Page images
PDF
EPUB

Luke 18. 51. Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the Pro

phets concerning the Son of Man shall be accomplished When he delivered Luke 22. 22. them the blessed Sacrament, the commemoration of his Death, he said, Truly por ser unero- the Son of Man goeth as it was determined. After his Resurrection, he cha Wikior.

stifed the dulness of his Disciples, who were so overwhelmed with his para fion, that they could not look back upon the antecedent Predicti

cedent Predictions ; fayLuke 24. 25, ing unto them, o fools and how of heart to believe all that the Prophets 26.

have spoken! ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter

into his glory? After his Ascension S. Peter made this profession before the Afts 3. 18. Jews, who had those Prophecies, and saw his Sufferings; Those things

which God before had Mewed by the mouth of all his Prophets, that Christ Should suffer, he bath fo fulfilled. Whatsoever therefore was determined by the Counsel of God, whatsoever was revealed by the Prophets concerning the Sufferings of the Messias, was all fulfilled by that Jesus whom we believe to be, and worship as the Christ. Which is the fourth and last assertion pro. pounded to express our Saviour's Passion in relation to his Office.

Haying considered him that suffered in his Office, we are next to consider him in his Person. And being in all this Article there is no person expreflly named or described, we must look back upon the former, till we find his description and his name. The Article immediately preceding leaves us in the fame suspension ; but for our satisfaction refers us to the former, where we find him named Jefus, and described the only-begotten Son of God.

Now this Son of God we have already shewed to be therefore truly called the Only-begotten, because he was from all eternity generated of the Essence

of the Father, and therefore is, as the eternal Son, fo also the eternal God. * This is that Wherefore by the * immediate coherence of the Articles, and necessary con

sequence of the Creed, it plainly appeareth that the eternal Son of God, God the Creed," of God, very God of very God, fuffered under Pontius Pilate, was cruwhich Callia- cified dead and buried. For it was no other person which suffered under nus urgeth L. Pontius Pilate than he which was born of the Virgin Mary, he which much against Neftorius, De was born of the Virgin Mary was no other person than he which was conIncarn. 1.6..ceived by the Holy Ghost, he which was conceived by the Holy Ghost was

no other person than our Lord, and that our Lord no other than the only

Son of God: therefore by the immediate coherence of the Articles it follow1 Cor. 2. 8. eth, that the only Son of God, our Lord, suffered under Pontius Pilate. Acts 20. 28. That Word which was in the beginning, which then was with God, and was Dominum paffum Sym- God, in the fulness of time being made flesh, did suffer. For the Princes boli tenet au- of this world crucified the Lord of glory, and God purchased his Church

bonitas, with his own blood. That person which was begotten of the Father before tradidit, di- all Worlds, and so was really the Lord of glory and most truly God, took upcens, Si enim on him the nature of Man, and in that nature being still the same person cognovissent,

" which before he was, did suffer. When our Saviour fasted forty days, there Dominum was no other person hungry than that Son of God which made the World; gloriæ cruci- when he for down fixissent. View

when he far down weary by the Well, there was no other person felt that gil. advers. thirst but he which was eternall gotten of the Father the fountain of Eurych. I. 2. the Deity: when he was buffered and scourged there was no other person

sensible of those pains than that eternal Word which before all Worlds was impassible; when he was crucified and died, there was no other person which gave up the Ghost but the Son of him, and so of the same nature with him, who only hath immortality. And thus we conclude our first Confideration propounded, viz. Who it was which suffered ; affirming that, in respect of his Office, it was the Messias, in respect of his Person, it was God the Son.

But the perfect probation and illustration of this truth requireth first a view of the second particular propounded, How, or, in what he suffered. For

while

[ocr errors]

while we prove the Person suffering to be God, we may seem to deny the Passion, of which the Perfection of the Godhead is incapable. The Divine Natúre is of infinite and eternal happiness, never to be disturbed by the least degree of infelicity, and therefore subject to no sense of misery: Wherefore while we profess that the Son of God did suffer for us, we must so far explain our Assertion, as to deny that the Divine Nature of our Saviour fuffered. For being the Divine Nature of the Son is common to the Father and the Spirit, if that had been the subject of his Passion, then must the Fa. ther and the Spirit have suffered. Wherefore as we ascribe the Passion to the Son alone, so must we attribute it to that nature which is his alone, that is, the human. And then neither the Father nor the Spirit will appear to fuf

se neither the Father nor the Spirit, but the Son alone, is Man, and so capable of suffering.

