tomb of Joseph of Ariraathea, an honourable counsellor. " After two days He will revive us, in the third day He wiU raise us up " (Hos. vi. 2), saith Hosea of the people of Israel ; in whose language they were the type of Christ ; and the third day Jesus rose frora the dead. " The Lord said unto my Lord," saith David, "sit thou at My right hand" (Ps. ex. i). Now "David is not ascended into the heavens " (Acts ii. 34), and consequently cannot be set at the right hand of God, but Jesus is already ascended, and set down at the right hand of God ; and so " all the house of Israel might know assuredly that God has made that same Jesus, whom they crucified, both Lord and Christ" (Acts n. 36). For He who taught, whatsoever the Messias, promised by God, foretold- by the prophets, expected by the people of God, was to teach ; He who did all which that Messias was by virtue of that office to do ; He who suffered all those pains and indignities, which that Messias was to suffer ; He to whom all things happened after His death, the period of His sufferings, which were according to the divine predictions to come to pass ; He, I say, raust infaUibly be the true Messias. But Jesus alone taught, did, suffered, and obtained all these things, as we have shewed. Therefore we raay again infaUibly conclude that our Jesus is the Christ. Fourthly. If it were the proper note and character of the Messias, that all nations should corae in to serve Him ; if the doctrine of Jesus hath been preached and received in all parts of the world, according to that character so long before delivered ¦ if it were absolutely impossible that the doctrine revealed by Jesus should have been so propagated as it hath been, had it not been Article II. iii divine ; then must this Jesus be the Messias, and when we have proved these three particulars, we may safely conclude He is the Christ. That all nations were to corae in to' the Messias, and so the distinction between the Jew and Gentile to cease at His coming, is the most universal description in aU the prophecies. God speaks to Hira thus, as to His Son : "Ask of Me, and I wiU give thee the heathen for Tliirie inheritance, and the utterraost parts of the earth for Thy possession " (Ps. ii. 8). It was one greater than Solomon of whom these words were spoken, " All kings shall fall down before Him, aU nations shaU serve Him" (Ps. Ixxn. ii). " It shall come to pass in the last days," saith Isaiah, " that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills, and all nations shall flow unto it" (Isa. ii. 2). And again, " In that day there shall be a root' of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek." And in general, all the prophets were but instruraents to deliver the sarae raessage, which Malachi concludes, frora God ; " From the rising of the sun, even to the going down of the same. My name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in everyplace incense shaUbe offered unto My narae, and a pure offering : for My name shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord of hosts" (Mai. i. -11). Now being the bounds of Judea were settled, being the promise of God was to bring all nations in at the coming of the Messias, being this was it which the Jews so rauch opposed, as loath to part from their ancient and peculiar privilege : He who actuaUy wrought this work, must certainly be the Messias : and that Jesus did it is most evident. That all nations did thus corae in to the doctrine preached by Jesus cannot be denied. For although He " were not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel " (Matt. xv. 24) ; although of those raany Israelites who believed in Him while He lived, very few were left immediately after His death : yet when the apostles had received their commission from Hira to "go teach all nations" (Matt, xxvih. 19), and were "endued with power from on high " (Luke xxiv. 49), by the plentiful effusion of the Holy Ghost; the first day there was an accession of "three thousand souls " (Acts u. 41) ; immediately after we find " the number of the men," besides women, "was about five thousand" (Acts iv. 4) ; and still " believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women " (Acts v. 14). Upon the persecution at 112 An Exposition of the^ Creed. Jerusalem, they went through the " regions of Judea, Galilee, and Samaria" (Acts ix. 31), and so the Gospel spread : insomuch that St James, the Bishop of Jerusalem, spake thus unto St Paul, " Thou seest, brother, how many thousands " (or rather, " how many myriads," that is, ten thousands) " of the Jews there are which believe" (Acts xxi. 20). Besides, how great was the nuraber of the believing Jews strangers scattered through Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, Bithynia, and the rest of the Roman provinces, wiU appear out of the Epistles of St Peter, St James, and St John. And yet all these are nothing to the fulness of the GentUes who carae after. First, those who were before Gentile worshippers, acknowledging the same God with the Jews, but not receiving the Law ; who had before abandoned their old idolatry, and already embraced the true doctrine of one God, and did con fess the Deity which the Jews did worship to be that only true God ; but yet refused to be circumcised, and so to oblige theraselves to the keeping of the whole Law. Now the apostles preaching the sarae God with . Moses, whora they all acknowledged, and teaching that circumcision and the rest of the legal ceremonies were now abrogated, which those men would never admit, they were with the greatest facility converted to the Christian faith. For being present at the synagogues of the Jews, and understand ing much of the law, they were of all the Gentiles readiest to hear, and most capable of the arguments which the apostles produced out of the Scriptures to prove that Jesus was the Christ. Thus many of the " Greeks which came up to worship " (John xii. 20) at Jerusalem, " devout men out of every nation under heaven " (Acts ii. s), not " men of Israel," but yet " fearing God," did first embrace the Christian faith. After them the rest ofthe GentUes left the idolatrous worship of their heathen gods, and in a short time in infinite multitudes received the Gospel. How much did Jesus work by one St Paul to " the obedience of the Gentiles by word and deed " ! (Rora. xv. 18, 19) ; how did he pass from Jerusalem round about through Phoenice, Syria, and Arabia, through Asia, Achaia, and Macedonia, even to lUyricum, fully "preaching the gospel of Christ " ! How far did others pass besides St Paul, that he should speak even of his time, that the Gospel was " preached to every creature under heaven"? (Col. i. 23). Many were the nations, innuraerable the people, which received the faith in the apostles' days ; and in not raany years after, notwithstandirig millions were cut off in their bloody persecutions, yet did their numbers equalise half the Roman Empire ; and little above two ages after the death of the last apostle, the emperors of the world gave in their naraes to Christ, and submitted their sceptres to His laws, that the " Gentiles might corae to His light, and kings to the brightness of His rising " (Isa. lx. 3), that " kings " might becorae " the nursing fathers, and their queens the nursing mothers " (Isa. xlix. 23) ofthe Church. From hence it came to pass, that according to all the predic tions of the prophets, the one God of Israel, the Maker of heaven and earth, was acknowledged through the world for the only true God : that the law given to Israel was taken for the true law of God, but as given to that people, and so to cease, when they ceased to be a people ; except the moral part thereof, which, as an universal rule common to all people, is still acknowledged for the law of God, given unto all, and obliging every man : that all the oracles of the heathen gods, in all places where Christianity was received, did presently cease, and all the idols or the gods thera selves, were rejected and condemned as spurious. For the Lord of Hosts had spoken concerning those times expressly : " It shall come to pass in that day, that I will cut off the naraes of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be reraerabered, also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land" (Zech. xin. 2). Now being this general reception of the Gospel was so an ciently, so frequently foretold, being the sarae was so clearly and universally performed, even this might seem sufficient to persuade that Jesus is Christ. But lest any should not yet be fully satisfied, we shall farther shew, that it is impossible Jesus should have been so received for the true Messias, had He not been so ; or that His doctrine, which teaches Him to be the Christ, should be admitted by all nations for divine, had it not been such. For whether we look upon the nature of the doctrine taught, the con dition of the teachers of it, or the manner in which it was taught, it can no way seem probable that it should have had any such success, without the iramediate working of the hand of God, acknowledging Jesus for His Son, the doctrine for His own, and the fulfilling by the hands of the apostles what He had foretold by the prophets. As for the nature of the doctrine, it was no way likely to have any such success : for first, it absolutely condemned all other re ligions, settled and corroborated by a constant succession of many ages, under which many nations and kingdoms, and especially at that time the Roman, had signally flourished. Secondly, it con- 114 -^^ Exposition of the Creed. tained precepts far more ungrateful and troublesome to flesh arid blood, and contrariant to the general inclination of mankind ; as the abnegation of ourselves, the mortifying of the flesh, the love of our enemies, and the bearing of the cross. Thirdly, it enforced those precepts seemingly unreasonable, by such promises as were as seemingly incredible and unperceivable. For they were not of the good things of this world, or such as afford any complacency to our sense, but of such as cannot be obtained till after this life, and necessarily presuppose that which then seemed as absolutely irapossible, the resurrection. Fourthly, it delivered certain pre dictions which were to be fulfilled in the persons of such as should erabrace it, which seera sufficient to have kept raost part of the world from listening to it, as dangers, losses, afflictions, tribula tions, and in sum', " AU that would live godly in Christ Jesus, should suffer persecution" (2 Tim. iii 12). If we look upon the teachers of this doctrine, there appeared nothing in them which could proraise any such success. The first revealer and proraulger, bred in the house of a carpenter, brought up at the feet of no professor, despised by the high priests, the Scribes, and Pharisees, and all the learned in the re ligion of His nation : in the tirae of His preaching apprehended, bound, buffeted, spit upon, conderaned, crucified ; betrayed in His life by one disciple, denied by another ; at His death dis trusted by all. What advantage can we perceive towards the pro pagation of the Gospel, in this Author of it, " Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling-block and unto the Greeks foolish ness" ? (i Cor. i. 23). What in those who followed Him, sent by Him, and thence caUed apostles, men by birth obscure, by educa tion illiterate, by profession low and inglorious ? How can we conceive that all the schools and universities of the world should give way to them, and the kingdoms and empires should at last come in -to them, except their doctrine were indeed divine, except that Jesus whom they testified to be the Christ, were truly so ? If we consider the manner in which they delivered this doctrine to the world, it will add no advantage to their persons, or advance the probabUity of success. For in their delivery they used no such rhetorical expressions, or ornaments of eloquence, to allure or entice the world ; they affected no such subtlety of wit, or strength of argumentation, as thereby to persuade and convince men ; they made use of no force or violence to compel, no cor poral menaces to affright mankind unto a compliance. But in a plain simplicity of words, they nakedly delivered what they had Article II. 115 seen and heard, " preaching not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in the demonstration of the Spirit " (i Cor. ii. 4). • It is not then rationally imaginable, that so raany nations should forsake their own religions, so raany ages professed, and brand them all as damnable, only that they raight embrace such pre cepts as were most unacceptable to their natural inclinations, and that upon such promises as seemed not probable to their reason, nor could have any influence on their sense, and notwithstand ing those predictions, which did assure thera upon the receiving of that doctrine to be exposed to all kind of misery : that they should do this upon the authority of Him, who for the same was condemned and crucified, and by the persuasion of those who were both ilhterate and obscure: that they should be enticed with words without eloquence, convinced without the least sub tlety, constrained without any force. I say, it is no way imagin able how this should come to pass, had not the doctrine of the Gospel which did thus prevail, been certainly divine ; had not the light of the Word, which thus dispelled the clouds of all former religions, come from heaven ; had not that " Jesus, the Author and Finisher of our faith," been the true Messias. -f.. To conclude this discourse. He who was in the world at the time when the Messias was to come, and no other at that time or since pretended ; He who was born of the same family, in the sarae place, after the sarae manner, which the prophets foretold of the birth of the Messias ; He who taught all those truths, wrought all those miracles, suffered all those indignities, received all that glory, which the Messias was to teach, do, suffer, and re ceive ; He whose doctrine was received in all nations, according to the character of the Messias : He was certainly the true Messias. But we have already sufficiently shewed that all these things are exactly fulfiUed in Jesus, and in Him alone. We must therefore acknowledge and profess that this Jesus is the promised Messias, that is, the Christ. Having thus manifested the truth of this proposition, " Jesus is the Christ," and shewed the interpretation of the word " Christ " to be " anointed ;" we find it yet necessary, for the explication of this Article, to inquire what was the end, or immediate effect of His unction, and how or in what manner He was anointed to that end. For the first, as the Messias was foretold, so was He typified ; nor were the actions prescribed under the law less predictive than the words of the prophets. Nay, whosoever were then anointed, were therefore so, because He was to be anointed. Now it is Ii6 An E.xposition of the Creed. evident that among the Jews they were wont to anoint those who were appointed as kings over thera : so "Samuel said unto Saul, The Lord sent me to anoint thee to be king over His people, over Israel" (i Sam. xv. i). When Saul was rejected, and David produced before Samuel, the Lord said, " Arise, anoint him, for this is he." And some may have contented themselves with this, that the Messias was to be a king. But not only the kings, but beside, and long before them, the high priests were also anointed, insomuch as the "anointed," in their common language signified their high priest. And because these two were most constantly anointed, therefore divers have thought it sufficient to assert that the Messias was to be a King and a Priest. But being not only the high priests and kings were actually anointed (though they principally and most frequenriy), for "the Lord said unto Elijah, Go anoint Hazael to be king over Syria, and Jehu the son of Nirashi shalt thou anoint to be king over Israel ; and Elisha the son of Shaphat shalt thou anoint to be prophet in thy roora '!. (] Kings xix. 15, 16). Therefore, hence it has been concluded that the three offices of prophet, priest, and king, belonged to Jesus as the Christ ; and that upon good reason. For the comraon wealth of Israel was totally ordered and disposed, both in the constitution and administration of it, for, and with respect unto the Messias. The constitution of that people was made by a sej unction and separation of thera from all other nations on the earth ; and this began in Abrahara, with a peculiar promise of a seed, in whom all the nations should be blessed, and be united into one religion. That promised seed was the Messias, the type of whom was Isaac. This separation was continued by the administration of that commonwealth, which was a "royal priest hood : " and that administration of the people did consist in three functions, prophetical, regal, sacerdotal; all which had respect unto the Messias, as the scope of aU the prophets, and the complement of their prophecies, as the Lord of the teraple, and the end of all the sacrifices for which the temple was erected, as the heir of an eternal priesthood " after the order of Melchisedec," and of the throne of David, or an everlasting kingdom. Being then the separation was to cease at the coming of the Messias, '^¦being that could not cease so long as the administration of that people stood, being that administration did consist in those three functions; it followeth those three were to be united in the person of the Messias, who was to make all one, and consequently that the Christ was to be Prophet, Priest, and King. Article II. 117 Again, the redemption or salvation which the Messias was to bring, consists in the freeing of a sinner from the state of sin and eternal death into a state of righteousness and eternal life. Now a freedom from sin in respect of the guilt, could not be wrought without a sacrifice propitiatory, and therefore there was a necessity of a priest ; a freedora from sin in respect of the dominion, could not be obtained without a revelation of the will of God, and of His wrath against all ungodliness, therefore there was also need of a prophet ; a translation from the state of death into eternal life, is not to be effected without absolute authority and irresistible power, therefore a king was also necessary. The Messias then, the Redeemer of Israel, was certainly anointed for that end, that He might become Prophet, Priest, and King. And if we believe Him, whom we call Jesus, that is, our Saviour and Redeemer, to be Christ, we must assert him by His unction sent to perforra all these three offices. That Jesus was anointed to the prophetical office, though we need no more to prove it than the prediction of Isaiah, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me ; because He hath anointed Me to preach the Gospel to the poor" (Isa. Ixi. i); the explica tion of our Saviour, " This day is this Scripture fulfiUed in your ears " (Luke iv. 21); and the confession of the synagogue at Nazareth, who "all bare Him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth " (Luke iv. 22) ; yet, we are furnished with more ample and plentiful demonstrations ; for whether we consider His preparation. His mission, or His admin istration, all of them speak Him fully to have performed it. To Jeremiah, -indeed, God said, " Before thou camest forth out of the womb," I sanctified thee, I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations" (Jer. i. 5); and of John the Baptist, "He shall be filled with the Holy Ghost even from his mother's womb " (Luke i. 15). And if these became singular prophets by their preparative sancti fication, how much more eminent must His prophetical prepara tion be, to whose mother it is said, " The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee " (Luke i. 3S). If the Levites must be " thirty years old, every one that came to do the service of the ministry" (Num. iv. 47) ; Jesus will not enter upon the public adrainistration of this office, "till He begin to be about thirty years of age " (Luke iii. 23). Then does the " Holy Ghost descend in a bodily shape like a dove upon Him ; " then must " a voice come from heaven, saying. Thou art My beloved Son; in Thee I am well pleased." Never such preparatipns, never such an inauguration of a prophet. Ii8 An Exposition of the Creed. As for His mission, never any was confirmed with such letters of credence, such irrefragable testimonials, as the formal testimony of John the Baptist, and the more virtual testimony of His miracles. " Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord " (Mai. iv. 5), saith God by Malachi. And John went " before him in the spirit of Elias " (Luke i. 1 7), saith another Malachi, even an angel from heaven. This John, or Elias, saw the Spirit descend on Jesus, "And bare record that this is the Son of God" (John i. 34). "The Jews took "notice of this testimony, who " said unto hira. Rabbi, He that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold the sarae baptiseth, and aU raen come unto Him" (John hi 26); and Jesus Himself puts them in mind of it, " Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth " (John V. 33) ; nay they theraselves confessed his testimony to be undeniable ; " John did no miracle, but all things that John spake of this man, were true" (John x. 41). But though the witness of John were thus cogent, yet the testimony of miracles was far more irrefragable ; " I have greater witness than that of John," saith our Saviour; "for the works which My Father hath given Me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of Me, that the Father hath sent Me " (John v. 36). Notwithstanding the prece dent record of John, Jesus requireth not an absolute assent unto His doctrine without His miracles : " If I do not the works of My Father, beheve Me not" But upon them He chaUengeth belief: " But if I do, though ye believe not Me, believe the works, that ye may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him " (John X. 37, 38). If then Moses, and other prophets, to whom God gave the power of miracles, did assert their mission to be frora God by the divine works which they wrought ; much more efficacious to this purpose must the miracles of Jesus appear, who wrought more wonders than they all. Never, therefore, was there so manifest a mission of a prophet. Now the prophetical function consisteth in the promulgation, confirraation, and perpetuation of the doctrine containing the will of God for the salvation of man. And the perfect administration of this office must be attributed unto Jesus. " For no man hath seen God at any time ; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him" (John i. 18). He gave unto the apostles the words which His Father gave Him (John xvn. 8-14) : therefore He hath revealed the perfect will of God. The confirmation of this doctrine cannot be denied Him, Article- II. 119 who lived a most innocent and holy life to persuade it, for " He did no sin, neither was guUe found in His mouth" (i Peter U. 2z);_ who wrought most powerful and divine works to confirm it, and was thereby known to be "a Teacher from God" (John iii. 2); who»died a most painful and shameful death to ratify it, witnessing a good profession before Pontius Pilate (i Tira. vi. 13); which in itself unto that purpose efficacious, was made more evidently operative in *he raising of Himself from death. The propagation and perpetual succession of this doctrine must likewise be attributed unto Jesus, as to no teraporary or accidental prophet, but as to Him who instituted and instructed all who have any relation to that function. For the " Spirit of Christ was in the prophets " (i Peter i. ri) ; and "when He ascended up on high. He gave gifts unto men." For " He gave sorae apostles, and sorae prophets, and sorae pastors and teachers, for the.perfecting of the saints, for the work of the rainistry, for the edifying of the body of Christ" (Eph. iv. 8-1 1). It is then raost apparent that Jesus was so far the Christ, as that He was anointed to the pro phetical office, because His preparation for that office was most remarkable. His mission unto that office was undeniable. His administration of that office was infallible. Now as Jesus was anointed with the unction of Elisha to the prophetical, so was He also with the unction of Aaron to the sacerdotal office. Not that He was called after the order of Aaron : " For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah, of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood" (Heb. vii 14); but affer a more ancient order, according to the predic tion of the psalmist, " The Lord hath sworn and will not repent. Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec." But though He were of another order, yet whatsoever Aaron did as a Priest was wholly typical, and consequently to be fulfilled by .the Messias, as He was a Priest. For the priesthood did not begin in Aaron, but was translated and conferred upon his faraily, be fore his consecration. We read of " the priests which came near the Lord " (Ex. xix. 22) ; of " young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt-offerings, and sacrificed peace-offerings of oxen unto the Lord " (Ex. xxiv. 5) ; which, without question, were no other than the first-born to whom the priesthood did belong. Jesus therefore as the first-begotten of God, was by right a Priest, and being anointed unto that office, performed every function, by way of oblation, intercession, and benediction. " Every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices : wherefore it is of 120 An Exposition of the Creed. necessity that this Man, Jesus," if He be an high priest, " have sottiewhat also to offer " (Heb. viii. 3). Not that He had any thing beside Himself, or that there was any peculiar sacrifice allowed to this Priest, to whora "when He coraeth into the world, He saith. Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not, but a body hast thou prepared Me " (Heb. x. 5) ; and " by the offering of this body of Jesus Christ are we sanctified" (Heb. x. 10). ¦ For He who is our Priest hath "given Hiraself an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour" (Eph. v. 2). Now when Jesus had thus given Himself a propitiatory sacrifice for sin. He ascended up on high, and entered into the holy of holies not made with hands, and there appeared before God as an atonement for our sin. Nor is He prevalent only in His own oblation once offered, but in His constant intercession. " Who is He that condemneth ? " saith the apostle, " It is Christ that died, yea rather that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us " (Rom. viii. 34). Upon this foundation He builds our persuasion, that " He is able also to save thera to the uttermost that come unto God by Him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them '' (Heb. vii. 25). Nor must we look upon this as a servile or precarious, but rather as an efficacious and glorious intercession, as of Him to whom all power is given both in heaven and earth. Beside these offerings and intercedings, there was something more required of the priest, and that is blessing. " Aaron was separated that he should sanctify the most holy things, he and his sons for ever, to burn incense before the Lord, to minister unto Him, and to bless in His name for ever" (i Chron. xxih. 13). We read of no other sacerdotal act performed by Melchisedec the priest of the most high God, but only thaj; of blessing, and that in respect both of God and man : first, he blessed raan and said, " Blessed be Abraham of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth ; " then, "Blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thine hand" (Gen. xiv. 19, 20). Nowit is observable what the rabbins have delivered, that at the raorning sacrifice, the priests under the Law did bless the people with the soleran form of benediction, but at the evening sacrifice they blessed them not ; to show that in the evening of the world, the last days, which are the days of the Messias, the benediction of the Law should cease, and the blessing of the Christ take place. When Zachariah the priest, the father of John Baptist the fore runner of our Saviour, "executed his office before God, in the Article II. 121 order of his course," and the " whole multitude of the people waited for him," to receive his benediction, " he could not speak unto them" (Luke i. 8, 21, 22), for he was dumb; shewing the power of benediction was now passing to another and far greater Priest, even to Jesus, whose doctrine in the mount begins with " Blessed :" who, when He left His disciples, " lift up His hands, and blessed thera " (Luke xxiv. 50). And yet this function is principally performed after His resurrection, as it is written, " Unto you first, God having raised up His Son Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning every one of you from his iniquities." It cannot, then, be denied that Jesus, who offered up Himself a raost perfect sacrifice and oblation for sin, who still maketh continual intercession for us, who was raised from the dead that He raight bless us with an everlasting benediction, is a most true and most perfect Priest. The third office belonging to the Messias was the regal, as appeareth by the most ancient tradition of the Jews, and by the express predictions of the prophets. " Yet have I set my king," saith the Psalmist, " upon my holy hill of Zion " (Ps. ii. 6). " Unto us a chUd is born, unto us a Son is given, and the government shall be upon His shoulder " (Isa. ix. 6), saith the prophet Isaiah, who calleth Him " The Prince of Peace," shewing the perpetuity of His power, and particularity of His seat. " Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end upon the throne of David, and upon His kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever" (Isa. ix. 7). All which most certainly belongs unto our Jesus, by the unerring interpretation of the angel Gabriel, who promised the blessed Virgin that the Lord God should give unto her Son " the throne of His father David, and He shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever, and of His kingdom there shall be no end " (Luke i. 32, 33). He acknowledgeth Hiraself this office, though by a strange and unlikely representation of it, the riding on an ass : but by that it was " fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, TeU ye the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and ¦sitting on an ass" (Matt. xxi. 4, 5). He made as strange a confes sion of it unto PUate ; for when he said unto Him, "Art thou a King then ? Jesus answered. Thou sayest that I am a King. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth" (John xvui. 37). The solemn inauguration into this office was at His ascension into heaven, and His session at the right hand of God ; not but that He was by 122 An Exposition of the Creed. right a King before, but the full and public execution was deferred till then, " When God raised Him from the dead, and set Him at His own right hand in the heavenly places, far above aU princi pality, and power, and might, and dominion" (Eph. i. 20, 21). Then He whose " Narae is called the word of God, had on His vesture and on His thigh a name written. King of kings, and Lords of lords " (Rev. xix. 13, 16). This regal office of our Saviour consisteth partly in the ruling, protecting, and rewarding of His people ; partly in the coercing, condemning, and destroying ofhis enemies. First, He ruleth in His own people, by delivering them a law, by which they walk ; by furnishing them with His grace, by which they are enabled to walk in it. Secondly, He protecteth the same, by helping them to subdue their lusts, which reign in their mortal bodies ; by pre serving thera frora the teraptations of the world, the flesh, and the devil ; by supporting them in all their afflictions ; by delivering them from all their enemies. Thirdly, whom He thus ruleth and protecteth here. He rewardeth hereafter in a raost royal raanner, making " them kings and priests unto God and His Father " (Rev. i. 6). On the contrary. He sheweth His regal dominion in the destruction of His enemies, whether they were temporal or spiritual enemies. Teraporal, as the Jews and Romans, who joined together in His crucifixion. While He was on earth He told His disciples, " There be sorae standing here which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of Man coraing in His king dora " (Matt. xvi. 28) : and in that kingdora He was then seen to come, when He brought utter destruction on the Jews by the Roman armies, not long after to be destroyed theraselves. But beside these visible eneraies, there are other spiritual, those which hinder the bringing in of His own people into His Father's king dom, those which refuse to be subject unto Him, and consequently deny Hira to be their King; as all wicked and ungodly men, of whom He has said, " These mine enemies which would not that I should reign over thera, bring hither, and slay them before me " (Luke xix. 27). Thus sin, Satan, and death, being the enemies to His kingdom, shall all be destroyed in their order. " For He must reign till He hath put all enemies under His feet, and the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death " (i Cor. xv. 25, 26). Thus is our Jesus become the " Prince of the kings of the earth ; " thus is the Lamb acknowledged to be " Lord of lords, and King of kings " (Rev. i. 5 ; xvii. 14). Wherefore seeing we have already shewed that the prophetical. Article II. 123 sacerdotal, and regal offices were to belong unto the promised Messias, as the proper end, and immediate effect of His unction ; seeing we have likewise declared how Jesus was anointed to these offices, and has, and doth actually perforra the same in all the functions belonging to_them : there remaineth nothing for the full explication of this particular concerning the Christ, but only to shew the manner of this unction, which is very necessary to be explained. For how they were anointed under the law who were the types of the Messias, is plain and evident, because the raanner was prescribed, and the materials were visible : God appointed an oil to be made, and appropriated it to that use : and the pouring that oil upon the body of any person, was His anointing to that office for which He was designed. But being that oil so appro priated to this use was lost many hundred years before our Saviour's birth, being the custora of anointing in this manner had a long time ceased, being howsoever we never read that Jesus was at all anointed with oil ; it remaineth still worthy our inquiry, how He was anointed, so as to answer to the former unctions ; and what it was which answered to that oil, which then was lost, and was at the first but as a type of this which now we search for. The Jews tell us that the anointing oil was hid in the days of Josiah, and that it shall be found and produced again when the Messias comes, that He may be anointed with it, and the kings and high priests of His days. But though the loss of that oil ' bespake the destruction of that nation, yet the Christ which was to corae needed no such unction for His consecration ; there being as great a difference between the typical and correspondent oil, as between the representing and represented Christ. The prophet David calleth it not by the vulgar narae of oil of unction, but the " oil of gladness " (Ps. xlv. 7). For though that place raay in the first sense be understood of Solomon, whom when Zadoc the priest anointed, " They blew the trurapet, and all the people said, God save King Solomon. And all the people came up after hira, and the people piped with pipes, and rejoiced with great joy, so that the earth rent with the sound of them ; " though from thence it might be said-of him, " Thy God hath anointed thee with the oU of gladness above thy fellows " (i Kings i. 39, 40) : yet being those words are spoken unto God, as well as of God (" therefore God, thy God"), the oil with which that God is anointed, must in the ultimate and highest sense signify a far greater gladness than that at Soloraon's coronation was, even the fountain of all joy and felicity in the Church of God. 124 An Exposition of the Creed. The ancients tell us that this oil is the Divinity itself, and in the language of the Scriptures it is the Holy Ghost. St Peter teacheth us "how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost, and with power." Now though there can be no question but the Spirit is the oil, yet there is some doubt when Jesus was anointed with it. For we know the angel said unto the blessed Virgin, " The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee, therefore also that holy thing which shaU be born of thee shall be called the Son of God " (Luke i. 35). From whence it appeareth that from the conception, or at the incarnation, Jesus was sanctified by the Holy Ghost, "and the power of the Highest ; and so, consequently, as St Peter spake. He "was anointed then with the Holy Ghost and with power." Again, being we read that after He was thirty years of age, the Spirit like "a dove descended and lighted upon Him," and- He, descending " in the power of the Spirit into Galilee," said unto thera of Nazareth, " This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears," meaning that of Isaiah, "TheSpirit ofthe Lord is upon Me, because He hath anointed Me to preach the gospel ; " hence has it been also collected, that His unction was performed at His baptism. Nor need we to contend which of these two was the true time of our Saviour's unction, since neither is destructive of the other, and' consequently both raay weU consist together. David, the most undoubted type of the Messiah, was anointed at Bethlehem, for there " Sarauel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren, and the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward" (i Sam. xvi. 13). Of which unction those words of God raust necessarily be understood, " I have found David, My servant ; with My holy oil have I anointed hira " (Ps. Ixxxix. 