Whereas then the Humanity of Christ consisteth of a Soul and Body, these were the proper subject of his Passion ; nor could he suffer any thing but in both or either of these two. For as the Word was made flesh, though the Word was * never made, (as being in the beginning God) but the flesh, thar *'o nóra is, the Humanity, was made, and the Word assuming it became flesh; food is lifiero

olve my sólo faith S. Peter, a Christ suffered for us in the flesh, in that nature of man s which he took upon him : and so God the Son did suffer, not in that nature ag rágra ixo in which he was begotten of the Father before all Worlds, but in that flesh ne

m ore on which by his Incarnation he became. For he was b put to death in the rest Sesalon flesh, but quickened in the Spirit; suffered in the weakness of his Huma- avodiča?o, co nity, but rofe by the power of his Divinity. As he was made of the feed of me

crogen har

Γθρωπίνη μέDavid according to the flesh, in the language of S. Paul; so was, he put to zer ráos, se death in th in the langua Peter : and as he was declared to

ads i wibás.

TO St. Athanas. be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness; so was de Incarn. he quickened by the spirit. Thus the proper subject and recipient of our Sa- 1 Pet. 4. I.

101 Pet. 3. 18. viour's Passion, which he underwent for us, was that nature which he took Adeo tasva eit from us.

utriusque Far be it therefore from us to think that the Deity, which is immutable,

which is imutabie, substantiæ, ut could suffer ; which only hath immortality, could die. The conjunction & Spiritus res with Humanity could put no imperfection upon the Divinity: nor can that fuas egerit in + infinite Nature by any external acquisition be any way changed in its in- virtutes & otrinsical and essential Perfections. If the bright rays of the Sun árę pera & figna, thought to infinuate into the most noisome bodies without any pollution of & caro paflio

0 nes suas funthemselves, how can thát spiritual Essence contract the least infirmity by any eta fit, esuriunion with Humanity ? We must neither harbour so low an estimation of ens sub Diathe Divine Nature, as, to conceive it capable of any diminutiôn ; nor so fub Samaris mean esteem of the Essence of the Word, as to imagine it subject to the tide, flens Lasufferings of the flesh he took ; nor yet so groundlels an estimation of the Zaruin, anxiè

c ufque ad great mystery of the Incarnation, as to make the properties of one nature mortem, de'mix in confusion with the other. Thele were the wild Collections of the nique &mor* Arian and Apollinarian Hereticks, whom the Church hath long since si-ml. advert

h both lona Gmc tua est. Terlenced by a sound and sober assertion, That all the sufferings of our Medi- Prax. c. 27.

Clement, Aator were subjected in his human Nature.

lex. Pedag.

1. 1.c. 5.91.c. To g5 púod @beglov tej dycareialov áld Toiệtív ésiv, s (waarocópilvov sõ tanavž púod, ötay is cncium ei oixeropi av skóng. Greg. Nyssen. Epist. I'lgóða málats poti's wháborén to extīves tá sér 70 waugšos, sed Carpictwv YExpūv xj š xulupäivi εφαπόμμαι πολύ πλέον η ασώματG- τ8 Θε8 διώαμις έτ' αν πάθοι ή υσίαν, εδ' αν βλέβας Cώμα/G- ασωμάτως επαφωνη. Euseb. Demon. Evang. l. 4. C. 13. * This danger is the rather to unfolded, because it is not generally understood. The Heresie of Arius, as it was condemned by the Council of Nice, is known to all. But that he made the nature of the Word to suffer in the flesh, is not so frequently or plainly delivered. This Phoebadius (the first of the Latin Church who wrote against the Arians,) chargeth them with. Duplicem hunc ftatum, non conjunctum, fed confusum, vultis videri; ut etiam unius veftrum, id est Epistola Potami, quæ ad Orientem & Occidentem transmisia est, quà asserit, carne & {piritu Christi coagulatis per sanguinem Mariæ, & in unum corpus redactis, paffibilem Deum factum. Hoc ideo, ne quis illum ex eo crederet, quem impassibilem satis constat. Lib. adv. Arianos, c. 7. And again, Non ergo est spiritus caro, nec caro spiritus, quod ifti volunt egregii Doctores, ut factus fit scilicet Dominus & Deus nofter ex hac fubstantiaruin permixtione pallibilis. Ideo autem paflibilem volunt dici, ne ex impaffibili credatur. Cap. 8. Máth gy 'Agatavos

въ2

?urlker)

Devlekov 9, Cáexce poslu W.7106 psluor duhanplubas À Eweg, en ö rõ walks vónou éti meratñ Szótnie dve pregles dreba S. Athan. lib. de. Incarn. Of this . Hilary is to be understood : Sed eorum omnis hic fenfus, ut opinentur metum mortis in Dei Filium incidiffe, qui afferunt non de æternitate prolatum, neque de infinitate paternæ fubftantiæ exftitiffe. sed ex nullo illum qui omnia creavit effectum ; ut affumptus ex nihilo fit, & cæptus ex opere & confirmatus ex tempore. Et ideo in eo doloris anxietas, ideo spiritûs paffio cum corporis passione. Can. 31. in Matth. Where clearly be argues against the Arians. The right understanding whereof is the only true way to reconcile ihose harh sayines of his which so troubled the Master of the Sententes, and the whole Schools ever fince.

And now the only difficulty will consist in this, how we can reconcile the Person fuffering with the Subject of his Pashion ; how we can fay that God did fuffer, when we profess the Godhead suffered not. But this seeming

difficulty will admit an easie folution, if we confider the intimate conju #par indiffe etion of the Divine and Human Nature, and their union in the Person of lubilem unita- the Son. For * hereby those Attributes which properly belong unto the one · tem Verbi & ar carnis omnia

b are given to the other; and that upon good reafon. For being the same quæ carnis individual perfon is, by the conjunction of the nature of God and the nafunt ascribun- ture of man, really and truly both God and Man; it necessarily followeth, tur & verbo, quomodo & that it is true to say, God is man, and as true, A man is God: becaufe in quæ verbi this particular he which is man is God, and he which is God is man. Again, funt prædi- being by reason of the Incarnation it is proper to say, God is man, it folcantur in car-9 ne. Orig. in loweth unavoidably, that whatsoever necessarily belongeth to the human Ep. ad Rom... nature, may be spoken of God; otherwise there would be a man to whom Aici T dresen process the nature of man did not belong, which were a contradiction. And being wegsampeesons by virtue of the fame Incarnation it is also proper to fay, A man is God, cupros a by the fame necessity of consequence we must acknowledge, that all the ef

07:105,"na fential Attributes of the Divine Nature may truly be spoken of that man ; mebisai tal otherwise there would be one truly and properly God to whom the Nature óvóuclcea se cand did not be

- of God did not belong, which is a clear repr sy to cvzátor-OL

ancy. Again, if the prosou tu Selo, aj perties of the Divine Nature, may be truly attributed to that man which is To Icon Tay God then

God, then may those actions which flow from those properties be attribu@gwaing, nem

voudia ted to the same. And being the properties of the human nature may be Greg. Nyfr. also attributed to the eternal Son of God, those actions or pafsions which Ep. ad Theoph. xps redes

bodid proceed from those properties may be attributed to the fame Son of Toi cidsvars God, or God the Son. Wherefore as God the Son is truly man, and as hivwois, kosydd man truly passible and mortal; fo God the Son did truly fuffer, and did worã Tú óvóMelic. Theo truly die. And this is the only true † Communication of Properties. dor. Dial. 3; Not that the essential Properties of one nature are really communica

Called by the ted to the other nature, as if the Divinity of Christ were passible and narily Com- mortal, or his Humanity of original Omnipotence and Omnipresence ;

le the fame God the Son was also the Son of man, he was at the same time both mortal and eternal : mortal as the Son of man, in Greek Divines respect of his Humanity ; eternal, as the Son of God, in refpect of his Aulidores, and Divinity. The Sufferings therefore of the Meffias were the Sufferings sometimes’Ar

of God the Son : not that they were the Sufferings of his D
which that was incapable; but the Sufferings of his Humanity, as unto
which' that was inclinable. For althoug he human nature was con-
joined to the Divine, yet it suffered as much as if it had been alone;
and the Divine as little suffered as if it had not been conjoined: because
each kept their respective Properties distinct, without the least confusion
in their most intimate conjunction. From whence at last the Perfon fuf-
fering is reconciled to the Subject of his Passion: For God the Son being
not only God, but also man, fuffered, though not in his Deity, by reason
of which he is truly God; yet in his Humanity, by which he who is truly
God, is as truly Mán. And thus we conclude our two first Disquisitions :
Who it was that suffered; in respect of his Office, the Mesias, in respect of
his Person, God the Son: How it was he suffered; not in his Deity, which

is

mu

the ancient

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

of

ris.

is impassible, but in his Humanity, which he assumed, cloathed with our infirmities.

Our next enquiry is, What this God the Son did fuffer as the Son of man ; not in the latitude of all his sufferings, but so far as they are comprehended in this Article, which first prescindeth all the antecedent part by the expression of time under Pontius Pilate, who was not Governour of 7udæa long before our Saviour's Baptism; and then takes off his con cluding Passion, by adding his Crucifixion and his Death. Looking then upon the sufferings of our Saviour in the time of his preaching the Gof pel, and efpecially before his Death, we shall best understand them by considering them in relation to the subject or recipient of them. And being we have already fhewed his Passion was wholly subjected in his humane nature, being that nature consistech of two parts, the Soul and Body; it will be necessary to declare what he suffered in the Body, what in the Soul.