20). And yet he was again anointed at Heb ron, first, " over the house of Judah," then over " all the tribes of Israel " (2 Sam. ii. 4 ; v. 3). As therefore David at his first unction received the Spirit of God, and a full right unto the throne of Israel, which yet he was not to exercise till the death of Saul and acceptation of the tribes ; and therefore when the time was corae that he should actually enter upon his regal office, he was again anointed ; so our Jesus, the Son of David, was first sanctified and anointed with the Holy Ghost at His conception, and thereby received a right unto, and was prepared for, all those offices which belonged to the Redeeraer of the world ; but when He was to enter upon the actual and full perforraance of all those functions which belonged to Him, then does the same Spirit Article II. 125 which had sanctified Him at His conception, visibly descend upon Him at His inauguration. And that most properly upon His baptism, because according to the customs of those ancient nations, washing was wont to precede their unctions ; wherefore " Jesus" when He was baptised, went up straightway out of the water, and la the heavens were opened unto Hira, and He saw the Spirit of God descending hke a dove " (Matt. iii. 16). As David sent Soloraon to be anointed at Gihon : frora whence arose that ancient observation of the Rabbins, that " kings were not to be anointed but by a fountain." Now as we have shewed that Jesus was anointed with the Holy Ghost, lest any should deny any such descension to be a proper or sufficient unction, we shall further raake it appear, that the effusion, or action of the Spirit, eminently containeth whatsoever the Jews have imagined to be performed or signified by those legal anointings. Two very good reasons they render, why God did command the use of such anointing oil, as in respect of the action. First, that it might signify the Divine election of that person, and designation to that office, from whence it was neces sary that it should be performed by a prophet, who understood the will of God. Secondly, that by it the person anointed might be made fit to receive the divine influx. For the first, it is evi dent there could be no such infallible sign of the Divine designa tion of Jesus to His offices, as the visible descent of the Spirit, attended with " a voice from heaven," instead of the hand of a prophet, saying, " This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased " (Matt. in. 17). For the second, this spiritual unction was so far from giving less than an aptitude to receive the Divine influx, that it was that Divine influx, nay the Divinity itself, the Godhead dwelling in Hira bodily. In respect of the matter, they give two causes why it was oU, and notanyother liquor. First, because of all other itsignifiesthe greatest glory and excellency. The olive was the first of trees mentioned as fit for sovereignty, in regard of its " fatness, wherewith they honour God and raan" (Judges ix. 9). Therefore it was fit that those persons who were called to a greater dignity than the rest of the Jews, should be consecrated by oil, as the best sign of election to honour. And can there be a greater honour than to be the Son of God, " the beloved Son," as Jesus was proclaimed at this unction, by which He was consecrated to such an office as will obtain Him a name far above all names ? Secondly, they teU us that oil con tinues uncorrupted longer than any other liquor. And indeed it 126 An Exposition ofthe Creed. hath been observed to preserve not only itself, but other things from corruption. Hence they conclude it fit, their kings and priests, whose succession was to continue for ever, should be anointed with oil, the raost proper erablem of etemity. But even by this reason of their own, their unction is ceased, being the succession of their kings and priests is long since cut. off, and their eternal and eternising oil lost long before ; and only that one Jesus, who was anointed with the most spiritual oil, " continueth for ever," and therefore " hath an unchangeable priesthood," as being 'made " not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life" (Heb. vii. 24, 16). Besides, they observe that simple oil without any mixture was sufficient for the candlestick, but that which was designed for unction must be corapounded with principal spices, which signify a good narae, always to be acquired by those in places of greatest dignity, by the most laudable and honourable actions. And certainly never was such an adraixtion of spices, as in the unction of our Saviour, by which He was endued with all variety of the graces of God, by which He was enabled to " offer Himself a sacrifice fdr a sweet-smeUing savour." For as " He was full of grace and truth ; " so " of His fulness have we all received, grace for grace" (John i. 16) : and as we "have received anointing of Hira" (i John n. 27) ; so we "are unto God a sweet savour of Christ" (2 Cor. h. 15). Again, it was sufficient to anoint the vessels of the sanctuary in any part, but it was particularly coraraanded that the oU should be poured upon the head of the kings and priests, as the seat of all the animal faculties, the fountain of all dignity, and original of all the members of the body. This was more eminently fulfilled in Jesus, who by His unction, or as Christ, became the " head of the Church ;" nay the " head of all principaUty and power, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God" (Col.ii 10, 19). Lastly, they observe, that though in the vessels nothing but a single unction was required, yet in the kings and priests there was commanded, or at least practised, both unction and affusion, (as it is written " He poured of the anointing oU upon Aaron's head, and anointed him to sanctify him," Lev. viu. 12); the first to signify their separation, the second to assure them of the falling of the spirit upon them. Now, what more clear than that our Christ was anointed by affusion, whether we look upon His con- Article II. 12/ ception, " the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee ; " or His inauguration, "the Spirit descended and lighted upon Him"? And thus, according unto all particulars required by the Jews themselves to complete their legal ^ unctions, we have sufficiently shewed that Jesus was, as most eminently, so most properly, anointed with the Spirit of God. Wherefore being we have shewn that a Messias was to come into the world ; being we have proved that He is already come, by the same predictions by which we believe He was to come ; being we have demonstrated that Jesus born in the days of Herod, was, and is, that proraised Messias ; being we have further declared that He was anointed to those offices which belonged to the Messias, and actually did and doth still perform them all ; and that His anointing was by the immediate affusion of the Spirit, which answereth fully to all things required in the legal and typical unction: I cannot see what further can be expected for explication or confirmation of this truth, that " Jesus is the Christ." The necessity of believing this part of the Article is most apparent, because it were impossible He should be our Jesus except He were the Christ. For He could not reveal the way of salvation, except He were a Prophet ; He could not work out that salvation revealed, except He were a Priest ; He could not confer that salvation upon us, except He were a King ; He could not be a Prophet, Priest, and King, except He were "the Christ." This was the fundamental doctrine which the apostles not only testified, as they did that of the resurrection, but argued, proved, and demon strated put of the Law and the Prophets. We find St Paul at Thessalonica " three Sabbath days reasoning with them out of the scriptures, opening and alleging that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead, and that this Jesus whom I preach unto you, is Christ " (Acts xvii. 2, 3). We find him again at Corinth "pressed in spirit, and testifying to the Jews that Jesus was Christ " (Acts xviii. 5). Thus Apollos, by birth a Jew, but instructed in the Christian faith by Aquila and Priscilla, " mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, shewing by the scriptures, that Jesus was Christ" (Acts xviii. 28). This was the touchstone by which all raen at first were tried, whether they were Christian or Antichristian. " For whosoever believeth," saith St John, "that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God." What greater commendation of the assertion of this truth ? " Who is a liar," saith the same apostle "but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? this man is the Antichrist, as denying the Father and the Son.'' What higher cpndemnation of the negation of it ? 128 An Exposition of the Creed. Secondly, as it is necessary to be believed as a most funda mental truth, so it has as necessary an influence upon our conversations, because except it hath so, it cannot clearly be main tained. Nothing can be more absurd in a disputant than to pretend to demonstrate a truth as infallible, and at the sarae time to shew it irapossible. And yet so doth every, one who professeth faith in Christ already come, and liveth not according to that pro fession : for thereby he proveth, as far as he is able, that the true Christ is not yet come, at least that Jesus is not he. We sufficiently demonstrate to the Jews that our Saviour, who did and suffered so much, is the true Messias ; but by bur Uves we recall our arguments, and strengthen their wilful opposition. For there was certainly a promise, that when Christ should corae, " the wolf should dwell with the lamb, and the leopard should lie down with the kid, and the calf, and the young lion and the falling together, and a httle child should lead thera " (Isa. xi. 6) : that is, there should be so much love, unaniraity, and brotherly kindness in the kingdom of Christ, that all ferity and inhumanity being laid aside, the most different natures and inclinations should come to the sweetest harraony and agreement. Whereas if we look upon ourselves, we must confess there was never more bitter ness of spirit, raore rancour of raalice, more heat of contention, raore manifest symptoms of envy, hatred, and all uncharitableness, than in those who make profession of the Christian faith. It was infallibly foretold, that " when the law should go forth out of Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem, they should beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruninghooks : nation should not lift up sword against nation, neither should they learn war any more " (Isa. ii. 4). Whereas there is no other art so much studied, so much applauded, so violently asserted, not only as lawful, but as necessary. Look upon the face of Christen dora divided into several kingdoms and principalities ; what are all these, but so many public enemies, either exercising or design ing war ? The Church was not more famous, or did more increase by the first blood which was shed in the primitive times, through the external violence of ten persecutions, than now it is infamous, and declines through constant violence, fraud, and rapine, through public engagements of the greatest empires in arms, through civil andjintestine wars, and, lest any way of shedding Christian blood should be unassayed, even by massacres. It was likewise pro phesied of the days of the Messias, that all idolatry should totally cease, that all false teachers should be cut off, and unclean Articlfi II. 129 spirits restrained. And can we think that the Jews, who really abhor tbe thoughts of worshipping an image, can ever be per suaded there is no idolatry comraitted in the Christian Church? Or can we excuse ourselves in the least degree from the plague of the locusts of Egypt, the false teachers ? Can so mariy schisms and sects arise and spread? can so many heresies be acknow ledged and countenanced, without false prophets, and unclean spirits ? If then we would return to the bond of true Christian love and charity, if we would appear true lovers of peace and tranquUUty, if we would truly hate the abominations of idolatry, false doctrine, and heresy, let us often remember what we ever profess in our Creed, that Jesus is " the Christ," that the kingdom of the Messias cannot consist with these impieties. -^ Thirdly, the necessity of this belief appeareth in respect of those offices which belong to Jesus, as He is the Christ. "We must look upon Him as upon the Prophet anointed by God to preach the Gospel, that we may be incited to hear and embrace His doctrine. Though Moses and Elias be together with Him in the Mount, yet the voice from heaven speaks of none but Jesus, " hear ye Him " (Matt, xvii's). He is that Wisdom, the " delight of God," crying in the Proverbs, " Blessed is the man that heareth Me, watching daily at My gates, waiting at the posts of My doors " (Prpv. vui. 34). " There is pne thing needful," saith our Saviour, "and Mary chose that good part, who sat at Jesus' feet, and heard His word" (Luke x. 39, 42). Which devout posture teacheth us as a willing ness to hear, so a readiness to obey : and the proper effect which the behef of this prophetical office worketh in us, is our "obedience of faith." We must farther consider Him as our High Priest, that we may thereby add confidence to that obedience. For we have " boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus ; " yea, " having an high priest over the house of God, we may draw near with a tme heart in full assurance of faith" (Heb, x. 19, 21, 22). And as this breedeth an adherence and assurance in us, so it requireth a resignation of us. For if Christ have redeemed us, we are His ; if He died for us, it was that we should live to Him ; if we be " bought with a price," we are no longer our own ; but we must " glorify God in our body, and in our spirit, which are God's" (i Cor. vi. 20). Again, an apprehension of Him as a - King is necessary for the perforraance of our true and entire allegiance to Him. " Send the larab of the ruler of the earth " (Isa. xvi. i), do Him homage, acknowledge Him your king, shew yourselves faithful and obedient subjects. We can pretend, and 130 An Exposition ofthe Creed. He hath required, no less. As soon as He let the apostles under stand that " AU 'power was given' unto Him in heaven and in earth," He charged them to " teach aU nations, to observe all things whatsoever He commanded them" (Matt, xxviu. 18-20). Can we imagine He should so strictly enjoin subjection to " higher powers," the highest of whora are here below, and that He does not expect exact obedience to Hira who is exalted " far above aU principalities and powers, and is set down at the right hand of God " ? It is observable, that, in the description of the coming of the Son of Man, it is said, " The King shall say unto them on His right hand. Come, ye blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdora prepared for you " (Matt. xxv. 34) : which title, as it secures our hope, in respect of His power ; as it magnifies our reward>y the excellency of our inheritance : so also it teaches us the indispens able condition of obedience. Fourthly, the belief of Jesus the Christ isnecessary to instruct us what it is to be a Christian, and how far we stand obliged by owning that name. Those whp did first embrace the faith were styled " disciples " (as when the " number of disciples was multi plied "), or " believers," or " brethren," or " men of the Church," or " callers upon the narae of Christ," or " men of the way," or by their enemies " Nazarenes " and " GaUleans." But in a short time they gained a name derived from their Saviour, though not from that name of His which signifies salvation ; for from Christ they were caUed " Christians." A title so honourable, and of such con cernment, that St Luke hath thought fit to mention the city in which that name first was heard. " And the disciples were called Christians first at Antioch," as the Scriptures assure us ; so named by Euodius the bishop of that place, as ecclesiastical history in forms us. A name no sooner invented, but embraced by all be-^ lievers, as bearing the raost proper signification of their profession, and relation to the Author and Master whom they served. In which the primitive Christians so much delighted, that before the face of their enemies they would acknowledge no other title but that, though hated, revUed, tormented, martyred for it. Nor is this name of greater honour to us than of obligation. There are two parts of the seal of the foundation of God, and one of them is this, " Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart frora iniquity" (2 Tim. ii. 19). It was a coraraon answer of the ancient martyrs, " I am a Christian, and with us no evil is done." The very name was thought to speak something of emendation ; and whosoever put it on, became the better man. Except such Article II. 131 reformation accompany our profession, there is no advantage in the appellation; nor can we be honoured by that title, while we dishonour Him that gives it. If He be therefore caUed Christ, because anointed ; as we derive the name of Christian, so do we receive our unction from Him. For as " the precious ointment upon the head ran down upon the beard, even Aaron's beard, and went down to the skirts of his garments " (Ps. cxxxui. 2) : so the Spirit which without measure was poured upon Christ our Head, is by Him diffused through all the members of His body. For " God hath established and anointed us in Christ" (2 Cor. i. 21): "We have an unction from the Holy One, and the anointing which we have received frorn Him-abideth in us " (i John ii. 20, 27). Necessary then it cannot choose but be, that we should know Jesus to be the Christ: because as He is Jesus, that is, our Saviour, by being Christ, that is, anointed ; so we can have no share in Him. as Jesus, -except we become truly Christians, and so be in Him as Christ, anointed with that unction from the Holy One. Thus having run through all the particulars at first designed for the explication of the title " Christ," we may at last clearly ex press, and every Christian easily understand, what it is we say when we make our confession in these words, " I believe in Jesus Christ." I do assent unto this as a certain truth, that there was a Man promised by God, foretold by the prophets to be the Messias, the Redeemer of Israel, and the expectation of the nations. I am fully assured by all those predictions that the Messias so promised is already come. I ara as certainly persuaded, that the Man born in - the days of Herod of the Virgin Mary, by an angel from heaven called Jesus, is that true Messias, so long, so often pro mised : that, as the Messias, He was anointed to three especial offices, belonging to Him as the Mediator between God and man : that He was a Prophet, revealing unto us the whole will of God for the salvation of man ; that He was a Priest, and hath given Himself a sacrifice for sin, and so hath made an atonement for us ; that He is a King set down at the right hand of God, far above all principalities and powers, whereby when He hath subdued all our enemies. He will confer actual, perfect, and eter nal happiness upon us. I believe this unction by which He be came the true Messias, was not performed by-any material oil, but by the Spirit of God, which He received as the Head, and con veyeth to His members. And in this ftdl acknowledgment " I believe in Jesus Christ." E 2 132 An E.xposition of the Creed, His only Son. After our Saviour's nomination immediately followeth His fiUa- tion : and ^justly, after we have acknowledged Him to be " the Christ," do we confess Him to be the "Son of God;" because these two were ever inseparable, and even by the Jews themselves accounted equivalent. Thus Nathanael, that true Israelite, maketh his confession of the Messias : " Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God, Thou art the King of Israel " (John i. 49). Thus Martha makes expression of her faith : " I believe that "Thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world " (John xi. 27). Thus the high priest maketh his inquisition : " I adjure Thee by the living God, that Thou tell us whether Thou be the Christ, the Son of God" (Matt. xxvi. 63). This was the famous confession of St Peter : " We believe and are sure that Thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God " (John vi. 69). And the Gospel of St John was therefore written, that "we raight believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God" (John xx. 31). Certain then it is that all the Jews, as they looked for a Messias to come, so they believed that Messias to be the Son of God, (although since the coming of our Saviour they have denied it) ; and that by reason of a constant interpretation of the second Psalm, as appropriated unto Him. And the primitive Christians did at the very beginning include this filial title of our Saviour together with His names into the compass of one word. Well therefore, after we have expressed our faith in Jesus Christ, is added that which always had so great affinity with it, the " only Son of God." In these words there is little variety to be observed, except-that what we translate the " only Son," that in the phrase of the Scrip ture and the Greek Church, is the " only-begotten." It is then sufficient for the explication of these wprds, to shew how Christ is the Son of God, and what is the peculiarity of His generation ; that when others are also the sons of God, He alone should so be His Son, as no other is or can be so : and therefore He alone should have the name of the " only-begotten." First then, it cannot be denied that Christ is the " Son of God," for that reason, because He was by the Spirit of God born of the Virgin Mary ; " for that which is conceived " (or " begotten ") " in her," by the testiraony of an angel, " is of the Holy Ghost ; " and because of Hira, therefore the Son of God. For so spake the angel to the Virgin : " The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee : therefore also Article II. 133 that holy thing which shall be born of thee " (or " which is be gotten of thep ") " shall be called the Son of God." And the reason is clear, because that the Holy Ghost is God. For were He any Creature, and not God Himself, by whom our Saviour was thus born of the Virgin, He must have been the Son of a creature, not of God. Secondly, it is as undoubtedly true, that the same Christ thus born of the Virgin by the Spirit of God, was designed to so high an office by the special and immediate will of God, that by virtue thereof He raust be acknowledged the "Son of God." He urgeth this argument Himself against the Jews. " Is it not written in your law, I said ye are gods? " (John x. 34-36). Are not these the very words of the eighty-second psalm ? " If He called them gods," if God Himself so spoke, or the Psalmist from Him, if this be the language of the Scripture, if they be caUed gods, " unto whom the word of God came," ("and the Scripture cannot be broken," nor the authority thereof in any particular denied :) " Say ye of Him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world," whom He hath consecrated and comraissioned to the most eminent and extraordinary office, " say ye of Him, thou blaspheraest, because I said, I ara the Son of God ? " Thirdly, Christ must therefore be acknowledged the " Son of God," because He is raised iraraediately by God out of the earth unto imraortal life. For " God hath fulfilled the promise unto us, in that He hath raised up Jesus again ; as it is also -written in the second psalm. Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee " (Acts xiii. 33). The grave is as the womb of the earth ; Christ who is raised from thence, is, as it were, begotten to another life ; and God who raised Him, is His Father. So true it raust needs be of Him, which is spoken of others, who are " the children of God, being the children of the resurrection " (Luke xx. 36). Thus was He "defined" or " constituted," and " appointed the Sort of God with powpr by the resurrection from the dead " (Rom. i. 4) : ¦ neither is He called simply the first that rose, but with a note of generation, "the first-born from the dead" (Col. i. r8). Fourthly, Christ, after His resurrection from the dead, is made actually Heir of all things in His Father's house, and Lord of all the Spirits which miriister unto Him, from whence He also hath the title of the "Son of God." "He is set 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 raore exceUent name than they. For unto which of the angels said He at any time. 134 An Exposition of the Creed. Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee ? " (Heb. i. 3-5). From all which testimonies of the Scripture it is evident, that Christ hath this fourfold right to the title of "the Son of God:" by generation, as begotten of God ; by commission, as sent by Him ; by resurrection, as the first-born; by actual possession, as heir of all. But besides these four, we must find yet a raore peculiar ground of our Saviour's filiation, totally distinct from any which belongs to the rest of the sons of God, that He may be clearly and fully acknowledged the "only-begotten Son." For although to be born of a Virgin be in itself miraculous, and justly entitles Christ unto the name of "Son of God;" yet is it not so far above the production of all mankind, as to place Him in that singular eminence which must be attributed to the only-begotten. We read of Adam " the son of God " (Luke iii. 38), as well as Seth the son of Adara : and surely the framing Christ out of a woman cannot so far transcend the making Adam out of the earth, as to cause so great a distance as we must believe between the first and the second Adam. Besides, there were many while our Saviour preached on earth who did believe His doctrine, and did confess Him to be the " Son of God," who in all probability understood nothing pf His being born of a Virgin ; much less did they foresee His rising from the dead, or inheriting all things. Wherefore supposing all these ways by which Christ is represented to us as the " Son of God," we shall find out one more yet, far more proper in itself, and more peculiar unto Him, in which no other son can have the least pretence of share or of similitude, and consequently in respect of which we must confess Him the " only-begotten." "To which purpose I observe, that the actual possession of His inheritance, which was our fourth title' to His sonship, pre supposeth His resurrection> which was the third : and His com mission to His office, which was the second, presupposeth His generation of a virgin, as the first. But I shaU now endeavour to .find another generation, by which the same Christ was begotten, and consequently a Son, before he was conceived in the Virgin's womb. Which that I may be able to evince, I shall proceed in this following method, as not only most facUe and perspicuous, but also most convincing and conclusive. First, I will clearly prove out of the Holy Scriptures, that Jesus Christ, born of the Virgin Mary, had an actual being or subsistence before the Holy Ghost did corae upon the Virgin, or the power ofthe Highest did overshadow her. Secondly, I will demonstrate frora the sarae Scriptures, that the being which He had antecedently to His con- Article 11. \Z1, ception in-the Virgin's wpmb, was npt any created being, but essentially Divine. Thirdly, we will shew that the Divine essence which He had. He received as Communicated to Him by the Father. Fourthly, we will declare this communication of the Divine nature to be a proper generation, by which He who com- municateth is a proper Father, and He to whom it is coraraunicated a proper Son. Lastly, we will raanifest that the Divine essence was never coraraunicated in that manner to any person but to Him, that never any was so begotten besides Himself, and con sequently, in respect of that Divine generation. He is most pro perly and perfectly " the only begotten Son of the Father." , As for the first, that Jesus Christ had a real being or existence, by which He truly was, before He was conceived of the Virgin Mary, I thus demonstrate. He who was really in heaven, and truly descended from thence, and came into the world from the Father, before that which was begotten of the Virgin ascended into, heaven or went unto the Father, He had a real being or existence before He was conceived in the Virgin, and distinct from that being which was "conceived in her. This is most clear and evident, upon these two suppositions not to be denied : first, that what was begotten of the Virgin had its first being here on earth, and therefore could not really be in heaven tUl it ascended thither; secondly, that what was really in heaven, really was, because nothing can be present in any place, which is not. Upon these suppositions certainly true, the first proposition can not be denied. Wherefore I assume. Jesus Christ was really in heaven, and truly descended from thence, and came into the world from the Father, before that which was begotten of the Virgin ascended into heaven, or went unto the Father ; as I shall particularly prove by the express words of the Scripture. There fore I conclude, that Jesus Christ had a real being or existence before He was conceived in the Virgin, and distinct from that being which was conceived in her. Now that He was really in heaven before He ascended thither, appears by His own words to His disciples. "What and if you shall see the Son of Man ascend up where He was before?" (John vi. 62). For He speaks of a real ascension, such as was to be seen or looked upon, such as they "might view as spectators. The place to which that ascension tended, was truly and really the heaven of heavens. The verb substantive, not otherwise used, sufficiently testifies not a figurative but a real being, especially considering the opposition in the word " before." Whether we look upon the time of speaking, 136 An Exposition ofthe Creed. then p'resent, or the time of His ascension, then to come. His being or existing in heaven was " before." Nor is this now at last denied, that He was in heaven before the ascension mentioned in these words, but that He was there before He ascended at all. We shall therefore farther shew that this ascension was the first; that what was born of the Virgin was never in heaven before this time of which He speaks ; and being in heaven before this ascension. He must be acknowledged to have been there before He ascended at all. If Christ had ascended into heaven before His death, and descended- from thence, it had been the most remarkable action in all His life, and the proof thereof of the greatest efficacy toward the disseminating of the gospel. And can we imagine so divine an action of so high concernment could have passed, and none of the evangelists ever make mention of it? Those who are so diligent in the description of His nativity and circuracision. His oblation in the temple. His reception by Simeon, His adoration by the wise men; those who have de scribed His descent into Egypt ; would they have omitted His ascent - into heaven ? Do they tell us of the wisdom which He shewed when He disputed with the doctors ; and were it not worthy our knowledge whether it were before He was in heaven or after ? The diligent seeking of Joseph and Mary, and her words when they found him, " Son, why hast thou dealt so with Us " ? (Luke ii. 48), shew that He had not been missing from them tUl then, and consequently not ascended into heaven. After that He went down to Nazareth, and " was subject to them : " and I understand not how He should ascend into heaven, and at the same time be subject to them, or there receive His commission and instructions as the great Legate of God, or Ambassador frora heaven, and return again unto His old subjection ; and afterwards to go to John to be baptised of him, and to expect the descent of the Spirit for His inauguration. Immediately frora Jordan He is carried into the wUderness to be terapted of the devU : and it were strange if any tirae could then be found for His ascension ; for "He was forty days in the wilderness" (Mark i. 13), and certainly heaven is no such kind of place ; He was all that time "with the beasts," who undoubtedly are none of the celestial hierarchy ; " and tempted of Satan " whose dominion reaches no higher than the" air. Wherefore in those forty days Christ ascended not into heaven, but rather heaven descended unto Him, for "the angels ministered unto Him" (Mark i. 13). After this "He returned in the power ofthe Spirit into Galilee " (Luke iv. 14), Article II. 137 and there exercised His prophetical office : after which there is not the least pretence of any reason for His ascension. Besides, the whole frame of this antecedent or preparatory ascension of Christ is not only raised without any written testimony of the word, or un written testimony of tradition, but is without any reason in itself, and contrary to the revealed way of our rederaption. Forwhat reason should Christ ascend into heaven to know the will of God, and not be known to ascend thither? Certainly the Father could reveal His will unto the Son as well on earth as in heaven. And if men must be ignorant of His ascension, to what purpose should they say He ascended, except they imagine either an impotency in the Father, or dissatisfaction in the Son? Nor is this only asserted without reason, but also against that rule to be observed by Christ, as He was anointed to the sacerdotal office. For the holy of hohes "made with hands" was the "figure of the true" (that is, " heaven itself"), into which the " high priest alone went once every year ; " and Christ as our High Priest " entered in once into the holy place" (Heb. ix. 24). If then they deny Christ was a Priest before He " preached the Gospel," then did He not enter into heaven, because the high priest alone went into the type thereof, the holy of holies. If they confess He was, then did He not ascend till after His death, because He was to enter in but once, and that not without blood. Wherefore being Christ ascended not into heaven till after His death, being He certainly was in heaven before that ascension, we have sufficiently made good that part of our arguraent, that Jesus Christ was in heaven before that which was begotten of the "Yirgin ascended thither. Now that ¦which followeth will both illustrate and confirm it ; for as He was there, so He descended from thence before He ascended thither. This He often testifieth and inculcateth of Himself " The bread of God is He which cometh down from heaven;" and, "I am the living bread which came down from heaven" (John vi 33, 51). He opposeth Himself unto the manna in the wilderness, which never was really in heaven, or had its original frora thence. "Moses gave you not that ,bread from heaven " (John vi. 3 2) : but the Father gave Christ really from thence. Wherefore He saith, " I came down from heaven, not to do Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me "(John vi. 38). Now never any person upon any occasion is said to descend from heaven, but such as were really there before they appeared on earth, as the Father, the Holy Ghost, and the angels; but no man, however born, however sanctified, sent, or dignified, is said thereby to descend 138 An Exposition of the Creed. from thence; but rather when any is opposed to Christ, -the opposition is placed in this very origination. John the Baptist was " filled with the Holy Ghost even from his mother's womb " (Luke i. 15) ; born of an aged father and a barren mother, by the. power of God : and yet he distinguished himself from Christ in this : " He that coraeth from above is above all ; he that is of of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth ; He that cometh from heaven is above all" (John hi. 31). Adam was fraraed iraraediately by God, without the intervention of man or woman ; and yet he is so far from being thereby from heaven, that even in that he is distinguished from the second Adam. For " the first man is of the earth, earthy, the second man is the l>ord from -, heaven" (i Cor. xv. 47). "Wherefore the descent of Christ from heaven doth really presuppose His being there, and that ante cedently to any ascent thither. For "that He ascended, what is it, but that He also descended first ? " (Eph. iv. 9). So St Paul, asserting a descent as necessarUy preceding His ascension, teacheth us never to imagine an ascent of Christ as His first motion between heaven and earth; and consequently, that the first being or existence which Christ had, was not what He re ceived by His conception here on earth, but what He had before in heaven, in respect whereof He was with the Father, from whom he came. His disciples beheved that He "came out from God," and He commended that faith, and confirmed the object of it by this assertion : " I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world ; again I leave the world, and go to the Father " (John xvi. 27, 28). Thus, having by undoubted testiraonies, raade good the latter part of the argument, I may safely conclude, that being Christ was really in heaven; and descended from thence, and came forth from the Father, before that which was conceived of the Holy Ghost ascended thither; it cannot with any show of reason be denied that Christ had a real being and existence antecedent unto His conception here on earth, and distinct from the being which He received here. T' Secondly, we shall prove not only a bare priority of existence, but a pre-existence of some certain and acknowledged space of duration. For wbosoever was before John the Baptist, and before Abraham, was some space of time before Christ was man. This no man can deny, because all must confess the blessed Virgin was first saluted by the angel six months after Elizabeth conceived, and many hundred years after Abraham died. But Jesus Christ was reaUy existent before John the Baptist, and before Abraham, as we Article II. 139 shall make good by the testimony of the Scriptures. Therefore it cannot be denied but Christ had a real being and existence some space of time before He was made man. For the first, it is the express testimony of John himself : " This is He of whom I spake. He that coraetli 'after me is preferred before rae, for He was_ before me" (John i. 15). In which words, first, he taketh to ' himself a priority of time, speaking of Christ, " He that cometh after me: " for so He came after him into the womb, at His con ception ; into the world, at His nativity ; unto His office, at His baptism ; always after John, and at the same distance. Secondly, He attributeth unto Christ a priority of dignity, saying, "He is pre-- ferred before me ; " as appears from the reiteration of these words : " He it fs who coming after me, is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose " (John i. 27). The addi tion of which expression of his unworthiness sheweth, that to " be^ preferred before him " is the same with being " worthier than he,"~ to which the sarae expression is constantly added by all the other three evangeUsts. Thirdly, he rendereth the reason Pr cause of that-- great dignity which belonged to Christ, saying, "for," or rather, , " because He was before me." And being the cause must be sup posed different and distinct frora the effect, therefore the priority : last mentioned cannot be that of dignity. For to assign anything as the cause or reason of itself is a great absurdity, and the expres sion of it a vain tautology. Wherefore that priority must have relation to time or duration (as the very tense, " He was before me," sufficiently signifies), and so be placed in opposition to His coming after him. As if John the Baptist had thus spoke at large : This" man Christ Jesiis, who came into the world, and entered on His pro- , phetical office six months after me, is notwithstanding of far more worth and greater dignity than I am ; even so much greater, that I must acknowledge myself unworthy to stoop down and unloose the- latchet of His shoes : and the reason of tliis transcendent dignity" is from the excellency of that nature which He had before I was ; for though He cometh after rae, yet He was before me. Now as Christ was before John, which speaks a small, so was He also before Abrahara, which speaks a larger time. Jesus Himself hath asserted this pre-existence to the Jews : " Verily, verily, I say unto you. Before Abraham was, I am" (John viii. 58). Which words plainly and literally expounded, must evidently contain this truth. For, first, "Abraham" in all theScriptures never has any other signi- , fication than such as denotes the person called by that name ; and the question to which these words are directed by way of answer, 140 An Exposition ofthe Creed, without controversy, spake of the sarae person. Besides Abraham must be the subject of that proposition, " Abraham was ; " because a proposition cannot be without a subject, and if Abraham be the predicate, there is none. Again, as we translate "Abraham was," in a tense signifying the time past, so it is most certainly to be understood, because that which He speaks unto is the pre- existence of Abraham, and that of long duration : so that whatso ever had concerned his present estate or future condition, had been wholly impertinent to the precedent question. Lastly, the expression " I ara," seeraing something unusual or improper to signify a priority in respect of any thing past, because no present instant is before that which precedes, but that which foUows : yet the use of it sufficiently maintaineth, and the nature of the place absolutely requireth, that it should not here denote a present being, but a priority of existence, together with a continuation of it till the present time. And then the words will plainly signify thus much. Do you question how I could see Abraham,' who am not yet fifty years old ? Verily, verily, I say unto you, before ever Abraham, the person whom you speak of, was born, I had a real being and existence (by which I was capable of the sight of him), in which I have continued until now. In this sense certainly the Jews understood our Saviour's answer as pertinent to their question, but in their opinion blasphemous, and therefore " they took up stones to cast at Him." This literal and plain explication is yet farther necessary ; because those which once recede from it, do not only wrest and pervert the place, but also invent and suggest an answer un worthy of, and wholly misbecoming Him that spake it. For (setting aside the addition, of the "light, of the world," which there can be no show of reason to admit) ; whether they interpret the former part (" before Abraham was ") of something to come, as the calling of the Gentiles, or the latter (" I am ") of a pre- existence in the Divine foreknowledge and appointment; they represent Christ with a great asseveration highly and strongly asserting that ^hich is nothing to the purpose to which He speaks, nothing to any other purpose at all : and they propound the Jews senselessly offended and foolishly exasperated with those. words, which any of them might have spoken as well as He. For the first interpretation makes our Saviour thus to speak. Do ye so rauch wonder how I should " have seen Abraham " who am " not yet fifty years old " ? do ye imagine so great a cpntradiction in this ? I tell you, and be ye most assured that what I speak unto Article II. 141 you at this time is mPst .certainly and infallibly true, find raost worthy of your observation, which moves Me not to deliver it with out this solemn asseveration (" Verily, verily, I say unto you ") be fore Abraham shall perfectly become that which was signified in his name, "the father of many nations," before the Gentiles shall corae in, " I am." Nor be ye troubled at this answer, or think in this I magnify Myself : for what I speak is as true of you as it is of me ; before Abraham be thus raade Abraham, ye are. Doubt ye not, therefore, as ye did, nor ever make that question again, whether I "have seen Abrahara." The second explication makes a sense of another nature, but with the same impertinency. " Do ye continue still to question, and that with so much admiration ? do ye look upon My age, and ask ' hast Thou seen Abraham ? ' I confess it is more than eighteen hundred years since that patriarch died, and less than forty since I was born at Bethlehem ; but look not on this coraputation, for before Abrahara was born, I was. But mistake Me not, I mean in the foreknowledge and decree of God. Nor do I magnify Myself in this, for ye were so." How either of these answers should give any reasonable satisfaction to the question, or the least occasion of the Jews' exasperation, is not to be understood. And that our Saviour should speak any such impertinencies as these interpretations bring forth, is not by a Christian to be conceived. "Wherefore being the plain and most obvious sense is a proper and full answer to the question, and most likely to exasperate the unbelieving Jews ; being those strained explications render the words of Christ not only im pertinent to the occasion, but vain and useless to the hearers of them; being our Saviour ga've this answer in words of another language, most probably incapable of any such interpretations ; we must adhere unto that literal sense already delivered, by which it appeareth Christ had a being, as before John, so also before Abraham (not only before Abram became Abraham, but before Abraham was Abrara), and consequently that He did exist two thousand years before He was born, or conceived by the Virgin. Thirdly, we shall extend this pre-existence to a far longer space of time, to the end of the first world, nay to the beginning of it. For He who was before the flood, and at the creation of the world, had a being before He was coriceived by the Virgin. But Christ was really before the flood, for He preached to them that lived before it; and at the creation ofthe world, for He created it. That He preached to those before the flood, is evident by the words of St Peter, who saith, that " Christ was put to death in the flesh. 142 An Exposition of the Creed. but quickened by the Spirit : by which also He went and preached unto the spirits in prison, which sometime were disobedient, when once the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah while the ark was a preparing" (i Peter iii. 18-20). From which words it appeareth, that Christ preached by the same Spirit by the virtue of which He was raised from the dead : but that Spirit was not His soul, but soraething ofa greater power. Secondly, that those to whom He preached were such as were disobedient. Thirdly, that the tirae when they were disobedient was the time before the flood, while the ark was preparing. It is certain then that Christ did preach unto those persons who in the days of Noah were disobedient at that time " the long-suffering of God waited," and consequently so long as repentance was offered. And it is as certain that He never preached to thera after they died ; which I shall not need here to prove, because those against whom I bring this argument deny it not. It foUoweth therefore, that He preached to them while they lived, and were disobedient ; for in the refusing of that mercy which was offered to them by the preaching of Christ, did their disobedience principally consist. In vain then are we taught to understand St Peter of the promulgation of the Gospel to the the Gentiles after the Holy Ghost descended upon the apostles, when the words themselves refuse all relation to any such times or persons. For all those of whom St Peter speaks were disobedient in the days of Noah. But none of those to whom the apostles preached were ever disobedient in the days of Noah. Therefore, none of those to whom the apostles preached were any of those of whom St Peter speaks. It remaineth therefore that the plain interpretation be acknowledged for the true, that Christ did preach unto those men who Uved before the flood, even while theylived, and consequently that He was before it. For though this was not done by an immediate act of the Son of God, as if He personaUy had appeared on earth, and actually preached to that old world ; but by the ministry of a prophet, by the sending of Noah, "the eighth preacher of righteousness" (2 Peter u. 5) : yet to do any thing by another not able to perform it without Him, as much demonstrates the existence of the principal cause, as if He did it of Hiraself without any intervening instrument. The second part of the argument, that Christ made this world, and consequently had a real being at the beginriing of it, the Scriptures manifestly and plentifully assure us. For the same "Son, by whom in these last days God spake unto us," is He "by whom also He made the worlds" (Heb. i. 2). So that Article II. 143 as "through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God " (Heb. xi. 3), so raust we also believe that they were made by the Son of God. Which the apostle doth not only in the entrance of his epistle deliver, but in the sequel prove. For shewing greater things have been spoken of Him than ever were attributed to any of the angels, the most glorious of all the creatures of God ; among the rest, he saith, the Scrip ture spake " unto the Son, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever." " And " not only so, but also, " Thou, Lord, in the begin ning hast laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of Thine hands. They shall perish, but Thou remainest ; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment ; and as a vesture shalt Thou fold thera up, and they shall be changed : but Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not fail" (Heb. i. 8, 10-12). Now whatsoever the person be to whom these words were spoken, it cannot be denied but He was the Creator of the world. Foi he must be acknowledged the Maker of the earth, who laid the foundation of it; and he may justly chaUenge to himself the making of the heavens, who can say, they are the work of his hands. But these words were spoken to the Son of God, as the apostle himself acknowledgeth, and it appeareth out of the order and series of the chapter ; the design of which is to declare the supereminent excellency of our Saviour Christ. Nay the conjunc tion " and," refers this place of the Psalmist plainly to the former, of which he had said expressly, "but unto the Son He saith." As sure then as " Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever," was said unto the Son ; so certain it is, " Thou, Lord^ hast laid the foundation of the earth," was said unto 'the same. Nor is it possible to avoid the Apostle's connexion by attributing the destruction ofthe heavens, out ofthe last words, to the Son, and denying the creation of them, out of the first, to the same. For it " is most evident that there is but one person spoken to, and that the destruction and the creation of the heavens are both attri buted to the same. Whosoever therefore shall grant that the Apostle produced this Scripture to shew that the Son of God shall destroy the heavens, must withal acknowledge that He created them: whosoever denieth Him to be here spoken of as the Creator, must also deny Him to be understood as the destroyer. Where fore being the words of the Psalmist were undoubtedly spoken of, and to our Saviour (or else the Apostle has attributed that unto Him which never belonged to Him, and consequently the spirit of St Paul mistook the spirit of David ;) being to whomsoever any 144 ^^ Exposition of the Creed, part of them belongs, the whole is applicable, because they are delivered unto one ; being the literal'exposition is so clear' that no raan hath ever pretended to a metaphorical ; it remaineth as an undeniable truth, grounded upon the profession of the Psalmist, and the interpretation of an apostle, that the Son of God created the world. Nor needed we so long to have insisted upon this testimony, because there are so raany which testify as much, but only that fhis is of a peculiar nature and different from the rest. For they which deny fhis truth of the creation of the world by the Son of God, notwithstanding all those Scriptures produced to confirm it, have found two ways to avoid or dechne, the force of them. If they speak so plainly and literally of the Vi'ork of creation, that they will not endure any figurative interpretation, then they endeavour to shew, that they are not spoken of the Son of God. If thej speak so expressly of our Saviour Christ, as that ; by no machination they can be applied to any other person, then ' their whole design is to make the creation, attributed unto Him, j appear to be merely raetaphorical. The place before alleged is j , of the first kind, which speaketh so clearly of the creation, or real : production of the world, that they never denied it : and I have so manifestly shewed it spoken to the Son of God, that it is beyond i all possibUity of gainsaying. "Thus having' asserted the creation acknowledged real unto Christ, we shall the easier persuade that likewise to be such, which is pretended to be metaphorical. In the Epistle to the Colossians we read of the Son of God, " in whom we have redemption through His blood " (Col. i. 14) ; and we are sure those words can be spoken of none other than Jesus Christ. He, therefore, it must be, who was thus described by the apostle : " who is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of every creature. For by Him were aU things created that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible ; whether they 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" (Col. i. 15-17). In which words our Saviour is expressly styled the " first-born of every creature," that is, begotten by God, as the "Son of His love," antecedently to all other emana tions, before anything proceeded from Him, or was framed and created by Him. And that precedency is presently proved by this undeniable argument, that all other emanations or produc tions came from Him, and whatsoever received its being by creation, was by Him created, Which assertion is delivered iq Article II, 145 the most proper, full, and- pregnant expressions imaginable. First, in the vulgar phrase of Moses, as raost consonant to his descrip tion : " for by Him were all things created that are in heaven and that are in earth ; " signifying thereby, that he speaks of the same creation. Secondly, by a division which Moses never used, as describing the production only of corporeal substances : lest therefore those imraaterial beings raight seem exempted from the Son's creation, because omitted in Moses's description, he addeth "visible and invisible;" and lest in that invisible world, among the many degrees of the celestial hierarchy, any order raight seem exempted from an essential dependence upon Him, he nameth those which are of greatest eminence, " whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principailities, or powers," and under them cora- prehendeth all the rest. Nor doth it yet suffice, thus to extend the object of His power by asserting- all things to be raade by Hira, except it be so understood, as to acknowledge the sovereignty of His person, and the authority of His action. For lest we should conceive the Son of God fraraing the world as a mere instrumental cause which worketh by and for another, he shews Him as well the final as the efficient cause ; for " all things were created by Him, and for Hira." Lastly, whereas all things first receive their being by creation, and when they have received it, continue in the same by virtue of God's conservation, " in whom we live, and move, and have our being ; " lest in anything we should be thought not to depend immediately upon the Son of God, He is described as the Conserver, as well as the Creator ; for " He is before all tbings, and by Him all things consist." If then we consider the two last cited verses by themselves, we cannot deny but they are a most complete description of the Creator of the world ; and if they were spoken of God the Father, could be no way injurious to His majesty, who is nowhere more plainly or fully set forth unto us as the Maker of the world. Now although this were sufficient to persuade us to interpret this place of the making of the world ; yet it will not be unfit to make use of another reason, which will corapel us so to under stand it. For undoubtedly there are but two kinds of creation in the language of the Scriptures, the one literal, the other meta phorical ; one old, the other new ; one by way of forraation, the other by way of reformation. " If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature" (2 Cor. v. 17), saith St Paul; and again, "In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but ^ new creature " (Gal. vi. 15), Instead of which words he had 146 An Exposition ofthe Creed. before, " faith working by love " (Gal. v. 6). " For we are the workmanship of God, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them " (Eph. ii. 10). From whence it is evident that a new creature is such a person as truly beheveth in Christ, and manifesteth that faith by the exercise of good works; and the ne'w creation, is the reforming or bringing man into this new condition, which by nature or his first creation he was not in. And therefore he who is so created is called a new man, in opposition to the old man, which is " corrupt according to the deceitful lusts." From whence the Apostle chargeth us to be "renewed in the spirit of our mind," and to " put on that new man, which after God is created in righteousness, and true holiness" (Eph. iv. 22-24); and " which is renewed in knowledge, after the image of Him that created him " (Col. iii. 10). The new creation then is described to us as consisting wholly in renovation, or a translation from a worse unto a better condition by way of reformation ; by which ' those which have lost the iraage of God, in which the first man was created, are restored to the image of the same God again, by a real change, though not substantial, wrought within them. Now this being the notion of the new creation in all those places which undoubtedly and confessedly speak of it, it wUl be necessary to apply it unto such Scriptures as are pretended to require the sarae interpretation. Thus, therefore, I proceed. If the second or new creation cannot be meant by the Apostle in the place produced out of the Epistle to the Colossians, then it must be interprete"d of the first. For there are but two kinds of creation mentioned in fhe Scriptures, and one of them is there expressly named. But the place of the i\postle can no way admit an interpretation by the new creation, as wiU thus appear: the object of the creation mentioned in this place is of as great latitude and universality, as the object of the first creation, not only expressed, but implied by Moses. But the object of the new creation is not of the same latitude with that of the old. Therefore that which is mentioned here cannot be the new creation. For certainly if we reflect upon the true notion of the new creation, it necessarily and essentially includes an opposition to a former worse condition, as the new man is always opposed to the old ; and if Adam had continued still in innocency, there could have been no such distinction between the old man and the new, or the old and new creation. Being then all men become not new, being there is no new creature but such whose faith worketh by love, being so many Article II. xi.'j millions of men have neither faith nor love ; it cannot be said that by " Christ all things were created anew that are in heaven and that are in earth," when the greatest part of mankind have no share in the new creation. Again, we cannot iraagine that the Apostle should speak of the creation in a general word, intending thereby only the new, and while he doth so, express par ticularly and especially those parts of the old creation which are incapable of the new, " or at least have no relation to it. The angels are aU either good or bad : but whether they be bad, they can never be good again, nor did Christ c6rae to redeem the devils ; or whether they be good, they were always such, nor were they so by the virtue of Christ's incarnation, for " He took not on Him the nature of angels." We acknowledge in mankind a new creation, because an old man becomes a new ; but there is no such notion in the celestial hierarchy, because no old and new- angels : they which fell, are fallen for eternity ; they which stand, always stood, and shall stand for ever. Where then are the re generated " thrones and dominions " ? where are the recreated " principalities and powers " ? All those angels, of whatsoever degrees, were created by. the Son of God, as the Apostle expressly affirms. But they were never created by a new creation " unto true holiness and righteousness," because they always were truly righteous and holy, ever since their first creation. Therefore except we could yet invent another creation, which were neither the old nor the new, we must conclude, that all the angels were at first created by the Son of God ; and as they, so aU things else, especially man, whose creation all the first writers of the Church of God expressly attribute unto the Son,'asserting that those words, " Let us make man," were spoken as by the Father unto Hira. Nor need we doubt of this interpretation, or the doctrine arising from it, seeing it is so clearly delivered by St John. " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word w'as God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made " (John i. 1-3). Whereas we have proved Christ had a being before He was conceived by the Virgin Mary, because He was at the beginning of the world ; ahd have also proved that He was at the beginning of the world, because He made it ; this place of St John gives a sufficient testimony to the truth of both the last together. " In the beginning was the Word ; " and that Word made flesh is Christ : therefore Christ was in the beginning. "All things were made by Him;" therefore He 148 An Exposition of the Creed. -created the world. Indeed nothing can be more clearly penned to give full satisfaction in this point, than these words of St John, w'hich seem with a strange brevity designed to take off all ob jections, and reraove all prejudice, before they teach so strange a truth. Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, and His age was known to thera for whom this Gospel was penned. St John would teach, that this Christ did make the world, which was created at least four thousand years before His birth. The name of Jesus was given Him since at His circumcision : the title of Christ belonged unto His office, which He exercised not till thirty years after. Neither of these with any show of probability will reach to the creation ofthe world. Wherefore he produceth a narae of His, as yet unknown unto the world, or rather not taken notice of, though in frequent use among the Jews, which belonged unto Hira who was made man, but before He was so. Under this name he shews at first that He had a being in the beginning ; when all things were to be created, and consequently were not yet ; then, in the beginning was the Word, and so not created. This is the first step, the "Word was not created when the world was made. The next is, that the same Word which then was, and was not made, at the sarae time " was with God," when He made all things : and therefore well may we conceive it was He, to whom " God said. Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Gen. i. 26); and ofwhorn those words may be under stood, "Behold the man is become as one of us" (Gen. iii. 22). After this, lest any should conceive the creation of the world too great and divine a work, to be attributed to the Word ; lest any should object, that none can produce anything out of nothing, but God Hiraself; he adds, that the Word, as He " was with God," so was He also God. Again, lest any should divide the Deity, or frarae a false conception of different gods, he returneth unto the second assertion, and joineth it with the first : " The same was in the beginning with God ; " and then delivers that which at the first seeraed strange, but now after those three propositions may easily be accepted : " All things were raade by Hira, and with out Him was not anything made that was made." For now this ' is no new doctrine, but only an interpretation of those Scriptures which told us, God made aU things by His word before. For " God said. Let there be light, and there was light " (Gen. i. 3). And so " By the word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth " (Ps. xxxiii. 