For the first, As we believe the Son of God took upon him the nature of Man, of which the Body is a part ; so we acknowledge that he took a true and real Body, so as to become flesh of our fleth, bone of our bone. This Body of Christ, really and truly humane, was also frail and mortal, a accompanied with all those natural properties which necessarily flow from the condition of a frail and mortal Body: and though now the same body, exalted above the highest Heavens, by virtue of its glorification be put beyond all possibility of Passion; yet in the time of his Humiliation it was cloathed with no such glorious perfection ; but as it was subject unto, so it felt weariness, hunger and thirst. Ņor was it only liable to thofe internal weaknesses and natural infirmities, but to all outward injuries and violent impressions. As all our corporal pain consists in that sense which ariseth from the solution of that continuity which is connatural to the parts of our body, so no parts of his facred body were injuriously violated by any outward impression, but he was truly and fully sensible of the pain arising from that violation. Deep was that fenfe and grievous was that pain which those Scourges produced, when the plowers ploughed upon his back and made long their furrows: the dilaceration of those nervous parts created a most fharp and dolorous sensation. The coronary Thorns did not only express the scorn of the impofers by that figure into which they were contrived, but did also pierce his render and facred Temples to a multiplicity of pains, by their numerous acuminations. That spear directed by an impertinent inalice which opened his side, though it brought forth water and blood, caused no dolorous sensation, because the Body was then dead : but the Nails which pierced his hands and feet made another kind of impression, while it was yet alive and highly fensible. Thus did the body of the Son of man truly suffer the bitterness of corporal pains and torments inflicted by violent external impressions.. .

As our Saviour took upon him both parts of the nature of man, fo he suf- Qui suscepit fered in them both, that he might be a Saviour of the whole. In what

per animam, su

lat scepit anime sense the Soul is capable of suffering, in that he was subject to animal Paf- paffionem. fion. Evil apprehended to come tormented his Soul with fear, which was S. Ambrof. de

> Fide. I. 2. 6.3. as truly in him in respect of what he was to suffer, as Hope in reference to the recompense of a reward to come after and for his Sufferings. Evil apprehended as present tormented the same with Sadness Sorrow, and Anguilh of mind. So that he was truly represented to us by the Prophet, as a man Isa. 53. 3. of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and the proper fubject of that Grief he hath fully expressed who alone felt it, saying unto his Disciples, My foul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death,

Matt. 26.38.

[ocr errors]

alled with griei, anaoVCI W
IcU WILIS

We ought not therefore to question whether he suffered in his Soul or no; bur rather to endeavour to reach, if it were possible, the knowledge how far and in what degree he suffered; how bitter that grief, how great that forrow and that anguish was. Which though we can never fully and exactly measure; yet we may infallibly know thus much, both from the expressions of the Spirit of God, and from the occasion of his Sufferings, that the griefs and forrows which he felt, and the anguish which he underwent, were most incomparably far beyond all sorrows of which any person here was sensible or capable.

The Evangelists have in such language expressed his Agony, as cannot but Mat. 26.37. raise in us the highest admiration at the bitterness of that Passion. He began Mark 14. 33. to be forrowful, faith S. Matthew; He began to be fore amazed, faith

S. Mark, and to be very heavy, fay both: and yet these words in our Trans

lation come far short of the * Original Expression, which render him sud* The words denly, upon a present and immediate apprehension, possessed with fear, horin the Original are three, ror and amazement, ror and amazement, enco