6). Frora whence " we understand that the worlds were framed by the Article II. 149 word of God " (Heb. xi. 3). Neither was it a new interpretation, but that which was most famUiar to the Jews, who in their syna gogues, by the reading of the paraphrase or interpretation of the - Hebrew text in the Chaldee language, were constantly taught, that the Word of God was the same with God, and that by that Word all things were made. Which undoubtedly was the cause why St John delivered so great a mystery in so few words, as speaking unto them who at the first apprehension understood hira. Only that which as yet they knew not, was, that this Word was made flesh, and that this Word made flesh was Jesus Christ. Wherefore this exposition being so literally clear in itself, so consonant to the notion of the Word, arid the apprehension of the Jews; it is infinitely to be preferred before any such interpretation, as shall restrain the most universals to a few particulars, change the plainest expressions into figurative phrases, and make of a sublime truth, a weak, useless, false discourse. For who wiU grant that "in the beginning," must be the same with that in St John's Epistle, "from the beginning" especially when the very inter pretation involves in itself a contradiction? For "the beginning" (i Johni. i) in St John's Epistle is that, in which the Apostle saw, and heard, and touched the Word : " the beginning " in his Gospel was that, in which " the Word was with God," that is, not seen, nor heard by the Apostles, but known as yet to God alone, as the new exposition will have it. Who will conceive it worthy of the Apostle's assertion, to teach that the Word had a being in 'the beginning of the Gospel, at what tirae John the Baptist began to preach, when we know the Baptist taught as rauch ; who there fore " carae baptising with water, that he might be made manifest unto Israel"? (John i. 31); when we are sure that St Matthew and St Luke, who wrote before hira, taught us more than this ; that He had a being thirty years before ? when we are assured, it was as true of any other then living, as of the Word, even of Judas who betrayed Him, even of PUate who condemned -Hira ? Again, who can imagine the Apostle should assert, that the Word was, that is, had an actual being, when as yet He was not actually the Word ? For if " the beginning " be when John the Baptist began to preach, and the Word, as they say, be nothing else but he which speaketh, and so revealeth the wUl of God ; Christ had not then revealed the will of God, and consequently was not then actually the Word, but only potentially or by designation. Secondly, it is a strange figurative speech, " the "Word was with God," that is, was known to God, especially in this Aposde's method. " In the 150 An Exposition ofthe Creed. beginning was the Word; "there "was" must signify an actual existence : and if so, why in the next sentence (" the Word was with God") shall the same verb signify an objective being only? Certainly though to be in the beginning, be one thing, and to be with God, another ; yet " to be," in either of them is the same. But if we should iraagine this "being" understood of the knowledge of God, why we should grant that thereby is signified, He was known to God alone, I cannot conceive. For the proposition of itself is plainly affirraative, and the exclusive particle only added to the exposition raakes it clearly negative. Nay more, the affirmative sense is certainly true, the negative is certainly false. For except Gabriel be God, who came to the Virgin, except every one of the heavenly host which appeared to the shepherds, be God, except Zacharias and Elisabeth, except Simeon and Anna, except Joseph and Mary be God ; it cannot be true, that He was known to God only, for to all these He was certainly kno'wn. Thirdly, to pass by the third attribute, " and the Word was God," as having occasion suddenly after to handle it ; seeing the Apostle hath again repeated the circumstance of time as most material, " the sarae was in the beginning with God," and immediately subjoined those words, " all things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made ; "' how can we feceive any exposition which refers not the making of all these things to Him in the beginning ? But if we understand the latter part, of the Apostles, who after the ascension of our Saviour, did nothing but what they were commanded and erapowered to do by Christ, it will bear no relation to the beginning. If we interpret the former, of all which Jesus said and did in the promulgation of the Gospel, we cannot yet reach to the beginning assigned by the new expositors ; for while John the Baptist only preached, while in their sense the Word was with God, they wUl not affirm that Jesus did any of these things that here are spoken of And conse quently, according to their grounds, it will be true to say, in the beginning was the Word, and that Word in the beginning was with God, insomuch as in the beginning nothing was done by Him, but without Him were all things done, which were done in the beginning.- Wherefore in all reason we should stick to the known interpretation, in which every word receiveth its own proper signi fication, without any figurative distortion, and is preserved in its due'latitude and extension without any curtailing restriction. And, therefore, I conclude from the undeniable testimony of St John, that in the beginning, when the .heavens and the earth and all the Article II. ¦ 151 hosts of them were created, all things were made by the Word, who is Christ Jesus being made flesh ; and consequently, by the method of argument, as the Apostle antecedently by the method of riature, that in the beginning Christ was. He then who was in heaven and descended from thence, before that which was begotten of the Virgin ascended thither ; He who was before John the Baptist, and before Abraham ; He who was at the end of the first world, and at the beginning of the same ; He had a real being and existence before Christ was conceived by the Virgin Mary. But all these we have already shewn belong unto the Son of God. Therefore we must acknowledge, that Jesus Christ had. a real being and existence, before He was begotten by the Holy Ghost : which is our first assertion, properly opposed to the Photinians. The second assertion, next to be made good, is that the being which Christ had before He was conceived by the Virgin, was not any created, but the Divine essence, bywhich He always was , truly, really, and properly God. This will evidently and neces sarily follow frora the last deraonstration of the first assertion, the creating all things by the Son of God, frora whence we inferred His pre-existence in the beginning, assuring us as rauch that He was God, as that He was. " For He that buUt all things is God " (Heb. iii. 4). And the same Apostle who assures us " AU things were made by Him," at the same time tells us, " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word > was God." Where "in the beinning" must not be denied unto the third proposition, because it cannot be denied unto the second. Therefore" in the beginning, or ever the earth was," (Prov. viii. 23), " the Word was God," the same God with whom He was. For we cannot with any show of reason either imagine that He was with one God, and was another, because there can be no more supreme Gods than one ; or conceive that the Apostle should speak of one kind of God in the second, and of another in the third proposition : in the second, of a God eternal and independent; in the third, of a made and depending God. Especially, first considering that the eternal God was so con stantly among the Jews called the Word, the only reason which we can conceive why the Apostle should thus use this phrase; and then observing the mannerof St John's writing, who'rises strangely by degrees, making the last word of the former sentence the first of that which follows ; as, " In Hira was life, and the life was the light of raen ; and the Ught shineth in darkness, and the dark ness comprehended it not " (John i. 4, 5) ; so, " In the beginning 152 An Exposition of the Creed. was the Word, and the Word," which so was in the beginning, "was with God, and the Word was God ; " that is, the same God with whom the Word was in the beginning. But He could not be the same God with Him any other way than by having the same Divine essence. Therefore the being which Christ had before He was conceived by the Virgin, was the Divine nature, by w. which He was properly and really God. f Secondly, He who was subsisting in the form of God, and thought Himself to be equal with God (in which thought He could not be deceived, nor be injurious to God), must of necessity be truly and essentially God : because there can be no equality between the Divine essence, which is infinite, and any other whatsoever, which must be finite. But this is trae of Christ, and that antecedently to His conception in the Virgin's womb, and existence in His human nature. For, " being " (or rather, subsisting) " in the form of God, He thought it not robbery to be equal with God : but emptied Himself, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was raade in the likeness of men " (Phil. n. 6, 7). Out of which words naturally result three propositions fully demonstrating our assertion. First, that Christ was in the form of a servant as soon as He was made man. Secondly, that He was in the form of God before He was in the form of a servant. Thirdly, that He was in the form of God, that is, did as truly and really subsist in the Divine nature, as in the form of a servant, or in the nature of man. It is a vain imagination, that our Saviour then first appeared a servant, when he was apprehended, bound, scourged, crucified. For, they were not all slaves which ever suffered such indignities, or died that death ; and when they did, their death did not raake, but find them, or suppose them ser vants. Besides, our Saviour, in all the degrees of His humUiation, never lived as a servant unto any raaster on earth. It is trae, at first he was subject, but as a son, to his reputed father and un doubted mother. When He appeared in public. He lived after the manner of a prophet, and a doctor sent from God, accom panied with a family, as it were, of his Apostles, whose master He professed Hiraself, subject to the comraands of no man in that office, and obedient only unto God. The form then " of a ser vant " which " He took upon Hira," must consist in something distinct from His sufl'erings, or submission unto men ; as the con dition in which He was, when He so submitted and so suffered. In that He was " made flesh," sent " In the likeness of sinful flesh " (Rom. viii. 3), subject unto all infirmities and miseries of this life Article TI. I S3 attending on the sons of men faUen by the-sin of Adam : in that He was " made of a woman, made under the law " (Gal. iv. 4), and so obliged to perforra the same ; which Law did so handle the chUdren of God, as that- they differed nothing frora servants : in that He was born, bred, and lived in a mean, low, and abject con dition ; "As a root out of a dry ground. He had no form nor comeliness,'' and " when they saw Him, there was no beauty that they should desire Him ; " but " was despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief " (Isa. liii. 2, 3) : in that He was thus made man. He " took upon Him the form of a servant." Which is not mine, but the Apostle's explication ; as adding it not byway of conjunction, in which there might be some diversity, but by way of apposition, which signifieth a. clear identity. And therefore it is necessary to observe, that our translation of that verse is not orUy not exact, but very disadvantageous to that truth which is contained in it. For we read it thus : " He made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Hira the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men." Where we have two, copulative conjunctions, neither 'of which is in the original text, and three distinct propositions, without any dependence of one upon the other ; whereas all the words together are but an expression of Christ's exinanition, with an explication shewing in what it consists : which will clearly appear by this Uteral trans lation, "but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men." Where if any man doubt how Christ emptied Himself, the text wUl satisfy Him, by " taking the forra of a servant " ; if any still question, how He took the form ofa servant. He has the apostle's resolution, by " being made in the likeness of men." Indeed, after the expression of this exinanition, he goes on with a conjunction, to add another act of Christ's humiliation. " And being found in fashion as a raan," being already by His exinanition in the form of a servant, or the likeness ofmen, " He hurabled Himself, and became]" (or rather, becoming) " obedient unto death, even the death of the cross " (PhU. u. 8). As therefore His humiliation consisted in His obedience unto death, so His exinanition consisted in the assumption of the form of a servant, and that in the nature of man. All which is very fitly expressed by a strange interpretation on the Epistle to the H'ebrews. For whereas these words are clearly in the Psalraist, " Sacrifice and offering Thou didst not desire ; raine ears hast Thou opened " (Ps. xl. 6) : the Apostle appropriated the sentence to Christj " When He cometh into the world, He saith, Sacrifice and 154 -^'^ Exposition of the Creed. offering thou wouldst not, but a body hast thou prepared Me." Now being the boring of the ear under the law was a note of perpetual servitude, being this was expressed in the words of the Psalmist, and changed bythe Apostle into the preparing ofa body; it followed, that when Christ's body first was framed, even then did He assume the forra of a servant." Again, it appears" out of the sarae text, that Christ was in the form of God before He was in the form of a servant, and conse quently before He was made man. For he which is presupposed to be, and to think of that being which he has, and upon that thought to assume, must have that being before that assumption : but Christ is first expressly said to be in the form of God, and being so, to. think it no robbery to be equal with God, and notwithstanding that equality, to take upon Him the form of a servant : therefore it cannot be denied, but He was before in the form of God. Besides, He was not in the form of a servant but by the emptying Himself, and aU exinanition necessarily presupposeth a precedent plenitude ; it being as irapossible to empty anything which has no fulness, as to fill anything which has no emptiness. But the fulness which Christ had, in respect whereof assuraing the form of a servant He is said to empty Himself, could be in nothing else buf in the forra of God, in which He was before. Wherefore, if the assumption of the form of a servant be contem porary with His exinanition ; if that exinanition necessarily pre supposeth a plenitude as indispensably antecedent to it ; if the forra of God be also coeval with that precedent plenitude ; then must we confess, Christ was in the form of God before He was in the form of a servant : which is the second proposition. Again, it is as evident from the same Scripture, that Christ was as much in the forra of God, as the form of a servant ; and did as really subsist in the Divine nature, as in the nature of man. For he was so " in the form of God," as thereby " to be equal with God." But no other forra beside the essential, which is the Divine nature itself, could infer an equality with God. " To whom wUl ye liken Me, and make Me equal ? saith the Holy One." There can be but one infinite, etemal and independent being ; and there can be no coraparison between that, and whatsoever is finite, teraporal, and depending. He therefore who did truly think himself equal with God, as being in the form of God, must be conceived to subsist in that one infinite, etemal, and indepen dent nature of God. Again, the phrase, "in the form of God," not elsewhere mentioned, is used by the apostle with a respect Article II. 155 unto that other, of the " form of a servant," exegetically continued "in the likeness of man;" and the respect of one unto the other is so necessary, that if the form of God be not as real and essential as the form of a servant, or the likeness of raan, there is no force in the Apostle's words, nor will his argument be fit to work any great degree of humiliation upon ~ the consideration of Christ's exinanition. But by the " form," is certainly understood the true condition ofa servant, and by the "likeness," infallibly meant the real nature of mari : nor doesthe " fashion " in which He was found destroy, but rather assert the truth of His humanity. And there fore, as sure as Christ was really and essentially man, of the same nature with us, in whose similitude He was made ; so certainly was He also really and essentially God, of the same nature and being ¦with Him, in whose form He did subsist. Seeing then we have clearly evinced from the express words of St Paul that Christ was in the form of a servant as soon as He was made man, that He was in the form of God before He was in the form of a servant, that the form of God in which He subsisted doth as truly, signify the Divine, as the likeness of man, the human nature ; it necessarily followeth that Christ had a real existence before He was begotten of the Virgin, and that the being which He had was the Divine essence, by which He was truly, really, and properly God. Thirdly, He who is expressly styled Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, without any restriction or liraitation, as He is after, so was before any time assignable, truly and essentially God. For by this title God describeth His own being, and distinguisheth it from aU other. " I the Lord, the first, and with the last, I am He " (Isa. xli. 4). " I am He ; I am the first, I also am the last " (Isa. xlvin. 12). " I am the first, and I ara the last ; and beside Me there is no God " (Isa. xliv. 6). But Christ is expressly called Alpha, and Oraega, the first and the last. He so proclaimed Himself, " by a great voice, as of a trumpet, saying, I am Alpha and Oraega, the first and the last" (Rev. i. 10, 11). Which answereth to that solemn call and proclamation in the prophet, " Hearken unto Me, O Jacob and Israel, my caUed " (Isa. xlviu. 12). He comforteth St John, with the majesty of this title. "Fear not, I ara the first and the last" (Rev. i. 17). Which words were spoken by " one like unto the Son of Man " (Rev. i. 13.), by Hira " that liveth and was dead, and is alive for ever more," that is, undoubtedly, by Christ. He upholdeth the Church of Smyrna in her tribulation by virtue of the same description. " These things 156 An Exposition of the Creed. saith the first and the last, which was dead and is alive " (Rev. ii. 8),. He ascertaineth His coraing unto judgraent with the same as sertion, " I ara Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last" (Rev. xxii 13). And in aU these places this title is attributed unto Christ absolutely and universally, without any kind of restriction or limitation, without any assigna tion of any particular in respect of which He is the first or last : in the sarae latitude and erainence of expression, in which it is or can be attributed to the supreme God. There is yet another scripture, in which the sarae description may seem of a more dubious interpretation : " I am Alpha and Oraega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty " (Rev. i. 8). For being it is " the Lord" who so calls Himself, which title belongeth to the Father and the Son, it may be doubted whether it be spoken by the Father or the Son ; but whether it be understood of the one or of the other, it wUl sufficiently make good what we intend to prove. For if they be understood of Christ, as the precedent and the following words iraply, then is He certainly that " Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Alraighty," that is, the supreme eternal God, of the same Divine essence with the Father, who was before described by " Him which is, and which was^ and which is to come " (Rev. i. 4.), to whom the six-winged beasts con tinually cry, " Holy, holy, holy. Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to corae " (Rev. iv. 8) ; as the familiar explication of that name which God revealed to Moses. If they belong unto the supreme God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ ; then did He so describe Himself unto St John, and express His supreme Deity, that by those words, "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending," He might be known to be the one Almighty and eternal God : and consequently, whosoever should assume that title, must attribute as much unto himself Where fore being Christ hath so immediately, and with so great solemnity and frequency, taken the same title upon Him . by which the Father did express His Godhead; it foUoweth that He has declared Hiraself to be the Suprerae, Almighty, and Eternal vGod. And being thus the Alpha and the first. He was before any time assignable, and consequently before He was conceived of the Virgin; and the being which then He had was the Divine essence, by which He was truly and properly the Almighty and Eternal God. Fourthly, He whose glory Isaiah saw in the year that king Article II. 157 Uzziah died, had a being before Christ was begotten of the Virgin, and that being was the Divine essence, by which He was naturally and essentially God : for He is expressly caUed the Lord, " Holy, holy, holy, the Lord of Hosts, whose glory filleth the whole earth " (Isaiah vi. i, 3) ; which titles can belong to none beside the one and only God. But Christ was He whose glory Isaiah saw, as St John doth testify, saying, " These things said Esaias, when he saw His glory, and spake of Him " (John xii. 41) : and He whose glory he saw, and of whom he spake, was certainly Christ : for of Him the Apostle treats in that place, and of none but Him. "These things spake Jesus and departed" (John xii. 36). "But though He," that is, Jesus, " had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on Him " (John xii. 37), that is, Christ, who wrought those miracles.' The reason why they belived not on Hira was, " That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fhlfiUed, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our re port ? " (John xii. 38). And as they did not, so " they could not believe" in Christ, "because that Esaias said again. He hath blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be con verted, and I should heal thera " (John xii. 39, 40). For those who God foresaw, and the prophet foretold, should not believe, could not do it without contradicting the prescience of the one, and the predictions of the other. But the Jews refusing to assent unto the doctrine of our Saviour, were those of whom the prophet spake : for "these things said Esaias when he saw His glory, and -spake of Him" (John xii. 41). Now if the glory which Isaiah saw were the glory of Christ, and He of whom Isaiah in that chapter spake were Christ Himself; then must those blinded eyes and hardened hearts belong unto these Jews, and then their infidelity was so long since foretold. Thus doth the fixing of that prophecy upon that people which saw our Saviour's rairacles, depend upon Isaiah's vision, and the appropriation of it unto Christ. "Wherefore St John infallibly hath taught us, that the prophet saw the glory of Christ ; and the prophet has as un doubtedly assured us, that He, whose glory then He saw, was the one omnipotent and eternal God ; and consequently both together have sealed this truth, that Christ did then subsist in that glorious majesty of the eternal Godhead. Lastly, He who being man, is frequently in the Scriptures called God, and that in such a manner, as by that narae no other can be understood but the one only and eternal God, He had an existence 158 An Exp.osition of the Creed. before He was made man, and the being which then He had was no other than the Divine essence. Because all novity is repugnant to the Deity, nor can any be that one God, who was not so from all eternity. But Jesus Christ, being in the nature of man, is frequently in the sacred Scriptures called God ; and that name is attributed unto Him in such a manner, as by it no other can be understood but the one Alraighty and Eternal God. Which may be thus demonstrated. It has been already proved, and we all agree in this, that there can be but orie Divine essence, and so but one supreme God. Wherefore were it not said in the Scriptures, there are " many gods " ; did not He Himself who is suprerae call others so ; we durst not_give that narae to any but to Him alone, nor could we think any called God to be any other but that one. It had been then enough to have alleged that Christ is God, to prove His supreme and eternal Deity : whereas now we are answered, that there are gods many, and therefore it foUoweth not from that narae, that He is the one eternal God. But if Christ be none of those many gods, and yet be God, then can He be no other but that one. And that He is not to be numbered with thera, is certain, because He is clearly distinguished from them, and opposed to them. We read in the Psalmist, " I have said ye are gods, and all of you are chUdren of the most High " (Ps. Ixxxii. 6). But we must not reckon Christ among those gods, we must not number the only-begotten Son among those children. For " they knew not, neither would they understand, they walked on in darkness " (Ps. Ixxxii. 5) : and whosoever were gods only as they were, either did, or might do so. Whereas Christ, " in whom alone dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead" bodUy " (Col. ii. 9), is not only distinguished from, but opposed to such gods as those, by His disciples saying, " Now we are sure that thou knowest all things " (John xvi. 30) ; by Himself proclaim ing, " I am the light of the world. He that followeth Me shall not walk in darkness " (John viii. 1 2). St Paul hath told us " There be gods raany, and lords many " (i Cor. viii. 5), but withal hath taught us, that "to us there is but one God, the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ" (i Cor. vhi. 6). In which words as the "Father" is opposed as much unto the " many lords," as "many gods ; " so is the Son as much unto the "many gods," as "many lords ;" the Father being as much Lord as God, and the Son as rauch God as Lord. Wherefore being we find in Scripture frequent mention of one God, and beside that one an intimation of many gods, and whosoever is caUed God must either be that one, or one of those Article II. 159 many ; being we find our blessed Saviour to be wholly opposed to the many gods, and consequently to be none of them, and yet we read Him often styled God : it followeth, that that name is attributed unto Hira in such a manner, as by it no other can be understood but the one Almighty and Eternal God. Again, those who deny our Saviour to be the same God with the Father, have invented rules to be the touchstone of the eternal power and Godhead. First, where the name of God is taken absolutely, as the subjectof any proposition, it always signifieth the supreme power and majesty, excluding all others from that Deity. Secondly, where the same name is any way used with an article by way of excellency, it likewise signifieth the "same supreme God head, as admitting others to a coramunion of Deity, but excluding them from the supremacy. Upon these two rules they have raised unto theraselves this observation, that whensoever the name of God absolutely taken is placed as the subject of any proposition, - it is not to be understood of Christ : and wheresoever the sarae is spoken of our Saviour by way of predicate, it never has an article denoting excellency annexed to it ; and consequently leaves Him in the number of those gods who are excluded frora the majesty ofthe eternal Deity. 91 Now though there can be no kind of certainty in any such observations of the articles, because the Greeks promiscuously often use them, or omit them, without any reason of their usurpa tion or omission (whereof examples are innumerable) ; though, if those rules were granted, yet would not their conclusion follow, because the supreme God is often named (as they confess) with out an article, and therefore the same narae raay signify the same God, when spoken of Christ, as well as when of the Father, so far as can concern the omissiori of the article : yet, to complete my demonstration, I shall shew first, that the name of God taken subjectively is to be understood of Christ ;, secondly, that the same narae with the article affixed is attributed unto Hira; thirdly, that if it were not so, yet where the article is wanting, there is that added to the predicate, which hath as great a virtue to signify that excellency, as the article could have. St Paul, unfolding the mystery of godhness, hath deUvered six propositions together and the subject of all and each of them is God. " Without controversy great is the mystery of godhness : God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory " (r Tim. iii. 16). And this God which is i6o An Exposition ofthe Creed. the subject of all these propositions must be understood of Christ, because of Him each one is true, and aU are so of none but Him. He was the Word which was God, and was made flesh, and con sequently " God manifested in the flesh." Upon Him the Spirit descended at His baptism, and after His ascension was poured upon His apostles, ratifying His commission, and confirming the doctrine which they received from Him ; wherefore He was " God justified in the Spirit." His nativity the angels celebrated, in the discharge of His office they rainistered unto Hira, at His resurrection and ascension they were present, always feady to confess and adore Him : He wd,s therefore " God seen of angels." The apostles preached unto all nations, and He whom they preached was Jesus Christ. The Father " separated St Paul from his mother's womb, and called him by His grace, to reveal His Son unto him, that he might preach Hira among the heathen" (Gal. i. 15, 16): therefore He was "God preached unto the Gendles." John the Baptist spake " unto ' the people, that' they should believe on Hira which should corae after hira, that is on Christ Jesus " (Acts xix. 4). " We have believed in Jesus Christ," saith St Paul, who so taught the jaUor trerabUng at his feet, " BeUeve in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved" (Acts xvi. 31) : He therefore was " God believed on in the world." When He had been forty days on earth after His resurrection, He was taken visibly up into heaven, and sat down at the right band of the Father : wherefore he was " God received up in glory." And thus all these six propositions, according to the plain and familiar language of the Scriptures, are infallibly true of Christ, and so of God, as He is taken by St John, when he speaks those words, " the Word was God." But all these cannot be understood of any other, who either is, or is called, God. For though we grant the Divine perfections and attributes to be the same with the Divine essence, yet are they never in the Scriptures called God ; nor can any of them with the least show of probabiUty be pretended as the subject of these propositions, or afford any tolerable interpretation. When they teU us that "God," that is, the WiU of God, "was manifested in the flesh," that is, was revealed by frail and mortal men, " and received up in 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 by the Spirit ; not the Father, who was not mani- Article II. i6i fested in the flesh, nor received up in 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 expressed universally in the copies of the original language, so thus absolutely and subjectively taken raust it be understood of Christ. X Again, St Paul speaketh thus to the elders of the Church of^ Ephesus, " Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood " (Acts XX. 28). In these words this doctrinal proposition is clearly contained ; God has purchased the Church with His own blood. For there is no other word either in or near the text, which can by any grammatical construction be joined with the verb, except the Holy Ghost, to whom the predicate is repugnant, both in respect of the act, or our redemption, and of the means, the blood. If then the Holy Ghost has not purchased the Church ; > if He has not blood to shed for our rederaption, " and without bloodshed there is no remission ; " if there be no other word to which, according to the literal construction, the act of purchasing can be applied ; if the name of God, most frequently joined to His Church; be inimediately and properly applicable by all rules of syntax to the verb which follows it : then is it of necessity to be received as the subject of this proposition, then is this to be em braced as infallible Scripture truth ; God has purchased the Church with His own blood. But this God may and must be understood of Christ : it may, because He hath ; it must, because no other per son who is called God hath so purchased the Church. " We were not redeemed with corruptible things, as sUver and gold, but with the precious blood ofChrist" (i Peter i. 18, 19). With this price were we bought ; and therefore it may well be said, that Christ our God hathpurchased us with His own blood. But no other person who is, or is called God, can be said so to have purchased us, because it is an act belonging properly to the Mediatorship ; and " there is but one Mediator between God and men : " and the Church is "sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all " (Heb. x. 10). Nor can the expression of this act, peculiar to the Son, be attributed to the Father, because this blood signifieth death ; and though the Father be omnipotent, and can do all things, yet He cannot die. And though it might be said that He purchased us because He gave His Son to be a ransom for us, yet it cannot be said that He did it " by His own 1 62 An Exposition of the Creed. blood ; " for then it would follow that He gave not His Son, or that the Son and the Father were the sarae person. _ Besides it is very observable, that this particular phrase of " His own blood," is in the Scripture put by way of opposition to the blood of another : and howsoever we may attribute the acts of the Son unto the Father, because sent by Him, yet we cannot but acknowledge that the blood and death was of another than the Father. " Not by the blood of goats and calves, but by His own blood He entered in once into the holy place" (Heb. ix. 12): and whereas _" the high priest entered every year with the blood of others, Christ ap peared once to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself" He then who purchased us wrought it by His own blood, as an High Priest opposed to the Aaronical, who made atonement by the blood of others. But the Father taketh no priestly office, neither could He be opposed to the legal Priest, as not dying Hiraself, but giving another. Wherefore wheresoever the Father and the Son are described together as working the salvation of man, the blood by which it is wrought is attributed to the Son, not to the Father : as when St Paul speaketh of the " rederaption that is in Jesus Christ, whom Gpd hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness" (Rom. in. 25) ; "His," that is, " His own righteousness," has reference to God the Father ; but "His," that is "His own blood," must be referred to Christ the Son. When he glorlfieth the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, attributing unto Him that He hath blessed, elected, predestinated, adopted, accepted us, made known unto us the mystery of His will, and gathered us together in one ; in the midst of this acknow ledgment he bringeth in " the Beloved, in whora we have rederap tion through His blood " (Eph. i. 6, 7), as that which cannot be attributed to the Father. Christ hath blessed us, and the Apostle saith the Father hath blessed us : which is true, because "He sent His Son to bless us " (Acts ui. 26). Christ hath raade known unto us the will of His Father, and the Apostle saith the Father " hath made known unto us the -mystery of His will " (Eph. i. 9) ; be cause He sent His Son to reveal it. Christ hath delivered us, and the Father is said to " deliver us from the power of darkness ; " not that we are twice delivered, but because the Father delivereth us by His Son. And thus these general acts are famiUarly attributed to them both ; but stiU a difference must be observed and. acknow ledged in the means or manner of the performance of these acts. For though it is true that the Father and the Son revealed to us - the will of God ; yet it is not true that the Father revealed it by Article II. 163 Himself to us : but that the Son did so, it is. They both deUver us from sinand death': but the Son "gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us " (Gal. i. 4) ; the Father is not, cannot be, said to have given Himself, but His Son ; and therefore the apostle gives thanks unto the Father, " who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of His dear Son, in whom we have redemption through His blood " (Col. i 13, 14). Now this blood is not only the blood of the new Covenant, and consequently of the Mediator : but the nature of this Covenant is such that it is also a Testaraent, and there fore the blood must be the blood of the Testator; "for where a Testaraent is, there must also of necessity be the death of the Testator" (Heb. ix. 16). But the Testator who died is not, can not be the Father, but the Son, and consequently the blood is the blood of the Son, not of the Father. It remaineth therefore that God, who purchased the Church with His own blood, is not the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, or any other who is called God, but only Jesus Christ the Son of God, and God. And thus have I proved the first of the three assertions, that the name of " God," absolutely taken and placed subjectively, is sometimes to be understood of Christ. The second, that the narae of God invested by way of excel lency with an article, is attributed in the Scriptures unto Christ, may be thus made good. He who is caUed Emmanuel, is named God by way of excellency ; for that name, saith St Matthew, " being interpreted, is God with us" (Matt. i. 23), and in that interpreta tion the Greek article is prefixed. But Christ is called Eramanuel, " that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying. Behold a Virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a Son, and they shall call His name Eramanuel." Therefore He is that " God with us," which is expressed by way of excellency, and distinguished frora all other who are any way honoured with that name. For it is a vain imagination to think that Christ is called Eraraanuel, but that He is not what He is called : as Moses built an altar " and called the name of it, Jehovah Nissi" (Ex. xvu. 15), and Gideon another, "caUed Jehovah Shalom " (Judges vi. 24), and yet neither altar was Jehovah : as Jerusalem was called, " the Lord our righteousness " (Jer. xxxiii. 16), and yet that city was not the Lord. " Because these two nations which are conjoined in the name Eramanuel, are severally true of Christ. First, He is Emmanu, that is, "with us," for He has "dweft among us " (John i. 14): and F 2 164 An Exposition of the Creed. when He parted from the earth, He said to His disciples, " I am with you alway, ^yen to the end of the world " (Matt, xxviii. 20). Secondly, He is "El," and that name was given Him, as the same prophet testifieth, " For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is ' given, and His name shall be caUed Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God " (Isa. ix. 6). He then who is both properly called El, that is, God, and is also really Emraanu, that is, " with us," He must infallibly be that Emmanuel, who is- God with us. Indeed if the name Emmanuel were to be interpreted by way of a proposition, " God is with us," as " the Lord our righteous ness," and "the Lord is there" (Ezek. xlvui 35), must be understood where they are the names of Jerusalem ; then should it have been the name not of Christ, but of His Church : and if we under the Gospel had been called so, it could have received no other interpretation in reference to us. But being it is not ours, but our Saviour's name, it bears no kind of similitude with those pbjected appellations, and is as properly and directly to be attributed to the Messias, as the name of Jesus. Wherefore it remaineth that Christ be acknowledged God with us, according to the evangelical interpretation, with an expression of that excel lency which belongeth to the supreme Deity. , Again, He to whom St Thomas said, " My Lord, and ray God" (John xx. 28), or rather, "the Lord of me, and the God of me," He is that God, before whose narae the Greek article is prefixed, which they require, by way of excellency. But St Thoraas spake these words to Christ. For " Jesus spake unto Thomas, and Thomas answered and said unto Him, My Lord and my God." And in these words He made confession of His faith ; for our Saviour replied, " Thoraas, because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed." And let Him be the Lord of me, and the God of me, who was the Lord, and the God of an Apostle. Nor have we only their required testimony of Christ's supreme divinity, but also an addition of verity asserting that supremacy. For He is not only termed " the God," but, for a farther certainty, " the true God : " and the same Apostle who said the Word was God, lest any cavil should arise by any oraission of an article, though so frequently neglected by all, even the most accurate authors, hath also assured us that He is the true God. For, " we know," saith he, " that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding that we may know Him that is true : and we are in Him that is true : even in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life" (i John v. 20). Article II. 165 As therefore we read in the Acts, of the " Word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ ; He is Lord of all " (Acts x. 36) : where it is acknowledged that the Lord of all is by the pronoun "he" joined unto " Jesus Christ," the immediate, not unto " God," the remote antecedent : so likewise here " the true God," is to be referred unto Christ, who standeth next unto it ; not unto the Father, spoken of indeed in the text, but at a distance. There is no reason aUeged why these last words should not be referred to the Son of God, but only this, that in grammatical construction they may be ascribed to the Father. As, when " another king arose which knew not Joseph, the same dealt subtilly with our kindred" (Acts vn. 18, 19): the same referreth us not to Joseph, but to the King of Egypt. Whereas, if nothing else can be objected, but a possibility in respect of the grammatical construction, we may as well say that Joseph dealt subtilly with his kindred, as the King of Egypt : for whatsoever the incongraity be in history, it makes no solecism in the syntax. Wherefore being Jesus Christ is the immediate antecedent to which the relative may properly be referred : being the Son of God is He of whom the apostle chiefly speaks ; being this is rendered as a reason why " we are in Him that is true," by being " in" His Son," to wit, because that Son " is the true God ; " being in the language of St John the constant title of our Saviour is " eternal life " ; being all these reasons may be drawn out of the text itself, why the title of the true God should be attributed to the Son, and no one reason can be raised from thence why it should be referred to the Father ; I can conclude no less, than that our Saviour is " the true God," so styled in the Scriptures by way of eminency, with an article prefixed as the first Christian writers which imniediately followed the Apostles did both speak and write. "^ But thirdly, were there no such particular place in which the article were expressed, yet shall we find such adjuncts fixed to the name of God when attributed unto Christ, as wUl prove equivalent to an article, or whatsoever raay express the suprerae Majesty. As when St Paul doth raagnify the Jews, " out of whora, as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen " (Rora. ix. 5). First, it is evident that Christ is caUed God, even He who came of the Jews, though not as He came-of them, that is, according to the flesh, which is here distinguished from His Godhead. Secondly, He is so called God, as not to be any of the many gods, but the one supreme or 1 66 An Exposition ofthe Creed. most high God ; for He " is God over all." Thirdly, He hath also added the title of " blessed ; " which of itself elsewhere signifieth the supreme God, and was always used by the Jews to express that one God of Israel. Wherefore it cannot be conceived St Paul should write unto the Christians, most of whom then were converted Jews or proselytes, and give unto our Saviour not only the name of God, but also adds that title which they always gave unto the one God of Israel, and to none but Him ; except he did intend they should beUeve Him to be the same God, whom they always in that manner and under that notion had adored. As therefore the Apostle speaketh of " the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for everraore " (2 Cor. xi 31), ofthe Creator, "who is blessed for ever. Amen" (Rora. i. 25); and thereby doth signify the suprerae Deity, which was so glori fied by the Israelites ; and doth also testify that we worship the sarae God under the Gospel, which they did under the law : so doth he speak ofChrist in as sublime a style, " who is over all, God blessed for ever, Araen ;" and thereby doth testify the equality, or rather identity of His Deity. If we consider the scope of the apostle, which is to magnify the Israelites by the enumeration of such privileges as belonged peculiarly to that chosen nation (the most eminent of which was contained in the genealogy of our Saviour), we shall find their glory did not consist in this, that Christ at first was born of them a man, and afterwards made a God ; for what great honour could accrue to them by the nativity of a man, whose Godhead is referred not to his birth, but to his death ? whereas this is truly honourable, and the peculiar glory of that nation, that the most High God blessed for ever should " take on Him the seed of Abraham," and come out of the Israelites "as concerning the flesh." Thus every way it doth appear, the Apostle spake of Christ as of the one eternal God. He then who was the Word which in the beginning was with God, and was God ; He whose glory Isaiah saw as the glory of the God of Israel ; He who is styled Alpha and Omega without any restriction or limitation ; He who was truly subsisting in the form of God, and equal with Him, before He was in the nature of man ; He who being man is frequently called God, and that in all those ways by which the supreme Deity is expressed ; He had a being before Christ was conceived by the "Virgin Mary, and the being which He had was the one etemal and indivisible Divine essence, by which He always was truly, really, and properly God. But aU these are certainly true of Him, in whom we be- Article II. 167 lieve, Jesus Christ ; as has been proved by clear testimonies of the sacred Scriptures. Therefore the being which Christ had before He was conceived of the Virgin, was not any created, but the Divine essence ; nor was He any creature, but the true eter nal God, which was our second assertion, particularly opposed to the Arian heresy. The third assertion, next to be demonstrated, is. That the Divine essence which Christ had, as the Word, before Fie was conceived by the Virgin Mary, He had not of Hiraself, but by communication from God the Father. For this is not to be denied, that there can be but one essence properly Divine, and so but one God of infinite wisdora, power, and majesty ; that there can be but one Person originally of Himself subsisting in that , Infinite Being, because a plurality of more persons so subsisting would necessarily infer a raultiplicity of gods ; that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is originally God, as not receiving His eternal being frora any other. Wherefore it necessarily followeth ' that Jesus Christ, who is certainly not the Father, cannot be a person subsisting in the Divine nature originally of Hiraself, and consequently, being we have already proved that He is truly and properly the Eternal God, He must be understood to have the Godhead communicated to Hira by the Father, who is not only eternally but originally God. " All things whatsoever the Father hath are Mine" (John xvi. 15), saith Christ; because in Him is the same fulness of the Godhead, and raore than that the Father cannot have : but yet in that perfect and absolute equality there is notwithstanding this disparity, that the Father has the God head not from the Son, nor any other, whereas the Son has it from the Father. Christ is the true God and eternal life; but that He is so, is from the Father : for " as the Father hath life in Hiraself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself" (John V. 26), not by participation, but by communication. It is true, our Saviour was so in the form of God, that He thought it no robbery to be equal with God : but when the Jews sought to kill Him because He " made Himself equal With God " (John v. 18, 19), He answered thera, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do ; " by that connexion of His operations, shewing the recep tion of His essence : and by the acknowledgment of His power, professing His substance from the Father. From' whence He who was equal, even in that equaUty confesses a priority, saying, " The Father is greater than I." The Son equal in respect of l68 An Exposition of the Creed. His nature, the Father greater in reference to the coraraunication of the Godhead. " I know Hira," saith Christ, " for I am from Him " (John vii 29). And because He is from the Father, there fore He is called by those of the Nicene CouncU in their Creed, " God of God, Light of light, very God of very God." The Father is God, but not of God, Light, but not of hght ; Christ is God, but of God ; Light, but of light. There is no difference or inequality in the nature or essence, because the same in both ; but the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ hath that essence of Him self from none, Christ hath the same not of Hiraself, but from Him. And being the Divine nature, as it is absolutely immaterial and incorporeal, is also indivisible, Christ cannot have any part of it only coraraunicated unto Hira, but the whole, by which He must be acknowledged co-essential, of the same substance with the Father, as the Council of Nice deterrained, and the ancient Fathers before thera taught. Hence appeareth the truth of those words of our Saviour, which raised a second raotion in the Jews to stone Hira, " I and the Father are one " (John x. 30) : where the plurality of the verb, and the neutrality of the noun, with the distinction of their persons, speak a perfect identity of their essence. And though Christ saith, "the Father is in Me and I in Hira," yet withal He saith, " I came out from the Father : " by the former shewing the divinity of His essence, by the latter the origination of Himself We must not look upon the Divine nature as SterUe, but rather acknowledge and admire the fecundity, and communicability of itself, upon which the creation of the world dependeth; God iriaking all things by His Word, to whom He first communicated that omnipotency which is the cause of all things. And this may suffice for the illustration of our third asserdon, that the Father hath coramunicated the Divine essence to the Word, who is that Jesus, who is the Christ. The fourth assertion follows. That the communication of the Divine essence by the Father, is the generation of the Son ; and Christ, who was eternally God, not from Himself, but from the Father, is the eternal Son of God. That God always had a Son, appears by Agur's question in the Proverbs of Solomon, " Who hath estabhshed all the ends of the earth? what is His name? and what is His Son's name, if thou canst tell ? " And it was the chief design of Mahomet to deny this truth, because he knew it was not otherwise possible to prefer hiraself before our Saviour. One prophet may be greater than another, and Mahomet might Article II. 169 persuade his credulous disciples that he was greater than any of the sons of men ; but while any one was believed to be the eternal Son of God, he knew it wholly impossible to prefer himself before Hira. Wherefore he frequently inculcates that blaspheray in his C Alcoran, that God hath no such Son, nor any equal with Hira : and^ his disciples have corrupted the psalm of David, reading (instead of " Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee ") " Thou art My prophet, I have educated thee." The later Jews ac knowledging the words and the proper literal reading of them, apply them so unto David, as that they deny them to belong to Christ, and that upon no other ground, than that by such an ex position they may avoid the Christian's Confession. But by the consent of the ancient Jews, by the interpretation of the blessed Apostles, we know these words belong to Christ, and in the most proper sense, to Him alone. " For, unto which of the angels said He at any time. Thou art My son, this day have I begotten Thee " (Heb. i. 5), as the Apostle argues? and if He had spoken them unto any other man, as they were spoken unto Him, the Apostle's argument had been none at all. Now that the communication of the Divine essence by the Father (which we have already proved) was the true and proper generation by which He has begotten the Son, will thus appear : because the most proper generation which we know, is nothing else but a vital production of another in the sarae nature, with a full representation of him from whora he is produced. Thus man begetteth a son, that is, produceth another man of the same human nature with himself ; and this production, as a perfect generation, becomes the foundation of the relation of paternity in him that produceth, and of filiation in him that is produced. Thus after the proUfical benediction, " Be fruitful and multiply " (Gen. i. 28), "Adam begat in his own likeness, after his image" (Gen. V. 3) : and by the continuation of the same blessing, the suc cession of human 'generations has been continued. This then is the known confession of all men, that a son is nothing but another produced by his father in the same nature with him. But God- the Father hath communicated to the Word the same Divine essence by whicli He is God ; and consequently He is of the same nature with Hira, and thereby the perfect image and similitude of Him, and therefore His proper Son. In human generations we may conceive two kinds of similitude : one in respect of the internal nature, the other in reference to the external form or figure. The former simUitude is essential and necessary, it being 170 An Exposition of the Creed. impossible a man should beget a son, and that son not be by nature a raan : the latter accidental, not only sometimes the child representing this, soraetimes the other parent, but also oftentimes neither. The simihtude then in which the propriety of genera tion is preserved, is that which consisteth in the identity of nature : and this coraraunication of the Divine essence by the Father to the Word, is evidently a sufficient foundation of such a sirailitude ; from whence Christ is called "the image of God " (2 Cor. iv. 4), "the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person " (Heb. i. 3). Nor is this coraraunication ofthe Divine essence only the proper generation of the Son, but we must acknowledge it far more proper than any natural generation of the creature, not only because it is in a more perfect manner, but also because the identity of nature is most perfect. As in the Divine essence we acknowledge all the perfections of the creature, subtracting all the imperfections which adhere unto them here in things below; so in the com munication, we raust look upon the reality "without any kind of defect, bleraish, or impurity. In human generation the Son is begotten in the sarae nature with the Father, which is performed by derivation, or decision of part of the substance of tlie parent : but this decision includes iraperfection, because it supposeth a substance divisible, and consequently corporeal, whereas the es sence of God is incorporeal, spiritual, and indivisible ; and there fore His nature is really communicated, not by derivation or decision, but by a total and plenary communication. In natural conceptions the father necessarily precedes the son, and begets one younger than himself: for being generation is for the per petuity of the species, where the individuals successively fail, it is sufficient if the parent can produce another to live after him, and continue the existence of his nature, when his person is dissolved. But this presupposeth the iraperfection of mortality, wholly to be removed when we speak of Hira who inhabiteth eternity : the essence which God always had without beginning, without be ginning He did communicate ; being always Father, as always God. Animals when they corae to the perfection of nature, then become prohfical ; in God eternal perfection sheweth His eternal fecundity. And that which is raost remarkable, in human genera tions the son is of the sarae nature with the father, and yet is not the same raan ; because, though he has an essence of the same kind, yet he has not the same essence : the power of generation depending on the first prohfical benediction, "increase and Article II. 171 multiply," it must be made by way of multiplication ; and thus every son becomes ¦ another man. But the Divine essence being by reason of its simplicity not subject to division, and in respect of its infinity incapable of multiplication, is so communicated as not to be multipUed ; insomuch that he who proceedeth by that communication hath not only the same nature, but is also the same God. The Father God, and the Word God : Abraham man, and Isaac man ; but Abraham one raan, Isaac another man. Not so the Father one God, and the Word another ; but the Father and the Word both the sarae God. Being then the propriety of generation is founded in the essential similitude of the Son unto ' the Father, by reason of the sarae which He receiveth from Him ; being the full perfect nature of God is communicated unto the Word, and that raore intimately, and with a gjreater unity or identity than can be found in huraan generations ; it followeth that this communication of the Divine nature is the proper generation, by which Christ is, and is caUed the true and proper Son of God. This was the foundation of St Peter's confession, " Thou art the Son of the living God ; " this the ground of our Saviour's distinc tion, " I go unto My Father, and to your Father." Hence did St John raise a verity, more than only a negation of falsity, when he said, we "are in the true Son;" for we which are in Him are true, not false sons, we are not as " the true Son." Hence did St Paul draw an argument of the infinite love of God towards man, in that He " spared not His own" proper " Son." Thus have we sufficiently shewed, that the eternal coraraunication of the Divine essence by the Father to the Word, was a proper genera tion by which Christ Jesus always was the true and proper Son of God : which was our fourth assertipn. The fifth and last assertion followeth, that the Divine essence was so peculiarly communicated to the Word, that there was never any other naturally begotten by the Father, and in that respect Christ is the "only-begotten Son" of God. For theclearing of which truth, it will first be necessary to inquire into the true notion of the " only-begotten " ; and then shew how it belongs particularly to Christ, by reason of the Divine nature coraraunicated by way of generation to Him alone. Firstj therefore, we must avoid the vain interpretation of the ancient heretics, who would have the restraining term "only" to belong not to the Son, but to the Father; as if the " only-begotten " were no raore than " begotten " of the Father " only." Which is both contrary to the language of the Scrip tures, and the cortimon custora of men, who use it not for Him 172 An Exposition of the Creed. who is begotten of one, but for him who alone is begotten of any. Secondly, we must by no means admit the exposition of the later heretics, who take the " only-begotten " to be nothing else but the most beloved of all the sons ; because Isaac was called the only son of Abraham, when we know that he had Ishmael beside, and Solomon said to be the "only-begotten before his mother," when David had other children even by the mother ,of Solomon. For the " only-begotten " and the raost beloved are not the same, the one having the nature of a cause in respect of the other ; and the same cannot be cause and effect to itself For though it be true, that the only son is the beloved son, yet with this order, that he is therefore beloved because the only, not therefore the only, because beloved. Although, therefore, Christ be the " only-begotten " and the beloved Son of God, yet we raust not look upon these two attributes as synonyraous, or equally significant of the sarae thing, but as one depending on the other; His unigenifure being the foun dation of His singular love. Beside, Isaac was caUed the only son of Abraham for some other reason than because he was singularly beloved of Abraham ; for he was the only son of the free woman, the only son of the promise raade to Abrahara, which was first this : " Sarah shall have a son " (Gen. xviii. 14). And then, " in Isaac shall thy seed be caUed " (Gen. xxi. 12). So that Isaac may well be called the only son of Abraham in reference to the promise, as the Apostle speaketh expressly. " By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac : and he that had received the promises offered up his only-begotten son " (Heb. xi. 17). Avoiding, there fore, these two expositions, as far short of the true notion of the "only-begotten," we must look upon it in the raost proper, full, and significant sense, as signifying a son so begotten as none other is, was, or can be: so as the term restrictive "only" shall have relation not only to the Father generating, but also to the Son begotten, and to the manner of the generation. It is true, the Father spake from heaven, saying, "Thou art My beloved Son, in whom I am, well pleased : " and thereby we are to understand, that whosoever of us are beloved by the Father, are so beloved in and through the Son. In the same manner Christ is the "only begotten" Son of God ; and as many of us as God has bestowed His love upon, that we shall be called the sons of God, are all brought into that near relation by our fellowship with Him, who is by a far more near relation the natural and eternal Son. Having thus declared the interpretation of the word, that properly, as primogeniture consisteth in prelation, so unigeniture Article II. 173 in exclusion; and that none can be strictly called the "only begotten," but He who alone was so begotten ; we shall proceed to make good our assertion, showing that the Divine essence was peculiarly communicated to the Word, by which He wa:s begotten the Son of God, and never any was so begotten beside that Son. And here we irieet with two difficulties : one showing that there were other sons qf God said to be begotten of Him, to whom either the Divine essence was communicated, and then the com munication of that to the Word made Him not the only-be gotten; or it was not communicated, and then there is no such coraraunication necessary to found such a filiation : the other, alleging that the sarae Divine essence may be com municated to anpther beside the word, and not only that it may, but that it is so, to the person of the Holy Ghost : whence either the Holy Ghost must be the Son of God, and then the word is not the " only-begotten," or if He be not the Son, then is not the communication of the Divine essence a sufficient foundation of the relation of sonship. These two objections being answered, nothing will remain farther to demonstrate this last assertion. For the first, we acknowledge that others are frequently called the sons of God, and that we call the same God " our Father " which Christ called His ; that " both He that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one, for which cause He is not ashamed to call us brethren" (Heb. ii 11): we confess that those whom St Paul " hath begotten through the Gospel," may well be terraed the " begotten of God, whose seed reraaineth in them (i Cor. iv. 15) : but withal we affirm that this our regeneration is of a nature wholly different from the generation of the Son. We are first generated, and have our natural being; after that regenerated, and so receive a spiritual renovation, and by virtue thereof an inheritance incorruptible : whereas the generation of Christ adraits no regeneration. He becoming at once thereby God, and Son, and Heir of all. The state of sonship which we come into is but of adoption, shewing the generation by which we are begotten to be but metaphorical : whereas Christ is so truly begotten, so properly the natural Son of God, that His generation clearly excludes the name of adoption ; and not only so, but when He becometh the Son of Man, even in His humanity refuseth the narae of an adopted Son. For " when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son made of a woman, raade under the Law, to redeem them that were under the Law (not that He, but), that we might receive the adoption of sons " (Gal. iv. 4, 5). He, 174 -^^ Exposition ofthe Creed. then, whose generation is totally different frora ours whom He caUeth brethren ; He whora in the sacred Scriptures the Spirit nameth the true Son, the Father sometimes His own, sometiraes His beloved, but never his adopted Son ; He who by those proper and peculiar appellations is distinguished frora us, who can claim no higher filiation than that which we receive by the privilege of adoption, He is truly the "only begotten Son of God ;" notwithstanding the same God has begotten us by His word : and the reason why He is so, is because the divine essence was coraraunicated unto Hira in His natural and eternal generation, whereas only the grace of God is conveyed unto us in our adoption. Indeed, if we were begotten of the essence of God, as Christ was, or He were only by the grace of God adopted, as we are, then could He by no propriety of speech be called the " only Son," by reason of sp many brethren : but being we cannot aspire unto the first, nor He descend unto the latter, it remaineth, we acknowledge Him, not withstanding the first difficulty, by virtue of His natural and peculiar generation, to be the "only-begotten Son." But though neither raen nor angels be begotten of fhe sub stance of God, or by virtue of any such natural generation be called sons ; yet one person we know, to whom the Divine essence is as truly and really communicated by the Father, as to the Son, which is the third person in the blessed Trinity, the Holy Ghost Why then should the Word, by that coraraunication of the Divine essence, become the Son, and not Ihe Holy Ghost by the sarae ? or if, by receiving the sarae nature. He also be the Son of God, how is the Word the "only Son"? To this I answer, that the Holy Ghost receiveth the sarae essence from the . Father, which the Word receiveth, and thereby becometh the same God with the Father and the Word ; but though the essence be the same which is communicated, yet there is a difference in the communication ; the Word being God by generation, the Holy Ghost by procession ; and though everything which is begotten proceeds, yet everything which proceeds is not begotten. Wherefore, in the language of the sacred Scriptures and the Church, the Holy Ghost is never said to be begotten, Dut to proceed from the Father ; nor is He ever called the Son, Put the gift of God. Eve was produced out of Adam, and in the sarae nature with hira, and yet was not born of him, nor was she truly the daughter of Adam ; whereas Seth, proceeding from the same person, in the similitude of the same nature, was truly and properly the son of Adam ; and this difference was not in the Article II, i7i nature produced, but in the manner of production — Eve descend ing not from Adam, as Seth did, by way of generation, that is, by natural fecundity. The Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father, in the same nature with Him, the Word proceedeth frora the same person in the same sirailitude of nature also ; but the Word pro ceeding is the Son, the Holy Ghost is not, because the first procession is by way of generation, the other is not. As, there fore, the regeneration and adoption of raan, so the procession of the Holy Ghost doth no way prejudice the eternal generation, as pertaining solely to the Son of God. Seeing then our Saviour Jesus Christ had a real being and existence before He was conceived by the Virgin Mary ; seeing the being which He had antecedently to that conception was not any created, but the one and indivisible Divine essence ; seeing He had not that divinity of Himself originally,- as the Father, but by conimunication from Him ; seeing the coraraunica tion of the sarae essence unto Hira was a proper generation ; we cannot but believe that the sarae Jesus Christ is the begotten Son of God : and seeing the same essence was never so by way of generation communicated unto any, we must also acknowledge Him the " only-begotten," distinguished frora the Holy Ghost, as Son, frora the adopted children, as the natural Son. The necessity of the belief of this part of the Article, that Jesus Christ is the proper and natural Son of God, begotten of the substance of the Father, and by that singular way cif genera tion, the "only Son," appeareth first in the confirraation of our faith concerning the redemption of mankind. For this doth show such an excellency and dignity in the person of the Media tor, as will assure us of an infinite efficacy in His actions, and value in His sufferings. We know it " is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins " (Heb. x. 4) ; and we may very well doubt how the blood of Him who hath no other nature than that of man, can take away the sins of other raen ; there appearing no such difference as will show a certainty in the one, and an impossibility in the other. But since we may be " bought with a price " (i Cor. vi. 20 ; vn. 23), well may we believe the blood of Christ sufficiently " precious " (i Peter i. 19), when we are assured that it is the "blood of God "(Acts XX. 28); nor can we question the efficacy of it in purging " our conscience from dead works" (Heb. ix. 14), if we believe Christ "offered up Himself through the eternal Spirit." If we be truly sensible of our sins, we must acknowledge that in 176 An Exposition of the Creed. every one we have offended God; and the gravity of every offence must needs increase proportionably to the dignity of the party offended in respect of the offender ; because the more worthy any person is, the more reverence is due unto Him, and every injury tendeth to his dishonour ; but between God and raan there is an infinite disproportion, and therefore every offence coraraitted against Him, must be esteemed as in the highest degree of injury. Again, as the gravity of the offence bears pro portion to the person offended, so the value of reparation arises from the dignity of the person satisfying : because the satisfaction consists in a reparation of that honour which by the injury was eclipsed ; and all honour does increase proportionably as the person yielding it is honourable. If then by every sin we have offended God, who is of infinite eminency, according unto which the injury is aggravated; how shall we ever be secure of our reconciUation unto God, except the person who has undertaken to make the reparation be of the same infinite dignity, so as the honour rendered by his obedience may prove proportionable to the offence, and that dishonour which arose from our dis obedience ? This scruple is no otherwise to be satisfied than by a behef in such a Mediator as is the "only-begotten Son" of God, of the same substance with the Father, and, consequently, of the same power and dignity with the God whom by our sins we have offended. 