f, and overwhelmed with forrow, Aurrias, in-' pressed down with consternation and dejection of mind, tormented with Sepsoas, anxiety and disquietude of spirit. Aurt af, the first is of a known and ordinary signification, but in this case it is to be raised to the highest degree of its possible significancy, as appears by the words which follow, rehaupés isovoj yuxń M8. For, as the ancient Grammarians observe, s (wet efsous étíterno dndoñand again, si (mes) wegberis hombávny auzial (ww ) x nófor itsepérews og Destlórnlos, and therefore weinuto; of it self must signifie a man poslesed with an excessive grief; as in Æschylus, melodau xgvos, that is, according to the Scholiast, wera äs Bage. But beside this Greek notation, here is to be observed a reference to the words of David, Pfal.42.5. '14.7i aeíauró; és a fuxh us; nn'nun , Tn. So that it doth not only signifie an excess of sorrow Yurrounding and encompassing the Soul; but also such as brings a confternation and dejection of mind, bowing the Soul under the pressure and burthen of it. And if neither the notation of the word, nor the relation to that place in the Psalms did exprefs that forrow, yet the following part of our Saviour's words would sufficiently evidence it, i'wrs Javéry, it was a forrow which like the pangs of death compassed him, and like the pains of hell got hold upon him, Pfal. 116. 3. The second word used by S. Mark alone, is indarbh at, which with the Vulgar Latin is Pavere, but in the Language of the Greeks bears a higher sense. Oéubos Caraíve méxaangev, says Etymologus : and Hesychius, Odpßos, Sowpose, fringis. Glof. Vet. Odubos, ftupor. Philoponus, preserved by Eustathius 'ix. . Odubos Ñ j 'xat anžis. Sccubos ä xal očbo térn : cxThce Fess. From whence the Verb OdMbov, in termination active, in fignification passive, perculsum effe, in Homer, OkuEncev do 'Axunaots. where it is the observation of Eustathius, Tò été concev cvegroixos os vewréex xçãois sx řxes fecue Bópsfuos gs, xéotrebédn, xj Tebdépe impou, Qarin oi red'"Ounegy. but not universally true. For (as to our purpose) we have both the use and sense of this word in the Old Testament. As I Sam. 14. 15. rani, ponn sj idéu Sosy syn, and the earth quaked. And Pfal. 48.5. 179. Aquila, eBoerbuano av, Symmachus, igeniálncar as Psal. 31.22. 'Egad cu Tə insúor Me, Aquila, Saubhoth, Symmachus, ataúže. The like is also in the passive termination : as Daniel expresses his fear in a vision, édorballu, sy win 70 éri a egowToy M8, Dan. 8. 17. and the wicked are described by the wise man, Sapeuvon devās, x ivocarceos on tacco ópfeos, Sap. 17. 3. From whence it appeareth that feeport at of it self signifieth a high degree of fear, horror, and amazement. Gloj. Vet. Odub õpice, Obftupeo, ftupeo, pavesco. And by the addition of the preposition is the signification is augmented.""Exlubos, čxtinx?os, Hesych. passively ; Onelov 0666 og se fx@mubov. Dan. 7. 7. actively, i. e. intinypixòy. Such an augmentation in this word is justifiable by that rule left us in Eustathius ad Iliad. é. 5 (?) wegleois Móvor my lew ondoñgéri, inne üywnie wodnexis Caraívs. of which he gives an example in ezvopíws, used by Aristophanes in Pluto, though not named by him. And again, ad Iliad. v'. j (5) megberis friterade λοί, όποίαν και το μάλιςα. 'Εκθαμβiα therefore i5 μάλιςα θαμβά, to be urprised with horror in the highe degree, even unto stupefaction. Glofl. Vet. 'Ex Terböran, obstupesco. The third word is 'Admuoveis, Vulg. Lat. tædere in S.Mark, incitus esse in S. Matthew: but it hath yet a farther sense. 'Adhucovã, dxndow, ywriê, says Hesychius. 'Adauerä, to nicy domócu, Suidas. It signifieth therefore grief and anguish in excess, as appeareth also by the origination of it. For, as Eustathius observes, üdnuovey DEWTÓTUTOV ádána ádhuovas, o c'x dúan's wis oice xey Tivos xogo, os ados aéy], ávarsalnas. Iliad. X'. From idã dúow ádýrav, from údapeau ádmuovã. It bath therefore in it the signification of äšku or aider, satiety, or extremity. From whence it is ordinarily so expounded, as if it contained the consequence of the greatest fear or forrow, that is, anxiety of mind, difquietude and reftleffnefs. 'Adomovky, nó hy sy drogeiv, auryavešv, Etymol. As An-. tony is expressed by Plutarch, after the lofs of 8000 men, being in want of all things necessary for the rest, Kaloráregu Teré ulus, rj Bogdwórns, údapeovery Grue. So where the Heb. Sain is by the Lxx. translated carnavās, by Symmachus it is rendred conuovñs, Eccles. 7. 16.

This he first expressed to his Disciples. saying, My Soul is exceeding forrowful; and left they should not fully apprehend the excess, adding even unto death, as if the pangs of death had already encompassed him, and, as the Psalmist speaks, the pains of Hell had got hold upon him. He went but a little farther before he expressed the same to his Father; falling on his face and praying, even with strong crying and tears, unto him that was able to save him from death. Nor were his cries or tears fufficient evidences of his inward Sufferings, nor could the Sorrows of his breast be poured forth either at his

lips

« PreviousContinue »