5^ Secondly, the belief of the eternal generation of the Son, by which He is the same God with the Father, is necessary for the confirming and encouraging a Christian, in ascribing that honour and glory unto Christ, which is due unto Him. For we are com manded to give that worship unto the Son,- which is truly and properly Divine ; the same which we give unto God the Father, who "hath committed all judgment unto the Son, that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father " (John V. 23). As it was represented to St John in a vision, when he " heard every creature 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, saying. Blessing, honour, glory, and power be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb, for ever and ever" (Rev. v. 13). Again, we are coramanded "to fear the Lord our God, and to serve Him " (Deut. x. 20) ; and that with such an emphasis, as by "Him" we are to understand Him alone, because "the Lord our God is one Lord." From whence if any one arose among the Jews, teaching under the title of a Article II. 177 prophet to worship any other beside him for God, the judgraent of the Rabbins was, that notwithstanding all the rairacles which he could work, though they were as great as Moses wrought, he ought immediately to be strangled, because the evidence of this truth, that one God only must be worshipped, is above all evidence of sense. Nor must we look upon this precept as valid only under the law, as if then there were only one God to be worshipped, but since the Gospel we had another : for our Saviour hath commended it to oiir observation, by making use of it against the devil in His temptation, saying, " Get thee hence Satan, for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve." (Matt. iv. 10). If then we be obliged to worship the God of Israel only; if we be also commanded to give the same worship to the Son, which we give to Him ; it is necessary that we should believe that the Son is the God of Israel. When the Scripture "bringeth in the first begotten into the world, it saith. Let all the angels of God worship Him (Heb. i. 6.);" but then the same Scripture caUeth that first-be gotten "Jehovah," and "the Lord ofthe whole earth." (Ps. xcvii. 5). For a man to worship that for God which is not God, knowing that it is not God, is affected and gross idolatry ; to worship that as God which is not God, thinking that it is God, is not the sarae degree, but the same sin ; to worship Him as God, who is God, thinking that He is not God, cannot be thought an act in the for- maUty void of idolatry. Lest therefore, while we are all obliged to give unto Him Divine worship, we should fall into that sin which of all others we' ought most to abhor, it is no less necessary, that we should beUeve that Son to be that etemal God, whom we are bound to worship, and whom only we should serve. Thirdly, our belief in Christ, as the eternal Son of God, is necessary to raise us unto a thankful acknowledgment of the in finite love of God appearing in the sending of His only-begotten Son into the world to die for sinners. This love of God is fre quently extolled and admired bythe Apostles. "God so loved the world," says St John, " that He gave His only-begotten Son " (John iii. 16). " God comraendeth His love towards us," saith St Paul, " in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for, us " ; in that " He spared not His own Son, but delivered Hira up for us aU." (Rom. v. 8 ; vui. 32). " In this," saith St John again, " was manifested the love of God towards us, because that God sent His only-begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved 178 An Exposition ofthe Creed. us, and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins." (i John iv. 9, 10). If we look upon all this as nothing else, but that God should cause a man to be born after another raanner than other raen, and when he was so born after a peculiar manner, yet a mortal raan ; should deliver hira to die for the sins of the world ; I see no such great expression of His love this way of rederaption, raore than would have appeared if He had redeemed us any other way. It is true, indeed, that the reparation of lapsed man is no act of absolute necessity in respect of God, but that He has as fr- Our Lord. After our Saviour's relation founded upon His eternal generation followeth His dominion in all ancient Creeds, as the necessary con sequent of His filiation. For as we believe Hira to be the Son of God, so must we acknowledge Him to be " our Lord," because the only Son must of necessity be heir and Lord of all in His Father's house, and all others who bear the name of sons, whether they be men or angels, if compared to Him, must not be looked upon as sons of God, but as servants of Christ. Three things are necessary, and more cannot be, for a plenary explication of this part of the Article ; first, the proper notation of the word Lord in the Scripture phrase, or language of the Holy Ghost ; secondly, the full signification of the same in the adequate latitude of the sense, as it belongs to Christ ; thirdly, the applica tion of it to the person making confession of his faith, and all others whom he involves in the same condition with hiraself, as saying not " my," nor ," their," but " our Lord." First, then, we raust observe, that not only Christ is "the Lord," but that this title doth so properly belong unto Hira, that " the Lord!' alone, absolutely taken, is frequently used bythe evangelists and apostles- determinately for Christ, insomuch that the angels observe that dialect, "Corae, see the place where the Lord lay" (Matt, xxviii. 6.) Novv for the true notation of the word, it will not be so necessary to inquire into the use or origination of the Greek, much less into the etymology of the correspondent Latin, as to search into the notion of the Jews, and the language of the Scriptures, according unto which tbe evangelists and apostles spoke and wrote. And first, it cannot be denied, but that the word i8o An Exposition of the Creed. which we translate " the Lord " was used by the interpreters of the Old Testament sometimes for men with no relation unto any other than human dorainion. And as it was by the translators of the Old, so is it also by the penmen of the New. But it is most certain that Christ is called Lord in another notion than that which signifieth any kind of human dominion, because as so, "there are many Lords" (i Cor. viii! 5), but He is in that notion " Lord " (Eph. iv. 5), which admits of no more than one. They are only "masters according to the flesh" (Col. ni 22), He "the Lord of glory, the Lord from heaven" (i Cor. n. 8, 15, 47), "Kingof Kings," and " Lord of all other lords" (Rev. xix. 16). Nor is it difficult to find that name amongst the books of the Law in the most high and full signification ; for it is raost frequently used as the narae of the suprerae God, sometiraes for El or Elohim, sometimes for Shaddai, or the Rock, often for Adonai, and most universally for Jehovah, the undoubted proper name of God, and that to which the Greek translators, long before our Saviour's birth, had most appropriated the name of " Lord," not only by way of explication, but distinction and particular expression. As when we read, " Thou whose name alone is Jehovah, art the most higli in all the earth" (Ps. Ixxxui. 18), and when God so expresseth Hiraself, " I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by My name Jehovah was I not known unto them " (Ex. vi. 3). In both these places, for the narae "Jehovah" the Greek translation, which the Apostles followed, hath no other name but "Lord"; and therefore undoubtedly by that word which we translate " the Lord," did they understand the proper narae of God, Jehoi^ah, and had they placed it there as the exposition of any other name of God, they had raade an interpre tation contrary to the manifest intention of the Spirit ; for it cannot be denied but God was known to Abraham by the true importance of the title Adonai, as much as by the narae of Shaddai ; as much by His dominion and sovereignty, as by His power and all- sufficiency ; but by any experimental and personal sense of the fulfilling of His promises. His name Jehovah was not known unto Him : for though God spoke expressly unto Abrahara, " all the land which thou seest, to thee wUl I give it, and to thy seed for ever " (Gen. xiii. 15 ; xxyi. 3) ; yet the history teacheth us, and St Stephen confirmeth us, "that He gave him none inheritance in it, no not so rauch as to set li^s foot on, though He proraised that He would give it to him for a pocession " (Acts vii. 5). Wherefore, when God said He was not khpwn to Abraham by His name Article II. i8i Jehovah, the interpretation of no other name can make good that expression: and therefore we have reason to believe the word which the first Greek translators, and after them the Apostles, used, raay be appropriated to the notion which the original requires ; as, indeed, it may, being derived from a verb of the same signifi cation with the Hebrew root, and so denoting the essence or existence of God, and whatsoever else may be deduced from thence, as revealed by Him to be signified thereby. Being, then, this title "Lord" thus signifieth the proper name of God " Jehovah," being the same is certainly attributed unto Christ, in a notion far surpassing all other lords, which are rather to be looked upon as servants unto Him ; it will be worth our inquiry next whether, as it is the translation of the narae Jehovah, it belong to Christ ; or whether, though He be Lord of all other lords, as subjected under His authority, yet He be so inferior unto Him whose name alone is Jehovah, as that in that propriety and eminency in which it belongeth unto the supreme God, it raay not be attributed unto Christ This doubt will easily be satisfied, if we can shew the name " Jehovah " itself to be given unto otir Saviour ; it being against all reason to acknowledge the original name, and to deny the inter pretation in the sense and fuU iraportance of that original. Where fore if Christ be the Jehovah, as so caUed by the Spirit of God, then is He so the Lord, in the same propriety and eminency in which Jehovah is. Now whatsoever did 'belong to the Messias, that raay and must be attributed unto Jesus, as being the true and only Christ. But the Jews themselves acknowledge that Jehovah shall be known clearly in the days of the Messias, and not only so, but that it is the name which properly belongeth to Him. And if they cannot but confess so much, who only read the prophecies as the eunuch did, without an interpreter; how can we be ignorant of so plain and necessary a truth, whose eyes have seen the full completion, and read the infallible interpreta tion of them ? If they could see " Jehovah the Lord of Hosts " to be the name of the Messias, who was to them " for a stone of stumbling and rock of offence " (Isa. viii. 14), how can we possibly be ignorant of it, who are taught by St Paul that in Christ this prophecy was fulfilled, " as it is written. Behold, I lay in Sipn a sturiibling stone and rock of offence, and whosoever believeth on Him shall not be ashamed " (Rom. ix. 33) ? It was no other than Jehovah who spake those words, " I will have mercy upon the house of Judah, and wiU save them by the Lord (Jehovah) 1 82 An Exposition ofthe Creed. their God, and wUl not save them by bow nor sword " (Hos. i. 7). Where not only He who is described as the original and principal cause, that is, the Father who gave his Son, but also He who is the iraraediate efficient of our salvation, and that in opposition to all other raeans or instruraental causes, is called Jehovah ; who can be no other than our Jesus, because " there is no other name under heaven given unto raen whereby we must be saved" (Acts iv. 12) As in another place he speaketh, " I wiU strengthen thera in the Lord (Jehovah), and they shall walk up and down in His name, saith the Lord (Jehovah)" (Zech. x. 1 2); where He who strengtheneth is one, and He by whom He strengtheneth is another, clearly distin guished from Him by the personal pronoun, and yet each of them is Jehovah, and " Jehovah our God is one Jehovah " (Deut. vi. 4). Whatsoever objections may be framed against us, we know Christ is the " righteous branch raised unto David, the King that shall reign and prosper, in whose days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely ; " we are assured that " this is His name whereby He shall be called, the Lord our Righteousness " (Jer. xxiii. 6), " the Lord," that is, Jehovah, the expression of His supreiriacy : and the addition of " our Righteousness " can be no dirainution to His Majesty. If those words in the prophet, "Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Sion, for, lo, I come, and I dwell in the midst of thee, saith the Lord " (Jehovah) (Zech. ii 10), did not sufficiently of themselves denote our Saviour who dwelt amongst us, as they certainly do ; yet the words which follow would evince as much : "And many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that day, and shall be My people, and I wUl dwell in the midst of thee, and thou" shalt know that the Lord of Hosts hath sent Me unto thee " (Zech. ii. 11); for what other Lord can we conceive dwelling in the midst of us, and sent unto us by the Lord of hosts, but Christ ? And as the original "Jehovah" was spoken of Christ by the holy prppbets, so the title of " Lord," as the usual interpretation of that name, was attributed unto Him by the apostles. In that signal prediction of the first age of the Gospel, God promised by Joel that " whosoever shall caU on the narae of the Lord (Jehovah) shall be delivered" (Joel ii. 32) ; and St Paul hath assured us that Christ is that Lord, by proving from thence that "whosoever believeth on Him shall not be ashamed," and, inferring from that, " if we confess with our mouth the Lord Jesus, we shall be saved" (Rom. X. 9, II, 13). For if it be a certain truth that whosoever confesseth the Lord Jesus shall be saved ; and the certainty of this truth depend upon that foundation, that " whosoever believeth Article II. 183 on him shall not be ashamed " ; and the certainty of thd,t in relation to Christ depend upon that other proraise, " Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord" shall be saved; then must "the Lord" in the thirteenth verse ofthe tenth chapter to the Romans be the same with the Lord Jesus in the ninth verse, or else St Paul's arguraent must be invalid and fallacious, as containing that in the conclusion which was not conprehended in the premises. But the Lord in the ninth verse is no other than Jehovah, as appeareth by the prophet Joel from whom that Scripture is taken. Therefore our Saviour in the New Testament is called Lord, as that name or title is the interpretation of Jehovah. If we consider the office of John the Baptist peculiar unto him, we know " it was he of whom it is written " in the prophet Malachi, " I will send My messenger, and he shall prepare the way before Me" (Matt xi 10; Mai. iii. i); we are sure He who spake those words was (Jehovah) the Lord of hosts, and we are as sure that Christ is that Lord before whose face John the Baptist prepared the way. " The voice of hira that crieth in the wilderness," saith Isaiah, " Prepare ye the way of the Lord " (Jehovah) ; and " this is he that was sppken of by the prophet Isaiah," saith St Matthew (Matt. iii. 3) ; this is he of whom his father Zechariah did divinely presage, " Thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest, for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare His ways " (Luke i 76) ; where Christ is certainly " the Lord," and " the Lord" undeniably Jehovah. Nor is this the only notation of the name or title Lord, taken in a sense divine, above the expression of all mere human power and dominion ; for as it is Often used as the interpretation of the name Jehovah, so is it also for that of Adon or Adonai. " The Lord said unto my Lord" (Ps. ex. 1), said David, that is in the original, "Jehovah" unto "Adon," and that "Adon" is the "Word," that Lord is Christ. We know the Teraple at Jerusalem was the temple of the most High God, and the Lord of that temple in the eraphasis of an Hebrew Article was Christ, as appeareth by that prophet. " The Lord whora ye seek shall suddenly corae to His teraple even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye dehght in" (Mai. hi. i). Now this notation, as it is the interpretation of Adon, signifieth immediately and properly " dorainion," implying a right of posses sion, and power of disposing. Which doth not only agree with that other notion of Jehovah, but presupposeth it, as following and flowing from it. For He who alone hath a being or existence of 184 An Exposition of the Creed. Hiraself, and thereby is the fountain of all things beside Himselt, raust be acknowledged to have full power and dominion over all. Because everything raust necessarily belong to Him, from whom it hath received what it is. Wherefore being Christ is the Lord, as that titie is taken for Jehovah, the name of God, expressing the necessary existence, and independence of His single being, and consequently the dependency of all others upon Him; it followeth that He be acknowledged also the Lord, as that name expresseth Adon, signifying power authoritative, and proper dominion. Thus having explained the notation of the word Lord, which we pro pounded as the first part of our exposition, we come next to the second, which is to declare the nature of this dominion, and to shew, how, and in what respect, Christ is " the Lord." Now for the full and exact understanding of the dominion seated or invested in Christ as the Lord, it will be necessary to distinguish it according to that diversity which the Scriptures represent unto us. As therefore we have observed two natures united in His person, so must we also consider two kinds of dominion belonging respectively to those natures ; one inherent in his divinity, the other bestowed upon His humanity ; one, by which He is the Lord the Maker of aU things, the other, as He is made Lord of all things. For the first, we are assured, that the " Word was God," that by the same Word " all things were made ; and without Him was - not anything made that was made " (John i. r-3) ; we must acknowledge that whosoever is the Creator of all things, must have a direct dominion over aU, as belonging to the possession of the Creator who made all things. Therefore the Word, that is, Christ as God, has the suprerae and universal dominion of the world. Which was well expressed by that faraous confession of ^o longer doubting but believing Thomas, " My Lord, and my rGod " (John xx. 28). For the second, it is also certain that there was some kind of lordship given or bestowed on Christ, whose very unction proves no less than an imparted dominion : as St Peter tells us, that He was " made both Lord and Christ " (Acts ii. 36). What David spake of man, the apostle has applied peculiarly unto Hira, " Thou crownedst Him with glory and honour, and didst set Him over the works of Thy hands. Thou hast put all things in subjec tion under His feet" (Heb. U. 7, 8). Now a dominion thus imparted, given, derived, or bestowed, cannot be that which belongeth unto God, as God, founded in the Article IL 185 Divine nature, because whatsoever is such, is absolute and inde pendent. Wlierefore this lordship thus imparted or acquired, appertaineth to the human nature, and belongeth to our Saviour, as the Son of man. The right of judicature is part of this power, and Christ Himself hath told us that the Father " hath given Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of man " (John V. 27) ; and by virtue of this delegated authority, the " Son of man shall corae in the glory of His Father with His angels, and re-v^ard every man according' to His works" (Matt xvi. 27). Part ofthe same dominion is the power of forgiving sins; as pardoning, no less than punishing, is a branch of the supreme magistracy ; and Christ did therefore say to the sick of the palsy, " Thy sins be forgiven thee, that we might know that the Son of man had power on earth to forgive sins " (Matt. ix. 2, 6). Another branch of that power is the alteration of the law, there being the sarae authority required to abrogate or alter, which is to raake a law ; and Christ asserted Himself to be " greater than the temple," shewing that " the Son of man was Lord even of the Sabbath day " (Matt xu. 8). This dominion thus given unto Christ iir His human nature, was a direct and plenary power over all things, but was not actually given Him at once, but part while He lived on earth, part after His death and resurrection. For though it be true, " that Jesus knew," before his death, " that the Father had given all things into His hands (John xiii. 3), yet it is observable that in the same place it is written, that He likewise knew " that He was come from God, and went to God," and part of that power He received when He came from God, with part He was invested when He went to God ; the first to enable Him, the second, not^only so, but also to reward Him. " For to this end Christ both died, rose, and revived, that He might be Lord both of the dead and living " (Rom. xiv. 9). After His resurrection He said to the disciples, "All power is given unto Me in heaven and in earth" (Matt, xxviii. 18). He " drank of the brook in the way, therefore He hath lift up His head" (Ps. ex. 7). Because "He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, therefore God hath also 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" (Phil. U. 8-1 1). Thus for and after His death. He was instated in a full power 1 86 An Exposition ofthe Creed. and dominion over all things, even as the Son of man, but exalted by the Father, " who raised Him from the dead, and set Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, far above aU principality, and power, and might, and dorainion, and every name that is named, not only in this worid, but also in that which is to come; and hath put aU things under His feet, and gave Him to be Head over all things to the Church " (Eph. i. 20-22). Now as all the power given unto Christ as man had not the sarae beginning in respect of the use or possession, sp neither when begun, shall it aU. have the same duration. For parf of it being merely economical, aiming at a certain end, shall then cease and terminate, when that end for which .it was given shaU be ac complished : part, being either due upon the union of the human nature with the Divine, or upon covenant, as a reward for the suffer ings eridured in that riature, must be coeval with that union and that nature which so suffered, and consequently must be eternal. Of the first part of this dominion did David speak, when by the spirit of prophecy he called his Son his Lord. " The Lord said unto My Lord, Sit thou at My right hand, until I make Thine ene mies Thy footstool" (Ps. ex. i) : where the continuation of Christ's dominion over His eneraies is promised to be prolonged until their final and total subjection. " For He must reign, till He hath put all things under His feet" (i Cor. xv. 25). And as we are sure of the continuation of that kingdom till that time, so we are assured of the resignation of that time. For " when He shall have put down all rule, and all authority and power, then shall He deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father. And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may. be aU in aU " (i Cor. xv. 24, 28). Thus He which was appointed to " rule in the midst of His enemies " (Ps. ex. 2) during their rebellion, shall resign up His commission after their subjection. But we must not look upon Christ only in the nature of a general who has received a commission, or of an arabassador, with perfect instructions ; but of the only Son of God, em powered and employed to destroy the enemies of His Father's kingdom : and though thus empowered and comraissioned, though resigning that authority which has already had its perfect work, yet stiU the only Son and the Heir of all things in His Father's house, never to relinquish His dorainion over tho,se whom He has purchased with His own blood, never to be deprived of that reward which was assigned Him for His sufferings ; for if the Article II. 187 prize which we expect in the race of our iraperfect obedience be an imniarcessible crown, if the weight of glory which we look for from Him be eternal, then cannot His perfect and absolute obedience be crowned with a fading power, or He .cease ruling over us, who has always reigned in us. We shall for ever reign ¦with Him, and He will make us priests and kings, but so that He continue stUl fpr ever High Priest and King of kings. The certainty of this eternal dominion pf Christ as man, we may well ground upon the promise made to David, because by reason of that promise, Christ Himself is called David. For so God speaketh concerning His people : " I wUl set up one Shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even My servant David ; he shall feed thera, and he shall be their Shepherd. And I the Lord will be their God, and My servant David a Prince araong them ; I the Lord have spoken it " (Ezek. xxxiv. 23, 24). Now the promise was thus made expressly to David : " Thy house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee : thy throne shall be established for ever" (2 Sam. vii. 16). And although that term " for ever '' in the Hebrew language may signify oft- times no more than a certain duration so long as the nature of the thing is durable, or at the utmost, but to the end of all things ; and so the economical dominion or kingdom of Christ may be thought sufficiently to fulfil that promise, because it shall certainly continue so long as the nature of that econoray requireth, tUl all things be perforraed for which Christ was sent, and tha!t con tinuation will infallibly extend unto the end of all things : yet some times also the sarae terra "for ever" signifieth that absolute eternity of future duration which shall have no end at all ; and that it is so far to be extended, particularly in that promise made to David, and to be fulfilled in his Son, is as certain as the proraise. For the angel Gabriel did give that clear exposition to the blessed virgin, when in this manner he foretold the glory of Hira who was then to be conceived in her womb : " The Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David, and He shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever, and of His kingdom there shall be no end " (Luke i. 32, 33). Nor is this clearer in Gabriel's expUcation of the promise, than in Daniel's provision of the performance, who " saw in the night visions, and behold one, like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and came fo the Ancient of days, and they brought Him near before him. And there was given Him dominion and glory, and a kingdom, that all people and languages should serve Him: His dominion is an everlasting 1 88 An Exposition ofthe Creed. dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom that which shaU not be destroyed" (Dan. vii 13, 14). Thus Christ is Lord bpth by a natural and independent dorainion, as God, the Creator, and consequently the Owner of the works of His hands, and by a derived, imparted, and depen dent right, as man, sent, anointed, raised, and exalted, and so made Lord and Christ: which authority so given and -bestowed upon Him, is partiy economical, and therefore to be resigned into the hands of the Father, when all those ends for which it was imparted are accomplished : partly so proper to the union, or due unto the passion of the human nature, that it must be coeval with it, that is, of eternal duration. The third part of our explication is the due consideration of the object of Christ's dominion, inquiring whose Lord He is, and how ours. To which purpose first observe the latitude, extent, or rather universality of His power, under which all things are com prehended, as subjected to it. For " He is Lord of all " (Acts x. 36), saith St Peter, of aU things, and of aU persons ; and He must be so, who made all things as God, and to whom all power is given as raan. To Hira then all things are subjected whose sub jection iraplieth not a contradiction. " For He hath put all things under His feet, but when He saith All things are put under Hira, it is raanifest that He is excepted which did put aU things under 'Hira " (i Cor. xv. 27). God only then excepted, whose original dominion is repugnant to the least subjection, all things are sub ject unto Christ, whether they be things in heaven, or things on earth. In heaven He is far above all principalities and powers, and "all the angels of God worship Him" (Heb. i. 6); on earth " all nations are His inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth are His possession " (Ps. U. 8). Thus Christ is certainly " our Lord," because He is the Lord of all, and when all things were subjected to Hira, we were not excepted. But in the midst of this universality of Christ's regal authority, it will be further necessary to find some propriety pf dominion, by which He may be said to be peculiarly " our Lord." It is true He made us, and not we ourselves, we are the work of His hands ; but the lowest of His creatures can speak as much. We are stUl preserved by His power, and as He made us, so doth He maintain us ; but at the same time He feedeth the ravens, and clotheth the lilies of the field. Wherefore, beside His original right of creation, and His continued right of preservation, we shall find a more peculiar right of redemption, belonging properly to Article II 189 the sons of men. And in this redemption, though a single word, we shall find a double title to a most just dominion, one of con quest, another of purchase. We were first servants of the eneray of God, for Him we obeyed, "and His servants we are whom we obey " (Rom. vi. 16) ; when Christ "though death destroyed him that had the power of death, that is, the devU, and delivered us. He spoiled princi palities and powers, and made a show of them, openly triumphing over them " (Col. ii. 15). But contrary to the custom of triumph ing conquerors. He did not seU, but buy us ; because while He saved us, He died for us, and that death was the price by which He purchased us ; even so this dying victor gave us life ; upon the cross, as His triumphant chariot. He shed that precious blood which bought us, and thereby became our Lord, by right of re demption, both as to conquest and to purchase. Beside, He hath not only bought us, but provideith for us ; what ever we have, we receive from Him as the master of the famUy ; we hold of Him all temporal and eternal blessings, which we enjoy in this, or hope for in another life. He is the " Prince of Ufe" (Acts in. 15), and by Him we live; He is "the Lord of glory" (i Cor. ii. 8), and we are "called by His Gospel to "the obtaining of the glory of our Lord." Wherefore He hath us under His dominion, and becomes our Lord by right of promotion. Lastly, men were not anciently sold always by others, but some tiraes by themselves, and whosoever of us truly believe in Christ, have given up our naraes unto Htira. In our baptismal vow we bind ourselves unto His service, that "henceforth we wUl not serve sin ; but yield ourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and our members as instruments of righteousness unto God : " that " as we have yielded our members servants to uncleanness, and to iniquity unto iniquity ; even so " we should " yield our members servants to righteousness unto holiness " (Rom. vi. 6, 13, 19). And thus the same dorainion is acknow ledged by compact, and confirmed by covenant, and so Christ becomes " our Lord " by right of obligation. The necessity of believing and professing our faith in this part of the article, appeareth first in the discovery of our condition ; for by this we know that we are not our own, neither our persons, nor our actions. " Know ye not," saith St Paul, " that ye are not your own? for ye are bought with a price" (i Cor. vi. 19, 20). And ancient servitude, to which the scriptures relate, put the igo An Exposition of the Creed. servants wholly in the possession of their raaster, so that their persons were as properly his, as the rest of his goods. And if we be so in respect of Christ, then may we not live to ourselves, but to Him, for in this the difference of service and freedora doth properly consist : we cannot do our own wills, but the will of Him whose we are. Christ took upon Him the form of a servant : and to give us a proper and perfect example of that condition, He telleth us, " I came down frora heaven, not to do Mine own will, but the will of Hira that sent Me ". (John vi. 38). First, therefore, we must conclude with the Apostle reflecting upon Christ's dominion and our obligation, that " none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself For whether we live, we live unto the Lord, or - whether we die, we die unto the Lord ; whether we live therefore or die, we are the Lord's " (Rom. xiv. 7, 8). Secondly, the same is necessary both to enforce and invite us to obedience ; to enforce us, as " the Lord," to invite us, as " Christ the Lord." If we acknowledge ourselves to be His servants, we must "bring into captivity e^very thought to the obedience of Christ" (2 Cor. x. 5). He which therefore died, and rose and revived, that He might become the Lord both of the dead and living, maketh not that death and resurrection efficacious to any but such, as by their service acknowledge that dominion which He purchased. He " though He were a Son, yet learned obedience by the things which He suffered, and being made perfect. He is become the Author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey Him " (Heb. v. 8, 9). Thus the consideration of the power in vested in Him, and the necessity of the service due unto Him, should force us to obedience; whUe the consideration of Hira whom we are thus obliged to serve, should allure and invite us. When God gave the law with fire and thunder, the affrighted Israelites desired to receive it from Moses, and upon that receipt proraised obedience. " Go thou near," said they to hira, " and hear all that the Lord our God shall say, and speak thou unto us, and we will hear it and do it " (Deut. v. 27). If they interpreted it so great a favour to receive the Law by the hands of Moses ; if they raade so ready and cheerful a promise of exact obedience unto the Law so given ; how should we be invited to the same promise, and a better performance, who have received the whole will of God revealed to us by the Son of Man ? who are to give an account of our performance to the same Man set down at the right hand of the Father? He first took our nature to become our brother, that with so near a relation He might be made our Lord. If then Article II. 191 the patriarchs did cheerfully live in the land of Goshen'subject to the power and coramand of Egypt, because, that power was in the hand of Joseph their exalted brother ; shall not we with all readi ness of mind, submit ourselves to the divine dominion now given to Him who gave Himself for us ? Shall all the angels -worship Him, and all the archangels bow down before Him, and shall not we be proud to join with them? Thirdly, the belief of Christ's dorainion is necessary for the regulation of all power, authority, and dominion on earth, both in respect of those who rule, and in relation to those that obey. From hence the most absolute monarchs learn, that the people which they rule are not their own, but the subjects of a greater Prince, by Him committed to their charge. Upon this Sf Paul grounds his admonition to masters, " Give .unto your servants that which is just and equal, knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven " (Col. iv. I ). God gave a power to the Israelites to raake hired servants of their brethren, but not slaves, and gives this reason of the interdiction, " For they are My servants which I brought forth out of the land of Egypt, they shall not be sold as bondraen " (Lev. xxv. 42). What tenderness then should be used towards those, who are the servants of that Lord who redeemed them from a greater bondage, who bought them with a higher price ? From hence those which are subject, learn to obey the powers which are of human ordination, because in them they obey the Lord of all. Subjects bear the sarae proportion, and stand in the sarae relation to. their governors, with servants to their masters : and St Paul hath given them this charge, "Obey in all things your masters according to the flesh, and whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men, knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward ofthe inheritance, for ye serve fhe Lord Christ " (Col. iii 22-24). Neither do we learn from hence only whom, but also how, to obey. For while we look upon one Lord in heaven, while we consider Him as the " Lord of lords," we regulate our obedierice to them by our service due to Him, and so are always ready to obey, but " in the Lord." Lastly, this title of our Saviour is of necessary beUef for our comfort and encouragement. For being Lord of all, He is able to dispose of all things for the benefit of those who serve Him. He who commanded the unconstant winds, and stUled the raging seas, He who multiplied the loaves and fishes, and created wine with the word of His mouth, hath all creatures now under exact obedience, and therefore none can want whom He undertaketh to 192 Alt Exposition of the Creed. provide for. "For thesame Lord over aU is rich unto all that caU upon Him" (Rom. x. 12). Many are the eneraies of those persons who dedicate themselves unto His service ;_ but our eneraies are His, and part of His dorainion is therefore given Him, and to continue in Him untU aU His enemies be made His foot stool. Great is the power of the lusts of our flesh which war in our members, but His grace.is sufficient for us, and the power pf that spirit by which He ruleth in us. Heavy are the afflictions which we are called to undergo for His sake, but if we suffer with Him, we shall reign together with Hira, and blessed be that dominion, which makes us all kings, that He may be for ever Lord of lords, and King of kings. After this explication, every Christian may perceive what he is to believe in this part of the article, and express hiraself how he would be understood, when he maketh this profession of his faith, I believe in Christ " our Lord." For thereby we raay and ought to intend thus much ; I do assent unto this as a certain and infallible truth, taught rae by God Himself, that Jesus Christ the only Son of God is the true Jehovah, who has that being which is originally and eternally of itself, and of which aU other beings do essentiaUy depend ; that by the right of emanation of all things from Him, He hath an absolute, suprerae, and universal dominion over all things, as God ; that as the Son of Man He is invested with all power in heaven and earth ; partly economical, for the completing our redemption, and the destruction of our enemies, to continue to the end of all things, and then to be resigned to the Father; partly consequent unto the union, or due unto the obedience of His passion, and so eternal, as belonging to that kingdom which shall have no end. And though He be thus Lord of all things by right of the first creation, and constant preservation of them, yet is He more peculiarly the Lord of us who by faith are consecrated to His service ; for through the work of our redemption He becometh our Lord both by the, right of conquest and of purchase ; and making us the sons of God, and providing heavenly mansions for us. He acquireth a further right of promotion, which, considering , the covenant we all make to serve Him, is at last completed in the right of a voluntary obligation ; and thus I believe in Christ " our Lord." // ARTICLE III. Which was conceived by the Holy Ghost, bom of the Virgin Mary. THESE words, as they now stand, clearly distinguish the con ception of Jesus from His nativity, attributing the first to the Holy Ghost, the second to the blessed Virgin ; whereas the ancient Creeds made no such distinction, but without any parti cular express mention of the conception, had it only in this manner, " who was born by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary ; " understanding by the word " born," not only the nativity, but also the conception and generation. This is very necessary to be observed, because otherwise the addition df a word will prove the diminution of the sense of the Article. For they who speak only' of the operation of the Holy Ghost in Christ's conception, a.nd of the manner of His birth, leave out most part of that which was anciently understood under that one term of being " born " of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary. That therefore nothing may be omitted which is pertinent to express the full intent, and to comprehend the utmost signification of this Article, we shall consider three Persons mentioned, so far as they are concerned in it. The first is He who was conceived and born ; ,the second. He by whose energy or operation He was conceived ; the third. She who did conceive and bear Him. For the first, the relative in the front of this carries us clearly back unto the former Article^ and teUs us that He who was thus conceived and JDorn, was Jesus Christ the only Son of God. And being we have already demonstrated, that this only Son is therer fore called so, because He was begotten by the Father from all eternity, and so of the sarae substance with Him ; it followeth that this Article at the first beginning, or by virtue of its connexion, can import no less than this most certain but miraculous truth, that He who was begotten by the Father before all worlds, was now in the fulness of time " conceived by the Holy Ghost, and born of the Virgin Mary." Again, being by the conception and 194 An Exposition of the Creed. birth is to be understood whatsoever was done toward the produc tion of the human nature of our Saviour, therefore the same rela tive, considered with the words which follow it, can speak no less than the incarnation of that person ; and thus even in the entry of the Article, we meet with the incarnation of the Son of God ; that great mystery wrapped up in that short sentence of St John, " The Word was made flesh." Indeed the pronoun hath relation not only unto this but to the following Articles, which have their necessary connexion with, arid foundation in this third : for He who was conceived and born, and so made man, did in that human nature suffer, die, and rise again. Now when we say this was the Word, and that Word was God, being whosoever is God cannot cease to be so ; it must necessarily foUow, that He was made raan by joining the huraan nature with the Divine. But then we must take heed lest we conceive, because the Divine nature belongeth to the Father, to which the huraan is conjoined, that therefore the Father should be incarnate, or conceived and born. For as certainly as the Son was crucified, and the Son alone, so certainly the same Son was incarnate, and that Son alone. Although the human nature was conjoined with the Divinity, which is the nature common to the Father and the Son, yet was that union made only in the person of the Son. Which doctrine is to be observed against the heresy of the Patripassians, which was both very ancient and far diffused ; making the Father to be incarnate, and becoming man to be crucified. But this very Creed was always thought to be a sufficient confutation of that fond opinion, in that the incarnation is not subjoined to the first, but to the second Article ; we do not say, " I believe in God the Father Alraighty, which was con ceived," but " in His only Son our Lbrd, which was conceived by the Holy Ghost." First then we believe that He which was made flesh was the "Word, that He who took upon Hira the nature of man was not the Father, nor the Holy Ghost, nor any other person, but the only begotten Son. And when we, say that person was " conceived " and " boni," we declare He was made really and truly man, of the same human nature, which is in all other men, who by the ordinary way of generation are conceived and born. For the " Mediator between God and man is- the man Christ Jesus " (i Tim. n. 5). That since " by man came death," by man also should come "the resurrection ofthe dead" (i Cor. xv. 21). As sure then as the first Adam and we who are redeemed are men. Article III. 195 so certainly is the second Adam and our Mediator man. He is therefore frequently called the " Son of man," and in that nature He was always promised : first to Eve, as her " seed " (Gen. iii. 15), and consequently her son; then to Abraham, "in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed " (Gen. xxii. 18), and that " seed is Christ " (Gal. iii. 16), and so he is the Son of Abraham ; next to David, as his " Son to sit upon his throne," and so He is " made of the seed of David according to the flesh " (Rom. i. 3), the "Sou of David," "the Son of Abraham " (Matt i. i), and con sequently of the same nature with David and with Abraham. And as He was their Son, so are we His brethren, as descending from the same Father Adam ; " and therefore it behoved Him to be made like unto His brethren" (Heb. ii 17). For He "laid not hold on the angels, but on the seed of Abraham," and so becarae not an angel, but a man. As then man consisteth of two different parts, body and soul, so doth Christ; He assuraed a body at His conception of the blessed Virgin. '' Forasrauch as the children are partakers of the flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same " (Heb. ii. 14). The verity bf His body stands upon the truth of His nativity ; and the actions and passions of His life shew the nature of His flesh. He was first born with a body which was " prepared for Hira," of the same appearance with those of other infants ; He grew up by degrees, and was so far from being sustained without accustomed nutrition of our bodies, that He was observed even by His eneraies to come eating and drinking, and when He did not so. He suffered hunger and thirst Those ploughers never doubted of the true nature pf His flesh, who " ploughed upon his back, and make long furrows." The thoms which pricked His sacred temples, the nails which penetrated through His hands and feet, the spear which pierced His sacred side, give sufficient testimony of the natural tendemess and frailty of His flesh. And lest His fasting forty days together, lest His walking on the waters and traversing the seas, lest His sudden standing in the midst of His disciples when the doors were shut, should raise an opinion that His body was not true and proper flesh, He confirmed first His own disciples, '-' Feel and see, that a spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see Me to have " (Luke xxiv. 39). As therefore we believe the coming of Christ, so must we confess Him to have come in the verity of our human nature, even in true and proper flesh. With this de terminate expression was it always necessary to acknowledge Hira : 196 An Exposition of the Creed. for " every spirit that confesseth Jesus Christ come in the flesh, is of God, and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus Christ come in the flesh, is not of God " (i John iv. 2, 3). This spirit appeared early in opposition to the apostolical doctrine, and Christ, who is both God and man, was as soon denied to be man, as God. Simon Magus, the arch-heretic, first began, and many after followed him. And certainly if the Son of God would vouchsafe to take the frailty of our flesh, He would not omit the nobler part, our soul, without which He could not be man. For " Jesus increased in wisdom and stature" (Luke ii. 52); one in respect of His body, the other of His soul. Wisdom belongeth not to the flesh, nor can the knowledge of God, which is infinite, increase : He then whose knowledge did improve together ¦with His years, must have a sub ject proper for it, which was no other than a human soul. This was the seat of His finite understanding and directed wiU, distinct from the will of His Father, and consequently of His Divine nature, as appeareth by that known submission, " not My will, but Thine be done" (Luke xxii. 42). This was the subject of those affections and passions which so manifestly appeared in Him ; nor spake He any other than a proper language, when before His suffering He said, "My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death " (Matt. xxvi. 38). This was it which on the cross before the departure frora the body, He recoraraended to the Father, teaching us in whose hands the souls of the departed are, for " when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, He said. Father, into Thy hands I coramend My spirit : and having said thus, He gave up the ghost " (Luke xxiii. 46). And as His death was nothing else but the separation of the soul from His body, so the life of Christ as Man did consist in the conjunction and vital union of that soul with the body. So that He who was " perfect God" was also perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting," Which is to be observed and asserted against the ancient heretics, who taught that Christ assumed human flesh, but that the Word or His Divinity was unto that body in the place of an informing soul. Thus the whole perfect and complete nature of man was assumed by the Word, by Him who was "conceived and born" of a woman, and so made a Man. And being the Divine nature which " He had before," could never cease to be what before it was, nor ever become what before it was not ; therefore He who was God before by the Divine nature which He had, was in this incarnation Article III. 197 made man by that human nature which He then assumed, and so reaUy and truly was both God and man. And thus this third Article from the conjunction with the second, teacheth us no less than the two natures really distinct in Christ incarnate. For if both natures were not preserved complete and distinct in Christ, it must be either by the conversion and transubstantiation of one into the other, or by commixtion and confusion of both into one. But neither of these ways can consist with the person of our Saviour, or the office of our Mediator. For if we should conceive such a mixtion and confusion of substances as to make an union of natures, we should be so far from acknowledging Hira to be both God and man, that thereby we should profess Him to be neither God nor man, but a person of a nature as different from both, as all mixed bodies are distinct from each element which concurs unto their composition. Besides, we know there were in Christ the affections proper to the nature of man, and all those infirmities which belong to us, and cannot be conceived to belong to that nature of which the Divine was but a part Nor could our humanity be so commixed or confounded with the Divinity of our Saviour, but that the Father had been made man as much as the Son, because the Divine nature is the same both of the Father and the Son., Nor ought we to have so low an esteera of that infinite and independent being, as to think it so coramixed with, or immersed in, the creature. Again, as the confusion, so the conversion of natures is im possible. For, first, we cannot with the least show of probability conceive the Divine nature of Christ to be transubstantiated into the human nature ; as those whom they call Flandrian Ana baptists in the Low Countries at this day maintain. There is a plain repugnancy even in the supposition, for the nature of man must be made, the nature of God cannot be made, and conse quently cannot, become the nature of man. The immaterial, indivisible, and immortal Godhead cannot be divided into a spiritual and incorruptible soul, and a carnal and corruptible body, of which two humanity consisteth. There is no other Deity of the Father than of the Son, and therefore if this was converted into that huraanity, then was the Father also that man, and grew in knowledge, suffered, and died, and for three days there was no living God. We must not therefore so far stand upon the pro priety, of speech, when it is written, " The Word was made flesh," as to destroy the propriety both of the Word and of tkie flesh. Secondly, we must not, on the contrary, invent a conversion of 198 An Exposition of the Creed. the human nature into the Divine, as the Eutychians of old did fancy. For sure the incarnation could not at first consist in such a conversion, it being uniraaginable how that which had no being should be made by being turned into something else. Therefore the humanity of Christ could not at the first be made by being the Divimty of the Word. Nor is the incarnation so preposterously expressed, as if the flesh were made the Word, but that the Word was made flesh. And if the manhood were not in the first act of incarnation converted into the Divine nature, as we see it could not be, then is there no pretence of any tirae or manner in or by which it was afterward so transubstantiated. Vain therefore was that old conceit of Eutyches, who thought the union to be made so in the natures, that the humanity was absorbed and wholly turned into the Divinity, so that by that transtrbstantiation the human nature had no longer being. And well did the ancient Fathers, who opposed this heresy, make use of the sacramental union between the bread and wine, and the body and blood of Christ, and thereby shewed, that the human nature of Christ is no more really converted into the Divinity, and so ceaseth to be the human nature, than the substance of the bread and wine is really converted into the substance of the body and blood, and thereby ceaseth to be both bread and wine. From whence it is by the way observable, that the Church in those days understood no such doctrine as that of transubstantiation. Being then He who is " conceived " was the " only Son of God," ind that " only Son " begotten of the substance of the Father and so always subsisted in the Divine nature ; being by the same conception He was made truly man, and consequently assumed a human nature ; being- these two natures cannot be made one either by commixtion or conversion, and yet there can be but one Christ subsisting in them both, because that only Son was He who is conceived and born ; it followeth that the union which was not made in the nature, was made in the person of the Word : that is, it was not so made, that out of both natures one only should result, but only so, that to one person no other should be added. Nor is this union only a scholastic speculation, but a certain and necessary truth, without which we cannot have one Christ, but two Christs, one Mediator, but two Mediators ; without which we cannot join the second Article of our Creed with the third, making them equally belong to the same Person ; without which we cannot interpret the sacred Scriptures, or understand the Article III. igg history of our Saviour. For certainly He which was before Abraham, was in the days of Herod born of a woman ; He who preached in the days of Noah, began to preach in the reign of Tiberius, being at that time about thirty years of age ; He was demonstrated the Son of God with power, who was the seed of David according to the flesh ; He who died on the cross, raised Him from the dead who died so, being " put to death through the flesh, and quickened by the Spirit" (i Pet in. i8) ; He was " of the fathers according to the flesh,'' who was " God over all blessed for ever " (Rom. ix. 5). Being these and the like actions and affections cannot come from the same nature, and yet must be attributed to the same Person ; as we must acknowledge a diversity of natures united, so must we confess the identity of the person in whom they are conjoined, against the ancient heresy of the Nestorians, condemned in the CouncU of Ephesus. By the Holy Ghost. Having thus despatched the consideration of the first Person concerned in this Article, and the actions contained in it so far as distinctly from the rest they belong to Him, we descend unto the other two concerned in the same, and first to Him whose opera tion did precede the conception, the Holy Ghost. Which second part some may think to require a threefold consideration : first, of the conception ; secondly, of the Person ; thirdly, of the opera tion. But for the Person or existence of the Holy Ghost, that is here orily mentioned obliquely, and therefore to be reserved for another Article, where it is propounded directly. And for the conception itself, that belongeth not so properly to the Holy Ghost, of whom the act cannot be predicated. For though Christ " was conceived by the Holy Ghost," yet the Holy Ghost did not conceive Him, but said unto the Virgin, " thou shalt con ceive" (Luke i 31). There remaineth therefore nothing proper and peculiar to this second part, but that operation of the Holy Ghost in Christ's conception, whereby the Virgin was enabled to conceive, and by virtue whereof Christ is said to be conceived by Him. Now, when we say the conception of our Saviour was wrought by the operation of the Spirit, it will be necessary to observe, first, what is excluded by that attribution to the Spirit ; secondly, what is included in that operation of the Spirit For the first of these, we may take notice in the salutation of 200 An Exposition ofthe Creed. the angel, when he told the blessed Virgin she should conceive and bring forth a Son, she said, " How shaU this be, seeing I know not a man ? " (Luke i, 34) ; by which words she excludeth first aU men, and then herself: aU men by that assertion, "I know not a man," herself by the question, " how shall this be, seeing " it is so ? First, our Melchizedec had no father on earth ; in general, not any man ; in particular, not Joseph. It is true, " His mother Mary was espoused to Joseph," but it is as true, " before they came together, she was found with chUd of the Holy Ghost" (Matt i. 18). We read in St Luke that "the parents brought up the child Jesus into the Temple" (Luke ii. 27), but these parents were not the father and the mother, but as it follows, "Joseph and His mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of Him " (Luke ii. 33). It is true, Philip calleth Him " Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of Joseph " (John i. 45) ; and which is raore. His mother said unto Him, " Behold, Thy father and I have sought Thee sorrowing " (Luke ii. 48) ; but this must be only the reputed father of Christ, he being only, " as was sup posed, the Son of Joseph, which was the son of Heh" (Luke in. 23). Whence they must needs appear without all excuse, who therefore affirm our Saviour to have been the proper son of Joseph, because the genealogy belongeth to him, whereas in that very place where the genealogy begins, Joseph is called the sup posed father. How can it then therefore be necessary Christ should be the true Son of Joseph, that He may be known to be the Son of David, when in the same place where it is proved that Joseph came from David, it is denied that Christ carae from Joseph ? And that not only in St Luke where Joseph begins, but also in St Matthew where he ends the genealogy. " Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ " (Matt. i. 16). Howsoever then the genealogies are described, whether one belong to Joseph, the other to Mary, or both to Joseph, it is from other parts of the Scriptures infallibly certain, not only that Christ descended lineally from David according to the flesh, but also that the same Christ was begotten of the Virgin Mary, and not by Joseph. Secondly, as the blessed Virgin excluded all mankind, and- par ticularly Joseph, to whom she was then espoused, by her asser tion, so did she exclude herself by the manner of the question, shewing that of herself she could not cause any such conception. Although she may be thought the "root of Jesse," yet could she not germinate of herself; though Eve were the mother of all Article III. 201 living, yet generation was founded on the Divine benediction which was given to both together : for " God blessed them and said unto them. Be fruitful, and multiply^ and replenish the earth " (Gen. i. 28). Though Christ was promised as the " seed of the woman," yet we must not iraagine that it was in the power of woman to conceive Him. When the Virgin thinketh it irapossible she should conceive, because she knew not a raari, at the same time she confesseth it otherwise as impossible, and the Angel acknowledgeth as much in the satisfaction of his answer, " For with God nothing shall be impossible " (Luke i» 37). God then it was who iraraediately and miraculously enabled the blessed Virgin to conceive our Saviour ; and while Mary, Joseph, and all men are denied, no person which is that God can be excluded from that operation. But what is included in the conception by the Holy Ghost, or how His operation is to be-distinguished frora the conception of the Virgin, is not so easily deterrained. The words by which it is expressed in Scriptures are very general : first, as they a're de livered by way of promise, prediction, or satisfaction to Mary, " The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee" (Luke i 35) ; secondly, as they suppose the conception already past, " When His mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they carae together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost ; " and give satisfaction unto Joseph, " Fear not to take to thee Mary thy wife, for that which is con ceived in her, is of the Holy Ghost." Now being the expres sions in the Scriptures are so general, that from thence the opera tion of the Spirit cannot precisely be distinguished from the concurrence of the Virgin, much less shall we be able exactly to conclude it bythat late distinction raade in this Article, "con-« ceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin," because it is certain that the sarae Virgin also conceived^Hira according to theO. prophecy, " Thou shalt conceive and bear a Son : " and therefor^ notwithstanding that distinction, the difficulty still reraains, how' He was conceived by the Spirit, how by the Virgin. Neither will any difference of prepositions be suificient rightly fo distin guish these operations. Wherefore there is no other way to bound or determine the action of the Holy Ghost, but by that concurrence of the Virgin which must be acknowledged with it. For if she were truly the mother of Christ (as certainly she was, and we shall hereafter prove), then is there no reason to deny to her in respect of Him, whatsoever is given to other mothers in 202 An Exposition of the Creed. relation to the fruit of their womb ; and consequently, no more is left to be attributed to the Spirit, than what is necessary to cause the Virgin to perforra the actions of a mother. When the Scrip ture speaks of regeneration, or the second birth, it denieth all which belongs to natural procreation, describing the "sons of God "as " begotten not of bloods, nor of the wUl of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God" (John i. 13). And in the incarnation of our Saviour, we remove all will or lust of the flesh, we deny all will of man concurring, but as the bloods in the language of the Hebrews did signify that substance of which the flesh was formed in the womb, so we acknowledge in the genera tion of Jesus Christ, that He was made of the substance of His mother. But as He was so made of the substance of the Virgin, so was He not made of the substance of the Holy Ghost, whose essence cannot at all be made. And because the Holy Ghost did not beget Him by any coraraunication of His essence, therefore He is not the Father of Hira, though He were conceived by Him. And if at any time I have said, Christ was begotten by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, if the ancients speak as if He generated the Son, it is not so to be understood, as if the Spirit did perforra any proper act of generation, such as is the foundation of paternity. Again, as the Holy Ghost did not frame the human nature of Christ out of His own substance, so must we not beheve that He formed any part of His flesh of any other substance than of the Virgin. For certainly He was of the fathers according to the flesh, and was as to that truly and totally the Sori of David and of Abrahara. The Socinians, who will acknowledge no other way before Christ's conception by which He could be the only begotten' Son of God, have been forced to invent a strange conjunction in the nature of Christ : one "part received frora the Virgin, and so consequently frora David, and frora Abraham, from whom that Virgin did descend ; another framed by the Spirit, and conjoined with it : by the one part of which humanity He was the Son of Man, as by the other part He was the Son of God. The belief of this is necessary to prevent all fear or suspicion of spot in this Lamb, of sin in this Jesus. Whatsoever our original corruption is, howsoever displeasing unto God, we may be from hence assured there was none in Hira, in Whora alone God has declared Himself to be well pleased. " Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean ? " saith Job ; a clean and undefiled Article III. 203 Redeemer, out of an unclean and defiled nature? He whose name is Holiness, whose operation is to sanctify, the Holy Ghost. Our Jesus was like unto us in all things, as born of a woman, sin only excepted, as "conceived by the Holy Ghost." This original and total sanctification of the human nature was first necessary to fit it for the personal union with the Word, who out of his infinite love humbled Himself to become flesh, and at the same time, out of His infinite purity, could not defile Himself by becoming sinful flesh. Secondly, the same sanctification was as necessary in respect of the end for which He was made raan, the redemption of mankind : that as the first Adam was the fountain of our impurity, so the secoiM Adara should also be the pure fountain of our righteousness. " God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, condemned sin in the flesh " (Rom. viii. 3) ; which He could not have condemned, had He been sent in sinful flesh. " The Father made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin ; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him " (2 Cor. v. 21); which we could not have been made in Him, but that He "did no sin," and "knew no sin " (i Peter ii. 22). For whosoever is sinful wanteth a Redeemer, and he could have redeemed none, who stood in need of his own redemption. We are redeemed "with the precious blood of Christ" (i Peter i 19); therefore precious, because "of a Lamb without bleraish, and without spot." Our atonement can be made by no other High-Priest, than by Hira who is " holy, barraless, undefiled, and separate from sinners" (Heb. vii 26). We cannot "know that He was manifested to take away our sins " (i John iii. 5), except we, also know, that "in Him is no sin." Wherefore, being it is so necessary to believe the original holiness of our human nature in the person of our Saviour, it is as necessary to acknowledge that way by which we raay be fuUy assured of that sanctity. His con ception by the Holy Ghost. Again, it hath been observed that by this manner of Christ's conception is declared the freedom of the grace of God. For as the Holy Ghost is God, so is He - also called the gift of God : and therefore the human nature in its first original, without any ptecedent merit, was forraed by the Spirit, and in its formation sanctified, and in its sanctification united to the Word : so that the grace was co-existent, and in a raanner co-natural with it The. mystery of the incarnation is frequently attributed in the scrip tures to the love, mercy, and goodness of God. " Through the tender mercy of our God the day-spring from pn high hath visited 204 -^n Exposition of the Creed. us" (Luke i 78): in this "the kindness and love of God" (Tit. iii. 4) our Saviour toward man appeared. - And though these and such other scriptures speak properly of the love of God and mercy to man alone, offered unto him fn the incamation of our Saviour, and so directly exclude the merits of other men only : yet because they speak so generally with reference to God's mercy, they raay well be thought to exclude all universaUy. Especially considering the impossibility of merit in Christ's humanity, in respect of His conception ; because all desert neces sarily precedeth its reward, and Christ was hot man before He was conceived, nor can that merit which is not. Thirdly, whereas we are comraanded to be holy, and that even as He is holy : by this we learn from what foundation this holi ness must flow. We bring no such purity into fhe world, nor are we sanctified in the womb ; but as He was sanctified at His con ception, so are we at our regeneration. He was conceived not by man, but by the Holy Ghost; and we are "not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God" (John i. 13). The same overshadowing power which formed His human nature, reformeth ours ; and the sarae Spirit assureth us a remission of our sins, which caused in Him an exemption frora all sin. He who was born for us upon His incarnation, is born within us upon our regeneration. All which considered, we may now render a clear explication of this part of the Article, whereby every person may understand what he is to profess, and express what is the object of his faith, when he saith, I believe in Jesus Christ, " which was conceived by the Holy Ghost." For hereby he ought to intend thus much : I assent unto this as a most necessary and infaUible truth, that the only-begotten Son of God, begotten by the Father before all worlds, very God of very God, was conceived and born, and so made man ; taking to Himself the human nature, consisting of a soul and body, and conjoining it with the Divine in the unity of His person. I am fully assured that the Word was in this manner made flesh, that He was really and truly conceived in the womb of a woman, but not after the raanner of men; not by carnal copulation, not by the common way of human propagation, but by the singular, powerful, invisible, immediate operation of the Holy Ghost, whereby a Virgin was beyond the law of nature enabled to conceive, and that which was conceived in her was originally and corapletely sanctified. And in this latitude I pro fess to believe in Jesus Christ, "which was conceived by the Holy Ghpst" Article III. 205 Bo^m of the Virgin Mary. The third Person considerable in this third Article is represented under a threefold description, of her name, condition, and action. ,The first telleth us who it was, it was Mary; the second informeth us what she was, a Virgin ; the third teacheth us what she did, she conceived and bare our Saviour, and brought forth the Son of God : " which was born of the Virgin Mary." The evangelist relating, the annunciation, takes particular notice of this name : for, shewing how an angel was sent unto a "Virgin espoused to a man," he first observeth that his "name was Joseph," and then that the " Virgin's name was Mary " (Luke i. 27); not for any peculiar excellency in the name itself, or any particular application to the Virgin arising from the origi nation of it, as some have coriceived; but only to denote that singular person, who was then so well known to all men, being espoused unto Joseph, as appeareth by ihe question of his adrair- iiig countrymen, "Is not this the carpenter's son ? Is not His iriother called Mary" (Matt xiu. 55). Otherwise the name was comraon even at that tirae to many ; to the sister of Lazarus, to the mother of James and Joses, fo the wife of Cleophas, to the mother of John whose surname was Mark, to her who was of , Magdal in Galilee, to her who bestowed much labour on St Paul. Nor is there any original distinction between the name of these and of the raother of our Lord; For as the name of Jesus was the same "with Josuah, so this of Mary was the same with Miriam. The first of which name recorded was the daughter of Amrara, the sister of Moses and Aaron, a prophetess ; to whom the bring ing of Israel out of Egypt is attributed, as well as to her brethren. " For I brought thee up out of the land of Egypt," saith the Lord, " and redeemed thee out of the house of servants, and I sent before thee Moses, Aaron, and Miriam " (Micah vi. 4). As shew was exalted to be one of them who brought the people of God out o\ of the Egyptian bondage; so was this Mary exalted to becoraebT the raother of that Saviour, who through the Red Sea of His blood has wrought a plenteous redemption for us, of which that was but a type : and even with the confession of the lowliness of an hand maid she seems to bear that exaltation in her name. Beside this name of the blessed Virgin, little has been dis covered to us. Christ, who coraraended the faith of the Centurion, the love of Mary Magdalene, the excellencies of John the Baptist, hath left not the least encomium of his raother. The efangeUsts, 2o6 An Exposition of the Creed, who have so punctually described the city, famUy, and genealogy of Joseph, make no express mention of her relations, only of her cousin Elizabeth, who was of the tribe of " Levi, of the daughters of Aaron." Although it be of absolute necessity to believe, that He who was born of her descended from the tribe of Judah, and the faraily of David ; yet hath not the Scripture clearly expressed so much of her, nor have we any more than an obscure tradition of her parents Joacira and Anna. Wherefore the title added to that narae maketh the distinction : for as divers characters are given to several persons by which they are distinguished from all others of the same common nomination, as Jacob is called Israel, and Abraham the Friend of God, or Father of the faithful; so" is this Mary sufficiently characterised by that inseparable corapanion of her name, " the Virgin." For the full explication whereof more cannot' be required, than that we shew first that the Messias was to be born of a virgin, accord ing to the prediction of the prophets'; secondly, that this Mary, of whom Christ was born, was really a virgin when she bare Him, according to the relations of the evangelists ; thirdly, that being at once the mother of the Son of God and yet a virgin, she con tinued for ever in the same virginity, according to the tradition of the Fathers, and the constant doctrine of the Church. The obdurate Jew, that he niight more easily avoid the truth of the second, has most irrationally denied the first ; resolved rather not to understand Moses and the prophets, than to acknowledge the interpretation of the Apostles. It will therefore be necessary, from those oracles which were coraraitted to them, to shew the promised Messias was born after a miraculous manner, to be the son of a woman, not of a man. The first promise of Him seems to speak no less, " The seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent's head : " for as the name of seed is not generally or coUectively to be taken for the generation of mankind, but de terminately and individually for that one seed, which is Christ ; so the woman is not to be understood with relation unto man, but particularly and determinately to that sex frora which alone iramediately that seed should come. According to this first evangelical proraise followed that prediction of the prophet, " The Lord hath created a new thing on the earth, a woraan shall corapass a raan" (Jer. xxxi. 22). Th'at new crea tion of a man is therefore new, and therefore a creation, because wrought in a woman only, without a man, compassing a man ; which interpretation of the prophet is ancient, literal, and clear ; A rticle III. 207 and whatsoever the Jews have invented to elude it, is frivolous and forced. For while they force the phrase of " compassing a man " in the latter part of the prediction to anything else than a con ception, they do not only wrest the Scripture, but contradict the former part of the promise, making the new creation neither new, as being often done, nor a creation, as being easy to perform. But if this prophecy of Jeremiah seem obscure, it will be suffi-c ciently cleared by that of Isaiah, "Behold, a Virgin shall conceive! and bear a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel " (Isa. vii. 14).^ The ancient Jews, immediately upori the promulgation of the^ Gospel, understanding well how near this place did press them, gave V three several answers fo this text : first, denying that it spake ofav Virgin at all ; secondly, asserting that it could npt belorigto Jesus; thirdly, affirming that it was fully completed in the person of Hezekiah. Whereas the original word was translated a " virgin," by such interpreters as were Jews themselves, some hundred years before our Saviour's birth. And did not the notation of the word, and frequent use thereof in the Scriptures persuade it, the wonder of the sign given by the " Lord Himself" would evince as much. But as for that conceit, that all shduld be fulfilled in Hezekiah, it is so manifestly and undoubtedly false, that nothing can make more for the confirmation of our faith. For this sign was given, and this promise raade (" a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son")j, at sorae time in the reign 6f Ahaz. This " Ahaz reigned but six'J teen years in Jerusalera " (2 Kings xvi. 2) ; and Hezekiali, his son, k who succeeded hira " was twenty and five years old when he beganJ to reign " (2 Kings xviii. 2), and therefore born several yearstJ before Ahaz was king, and consequently not now to be conceivedj' when this sign was given. Thus while the ancient Jews narae j hira only to^fulfilthe prophecy, in whom it is irapossible it should" be fulfilled, they plainly shew, that for any knowledge which they had, it was not fulfilled till our Saviour carae : and therefore they cannot with any reason deny but that it belonged unto the Messias, as divers of the ancient Rabbins thought and confessed ; and is yet more evident by their monstrous error, who therefore expected no Messias in Israel, because they thought whatsoever was spoken of Him to have been completed in Hezekiah. Which is abundantly enough for our present purpose, being only to prove that the Messias promised by God, and expected by the people of God before and under the law, was to be conceived and born of a Virgin. Secondly, as we are taught by the predictions of the prophets. 2o8 Atl Exposi tiott of the Creed. that a Virgin was to be mother of the proraised Messias ; so are we assured by the infallible relations of the evangelists, that this Mary, the mother of Jesus, whom we believe to be Christ, was a virgin when she bare Him, when she " brought forth her first-born son." That she was a virgin when and after she was espoused unto Joseph, appears by the narration of St Luke : for " The angel Gabriel was sent from God to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph" (Luke i. 27). After the salutation of that angel, that she still was so, appeared by her question, " How shall this be, seeing I know not a man ? " That she continued so after she conceived by the Holy Ghost, is evident frora the relation of St Matthew : for when she was " espoused unto Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost " (Matt. i. 18). That she was a virgin not only while she was with xhild, but even when she had brought forth, is also evident out of his application of the prophecy, " Behold, a Virgin shall be with chUd, and shall bring forth a son" (Matt i. 23). For by thesame prediction it is as manifest that a virgin should " bring forth," as "conceive a son:" Neither was her act of parturition more con tradictory to virginity, than that former of conception. Thirdly, we believe the rapther of our Lord to have been not only before and after His nativity, but also for ever the most ira maculate and blessed Virgin. For although it may be thought sufficient as to the mystery of the incarnation, that when our Saviour Vas conceived and born. His mother was a virgin ; though whatsoever should have foUowed after could have no reflective operation upon the first-fruit of her womb ; though there be no further mention in the Creed than that He was "born ofthe Virgin Mary : " yet the pecuUar eminency and unparalleled privilege of that mother, the special honour and reverence due unto that son, and ever paid by her, the regard of that Holy Ghost who came upon her, and the power of the Highest which overshadowed her, the singular goodness and piety of Joseph, to whom she was espoused, have persuaded the Church of God in all ages to believe that she stUl continued in the same virginity, and therefore is to "be acknowledged the " ever Virgin Mary." As if the gate of the sanctuary in the prophet Ezekiel were to be understood of her, " This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no mari shall enter in by it ; because the Lord, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut " (Ezek. xliv. 2). Many, indeed, have taken the boldness to deny this truth, be cause not recorded in the sacred writ ; and not only so, but to Article III 209 assert the contrary as delivered in the Scriptures, but with no success. For though, as they object, St Matthew testifieth that " Joseph knew not Mary untU she had brought forth her firstborn son" (Matt i. 25); from whence they would infer that afterwards he knew her : yet the manner of the scripture language produceth no such inference. When God said to Jacob, " I will not leave thee until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of " (Gen. xxviii. 18), it followeth not that when that was done the God of Jacob left him. When the conclusion of Deuteronoray was written, it was said of Moses, " No man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day " (Deut. xxxiv. 6) : but it were a weak argument to infer from thence that the sepulchre of Moses has been known ever since. When Samuel had delivered a severe prediction unto Sauli he " came no more to see him until the day of his death " (r Sam. xv. 35) : but it were a strange collection to infer that he therefore gave him a visit after he was dead. " Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death " (2 Sam. vi. 23): andyet it were a ridiculous stupidity to dreara of any midwifery in the grave. Christ promised His presence to the Apostles " until the end- of the world " : who ever made so un happy a construction as to infer from thence that for ever after He would be absent from thera ? Again, it is true that Christ is terraed the " first-born Son " of Mary, frora whence they infer she must needs have a second ; but might as well conclude that wheresoever there is one, there must be two. For in this particular the scripture notion of priority excludeth an antecedent, but inferreth not a consequent ; it supposeth none to have gone before, but concludeth not any to foUbw after. " Sanctify unto me," saith God, " all the first-born ; " which was a firm and fixed law, iramediately obliging upon the birth : whereas if the first-born had included a relation to a second, there could have been no present certainty, but a suspension of obedience ; rior had the first-born been sanctified of itself, but the second birth had sanctified the first. And well might any sacri legious Jew have kept back the price of redemption due unto the priest, nor could it have been required of hira, till a second off spring had appeared, and so no rederaption at all had been required for an only son. Whereas all such pretences were unheard of in the Law, because the original Hebrew word is not capable of any such construction, and in the Law itself, it carrieth with it a clear interpretation, " Sanctify unto me all the first-born : whatsoever openeth the womb araong the children of Israel both of I. H 2io An Exposition of the Creed, man and beast, it is raine " (Exod. xin. 2). The apertion of the worab determines the first-born ; and the law of redemption excludeth all such tergiversation, " Those that are to be redeemed, from a month old thou shalt redeera" (Num. xviii. 16); no staying to make up the relation, no expecting another birth to perfect the redemption. Being then "the'y brought" our Saviour "to Jerusalera to present Him to the Lord, as it is written in the Law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord" (Luke ii 22, 23); it is evident He was called the first-born of Mary according to the notion of the law of Moses, and consequently that title inferreth no succession, nor proveth the raother to have any other offspring. Indeed, they thirdly object. It cannot be denied but that we read expressly in the Scriptures of the brethren of our Lord, " He went down to Capernaum, He, and His mother, and His brethren " (John n. 12): and while He talked unto the people, " His mother and His brethren stood without, desiring to speak with Hira " (Matt. xii. 46). But although His mother and His brethren be named together, yet they are never called the sons of His mother; and the question is not whether Christ had any brethren, but whether His raother biought forth any other children. It is possible Joseph might have children before Mary was espoused to hira ; and then, as he was reputed and called our Saviour's father, so might they well be accounted and called His brethren, as the ancient Fathers, especiaUy ofthe Greek Church, have taught. Nor need we thus assert that Joseph had any offspring, because the language of the Jews includeth in the name of brethren not only the strict relation of fraternity, but also the larger of consanguinity; and therefore it is sufficient satis faction for that expression, that there were such persons allied unto the blessed Virgin. "We be brethren" (Gen. xiii. 8), said Abraham unto Lot ; when Abraham was the son of Terah, Lot of Haran, and consequently not his brother, but his nephew, and, as elsewhere properly styled, " the son of his brother " (Gen. xii. 5). " Moses called Mishael and Elzaphan the sons of Uzziel the uncle of Aaron, and said unto them. Come near, carry your brethren from before the sanctuary " (Lev. x. 4) ; whereas those brethren were Nadab and Abihu, the sons not of Uzziel, but of Aaron. "Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's brotlier, and that he was Rebekah's son " (Gen. xxix. 12) : whereas Rebekah was the sister of Rachel's father. It is sufficient therefore that the evangelists, according to the constant language of the Jews, call A rticle III. 2 ii the kindred of the blessed Virgin the brethren and sisters of her only Son; which indeed is something the later, but the most generaUy approved, answer. And yet this difficulty, though usually no further considered, is not fully cleared ; for they which impugned the perpetual virginity of the mother of our Lord, urged it further, pretending that as the Scriptures caUed them the brethren of Christ, so they also shewed them to be the sons of Mary the mother of Christ For, first, the Jews express them particularly by their names, " Is not His mother called Mary ? and His brethren James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas ? " (Matt xiii 55). Therefore James and Joses were undoubtedly the brethren of Christ, and the same were also as unquestionably the sons of Mary : for among the women at the cross we find " Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses " (Matt, xxvii 56). Again, this Mary they think can be no other than the mother of our Lord, because they find her early in the morning at the sepulchre, with " Mary Magdalene and Salome " (Mark xvi. i) ; and it is not probable that any should have more care of the body of the son than the mother. She then who was certainly present at the cross, was not probably absent from the sepulchre. Wherefore they conclude, she was the mother of Christ, who was the mother of James and Joses the brethren of Christ. And now the urging of this argument will produce a greater clearness in the solution of- the question. For if it appear that Mary the mother of Jaraes and Joses was different and distin guished from Mary the Virgin, then will it also be apparent that the brethren of our Lord were the sons of another mother, for Jaraes and Joses were so called. But we read in St John that " there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his raother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene " (John xix. 25). In the rest ofthe evangehsts we find at the same place " Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses " (Matt. xxvn. 56 ; Mark xv. 40) ; and again at the sepulchre " Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary " (Matt, xxviii. i) : wherefore that " other Mary " by the conjunction of these testimonies appeareth to be Mary the wife of Cleophas, and the mother of James and Joses ; and consequently James and Joses, the brethren of our Lord, were not the sons of Mary His mother, but of the " other Mary," and therefore called His brethren, according to the language of the Jews, because that the other Mary was the sister of his mother. 212 An Exposition of the Creed. Notwithstanding therefore all these pretensions, there can be nothing found to raise the least suspicion of any interruption ofthe ever-blessed Mary's perpetual virginity. For as she was a Virgin, when she conceived, and after she brought forth our Saviour; so did she continue in the sarae state and condition, and was commended- by our Saviour to His beloved disciple as a mother only now of an adopted son. "The third consideration belonging to this part of the Article is how this Virgin was a mother, what the foundation was of her maternal relation to the Son of God, what is to be attributed unto her in this sacred nativity beside the immediate work of the power of the Highest, and the influence of the Holy Ghost. For we are here to remember again the most ancient form of this Article, briefly thus delivered, " Born of the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary;" as also that the word born was not taken precisely for the nativity of our Saviour, but as comprehending in it whatsoever belonged to His human generation : and when afterward the conception was attributed to the Spirit, the nativity to the Virgin, it was not so to be understood as if the Spirit had conceived Him, but the blessed Virgin by the power and operation of the Spirit First, therefore, we must acknowledge a true, real, and proper conception, by which the Virgin did conceive of her own substance the true and real substance of our Saviour, according to the pre diction of the prophet, " Behold, a virgin shall conceive," and the annunciation of the angel, " behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb." Frora whence our Saviour is expressly terraed by Elizabeth, " the fruit of her worab " (Luke i. 42). Secondly, as she did at first really and properly conceive, so did she also nourish and increase the sarae body of our Saviour once conceived, by the true substance of her own ; by which " she was found with child of the Holy Ghost" (Matt i. 18), and is described going with Joseph to be taxed, " being great with child " (Luke ii. 5), and pronounced happy by the loud cry of the woman in the gospel, " Blessed is the womb that bare thee " (Luke xi. 27). Thirdly, when Christ was thus conceived and grew in the worab of the blessed Virgin, she truly and really did bring forth her son by a true and proper parturition ; and Christ thereby was properly born by a true nativity. For as we read, " Ehzabeth's full time came that she should be delivered, and she brought forth a son " (Luke i. 57), so in the like siraplicity of expression, and propriety A rticle III. 2 1 3 of speech, the same evangelist speaks of Mary, " the days were accomplished that she should be delivered, and she brought forth her first-bom son " (Luke ii. 6, 7). Wherefore from these three, a true conception, nutrition, and parturition, we must acknowledge that the blessed "Virgin was truly and properly the mother of our Saviour. And so is she frequently styled the mother of Jesus in the language of the evangelists, and by Elizabeth particularly the " mother of her Lord," as also by the general consent of the Church (because He which was so born of her was God), the " Deipara ; " which, being a compound title begun in the Greek Church, was resolved into its parts by the Latins, and so the Virgin was plainly named the mother of God. The necessity of beUeving our Saviour thus to be " born of the virgin Mary," will appear both in respect of her who was the mother, and of Him who was the Son. In respect of her, it was therefore necessary, that we might per petually preserve an esteem of her person proportionable to so high a dignity. It was her own prediction, " From henceforth all generations shall call me blessed " (Luke i. 48); but the obligation is ours, to calllier, to esteem her so. If Elizabeth cried out "with so loud a voice. Blessed art thou among women," when Christ was but newly conceived in her womb; what expressions of honour and admiration can we think sufficient now that Christ is in heaven, _ and that mother with Him? Far be it from any Christian to derogate from that special privilege granted her, which is incom municable to any other. We cannot bear too reverend a regard unto the " mother of our Lord," sb long as we give her not that worship which is due unto the Lord Hiraself Let us keep the language of the primitive Church : let her be honoured and esteemed, let Him be worshipped and adored. In respect of Him, it was necessary, first, that we might be assured He was "made," or "begotten of a woraan," and conse quently that He had frora her the true nature of man. " For He took not on Him the nature of angels" (Heb. ii. 16), and there fore saved none of them, who, for want of a redeemer, are "reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." And man once fallen had been, as deservedly, so irrevocably condemned to the same condition, " but that He took upon Him the seed of Abraham." For being, we are " par takers of flesh and blood " (Heb. ii. 14), we could expect no redemption but by Him who " likewise took part of the same." 214 Att Exposition of the Creed. We could look for no Redeemer, but such an One, who by con sanguinity, was our Brother. And being there is but one Mediator between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus, we can not be assured that He was the Christ, or is our Jesus, except we be first assured that He was a man. Thus our Redeemer, the Man Christ Jesus, was born of a woman, that He might redeem both men and woraen ; thaf both sexes might rely upon Him, who was of the one, and from the other. Secondly, it was necessary we should believe our Saviour con ceived and born of such a woman, as was a most pure and immaculate Virgin. For as it behoved Him in aU things to be made like us ; so in that great similitude a dissimUitude was as necessary, that He should be "without sin" (Heb. iv. 15). Our passover is slain, and behold the Larab that taketh away the sins of the world ; but the Lamb of the passover must be without blemish. AVhereas then we draw something of corruption and contamination by our seminal traduction from the first Adam ; our Saviour hath received the same nature without any culpable inclination, because born of a virgin without any seminal traduction. Our High Priest is " separate from sinners " not only in the actions of His life, but in the production of His nature. For as Levi was in the loins of Abrahara, and paid tithes in him, and yet Christ, though the son of Abraham, did not pay tithes in hira, but receive them in Melchizedec : so though we being in the loins of Adam may be all said to sin in hira ; yet Christ, who descended from the sarae Adara according to the flesh, was not partaker of that sin, but an expiation for it. For he which is contained in the seminal virtue of his parent, is some way under his natural power, and therefore may be in sorae raanner concerned in his actions ; but he who is only from him by his natural substance, according to a passive or obediential power, and so receiveth not his propagation from him, cannot be so included in him~ as to be obliged by his actions, or obnoxious to his demerits. Thirdly, it was necessary that we should believe Christ born of that person, that Virgin Mary which was espoused unto Joseph, that thereby we raight be assured that He was of the family of David. For whatsoever promises were made of the Messias, were appropriated unto Him. As the seed of the woman was first contracted to the seed of Abraham, so the seed of Abraham was next appropriated to the Son of David. He was " to be called the Son of the Highest," and " the Lord God " was to " give unto Him the throne of his father David" (Luke i. 32). When Jesus Article III. 215' asked the Pharisees, "Wliat think ye of Christ? whose son is He? They said unto Him, the son of David" (Matt xxii 42). When Herod demanded of the chief Priests and Scribes " where Christ should be born; they said unto him, in Bethlehem of Judea" (Matt n. 5), because that was "the city of David" (Luke n. 4), whither Joseph went up with Mary his espoused wife, " because he was of the house and lineage of David." After John the Baptist, the forerunner of Christ, was born, " Zacharias blessed the Lord God of Israel, who had raised up an horn of salvation for us, in the house of His servant David " (Luke i. 68, 69). The woman of Canaan, the blind men sitting by the way, and those other blind that followed Him, cried out, " have mercy on us, O Lord, thou son of Da-v^id" (Matt ix. 27; xv. 22; xx. 30). The very children out of whose mouths God perfected praise, were crying in the temple, and saying, " Hosanna to the son of David" (Matt xxi. 15.) And when the blind and dumb both spake and saw, "all the people were amazed, and said. Is not this the son of David?" (Matt. xii. 23). Thus by the public and cpncurrent testimonies of all the Jews, the promised Messias was to come of the house and lineage of David ; for " God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, He would raise up Christ to sit upon his throne " (Acts ii 30). It was therefore necessary we should believe that our Saviour "was made of the seed of David according to the flesh" (Rom. i 3) : of which we are assured, because He was born of that Virgin Mary who descended from Him, and was espoused unto Joseph, who descended from the same, that thereby His genealogy might be known. The consideration of all which will at last lead us to a clear explication of this latter branch of the Article, whereby every Christian may inform himself what he is bound to profess, and being informed fully express what is the object of his faith in this particular, when he saith, I believe in Jesus Christ which was "born of the Virgin Mary." For hereby he is conceived to intend thus much : I assent unto this as a most certain and infallible truth, that there was a certain woman known by the name of Mary,, espoused unto Joseph of Nazareth, which before and after her espousals was a pure and unspotted Virgin, and being and continuing in the sarae virginity, did by the iraraediate operation of the Holy Ghost conceive within her worab the only begotten Son of God, and after the natural tirae of other woraen, -brought Him forth as her first-born son, continuing still a most 2i6 Att Exposition of the Creed. pure and immaculate Virgin ; whereby the Saviour of the world was born of a woman under the Law, without the least pretence of any original corruption, that He might deliver us from the guilt of sin ; born of that Virgin which was of the house and lineage of David, that He raight sit upon His throne, and rule for evermore. And in this latitude I profess to believe in Jesus Christ, " born of the Virgin Mary." END OF VOL. I. Turnbull and spears, printers, -Edinburgh. 3 M.— v.— 8/90.