« PreviousContinue »
the God of Nature died? Why did all the People, who came to see him cru-
Dead then our Blessed Saviour was upon the Cross; and that not by a
το αψύχε δοa 'Our Life appeareth principally in two Particulars, Motion and Sensation ; sy med rose and while both or either of these are perceived in a Body, we pronounce it spiçesy do
xã, nevhod to lives. Not that the Life it self confiffeth in either or both of these, but in
και το αθάνεthat which is the Original Principle of them both, which we call the Soul ; a.regenios and the intimate Presence or Union of that Soul unto the Body is the Life Baraza
wegs fussia thereof. The real Distinction, of which Soul from the Body in Man, our Blef
een gedor doo fed Saviour cauight most clearly in that Admonition. b Fear not them which kill me ou meer
Turis. Arift. the body, but are not able if kill the foul, but rather fear him which is able to destroy both body and soul in hell
. Now being Death is nothing elfe c. 2. 12 algbut the Privation or · Receffion of Life, and we are then properly faid to die pied. To uyua when we cease to live; being Life confifterh in the Union of the Soul unto Juze) a the Body, from whence, as from the Fountain, flow Motion, Sensation, and túzov, što whatsoever vital Perfection; Death can be nothing else but the Solution of that som vital Union, or the actual a Separation of the Soul, before united to the Body. voi, ciotod, As therefore when the Soul of Man doth leave the Habitation of its Body, barracin, vor and being the sole Fountain of Vitality bereaves it of all vital Activity, we say de Diis e that Body or that Man' is dead: so when we read that Christ our Saviour died, Mundo. c. 8. we must conceive that was a true and proper Death, and consequently that Ms.10:28.
CAs his Body was bereft of his Soul, and of all vital Influence from the fame. φυγή και από
d. As the Philfophers have anciently expressed.it, effecially Plato, who by the Advantage of an Error in the Original of Sorels, best renderstood the end of Life: Totó ye gevalla óvousse, aúcis saj xwesomos luzīs ato Gómez?G, in Prædone. Again, ο θάνατο τυχών; ών, ως εμοί δοκεί εδέν άλλο ή δυοϊν πραμάτοι» αλυσις, η ψυχής και τα ζώμα/G», απ' αλλήλοιν. in Gorgia. And more plainly and fully yet : Ηγέμεθα τι τ θάνατον αναι; Πάνυ γ', έφη ισολαβων ο Σιμμίας, Αρα μη άλλο τι ή τη ψυχής από το Cώμα7G- απαλλαγω; και είναι τέτο τεθνάναι, χωρίς κ από η ψυχής απαλλαγή αυτή καθ εαυτό το Cώμα γεΓονέναι, χωρίς 3 τ' ψυχω το σώμα G απαλλα[είσαν αύτω καθ' αυτό είναι και αρσ μη αλλά τι ή ο θάνατG- ή τετο; Ουκ, άλλα τέτο, έφη. in Phedone. Thus with four feveral Words, λύσις, Δάλυσις, χωρισμός, and απαλ277, doth Plato express the Separation of the Soul from the Body, and maketh Death formally to confift of that Separa. tion. This Solution is excellently expressed by Phocylides;
de Anim, l. 1.
κησις βί8. .
Ού καλόν αρμονία αναλυίμαι ανθρώποιο. .
Tlveõeece 7S isà Orš xeñors Poroños x cixav,
So Tertullian: Opus autem morțis in medio est, discretio corporis animæque. De Anim. c. 51. Si mors non aliud determinatur quam disjunctio corporis animæque, contrarium morti vita non aliud definietur quam conjunctio corporis animæque. 16. 6.27. This Description of Death is far more philosophical than the Notion of Aristotle, who makes it to consist in the Corruption of Natural Heat ; ('Avelun toirm äude to, Techno dokay rg Seguš Curixõ (winesav, ig Š xado pelear Sévce?ov sivos De Tóty plongév. in Parv. Natur. In as much as the soul is not that natural Heat, and the Corruption of that Heat followeth upon the Separation of the Soul.
Nor is this only our Conception, or a doubtful Truth; but we are as much assured of the Propriery of his Death, as of the Death it self. For that the unspotted Soul of our Jesus was really and actually separated from his Body, that
his Flesh was berefi of natural Life by the Secession of that Soul, appeareth Luke 23. 46. by his own Resignation, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit; and * This is ex- by the Evangelist's Expression, and having said thus, be * gave up the Ghoft. pressed three When he was to die, he resigned his Soul; when he gave it up; he died; nifying the t when it was delivered out of the Body, then was the Body dead: and so Separation of the Eternal Son of God upon the Cross did properly and truly die. his Body. St. Mark and St. Luke iğinvouce, which is of the same force with igi tuxe. But because crtó ze doth not always signife an absolute Expiration, but sometimes a Lipothymie only: as Hesychius, 'Ex4 óxoco, desnodrušos. so Hippocrates useth it, Eisi z očíta70 (xcuogi) 07015 in tóxsa da si wpeañous. l. 1. de Morbis. And again, 'Extúxxon Ő ad rõ cs vece? I uspesuri içerivns ytvo uslus. Left therefore we should take džínsovor in fuch an imperfect sense
, š. Matthew hath it cpörs to aveõus, and S. John waçidare te mirequa. Which is a full Expression of the secesion of the So:il from the Body, and consequently of Death, which is, in the Language of Secundus, wvbűnum á árósarisa
These thrée Points or Distinctions of Time I have therefore noted, that I might occur to any objection which possibly might arise out of the ancient Philosophical Subtilty, which Aulus Gellius reports to be agitated at the Table of Taurus. The Question was propounded thus, Quæfitum eft, quando moriens moreretur, cùm jam in morte esset, an tuin etiam cùm in vita foret. Where Taurus admonisbeth the rest, that this was no light question ; for, says he, graviffimi Philofophorum super hac re feriò quifiverunt; & alii moriendi verbum atque momentum manente adhuc vità dici atque fieri putaverunt; alii nihil in illo teinpore vitæ reliquerunt, totuinque illud quod mori dicitur morti vendicarent. The ancienter Philosophers were divided; some saying a Man died in the time of his Life, others in the time of his Death. But Plato observed a Contradiction in both'; for a Man can neither be said to die while he is alive, nor when he is dead; & idcircò peperit ipfe aliud quoddam novum in confinio tempus, quod verbis propriis atque integris T ižaiorns Quora appellavit: τυhich he thus defcribes in his Parmenides ; Το εξαίφνης τοιυτόν τι έoικε ζημαίνειν, ως εξ εκείνα με αβάλλον cis fréteogr. So A. Gellius. 1. 6. c.13. Thus when our Saviour commended his soul into the hands of the Father, he was yet alive; when the soldier, pierced his side, he was already dead: and the Instant in which he gave up the Ghost was the ci itasorms when he died,
This Reality and Propriety of the Death of Christ is yet farther illustrated from the Cause immediately producing it, which was an external Violence and Cruciation, sufficient to dissolve that Natural Disposition of the Body which is absolutely necessary to continue the Vital Union of the Soul: the Torments which he endured on the Cross did bring him to that State in which Life could not longer be naturally conserved, and Death, without Intervention of supernatural Power, must necessarily follow.
For Christ, who took upon him all our Infirmities, Sin only excepted, had in his Nature not only a Possibility and Aptitude, but also a Necessity of dying; and as to any extrinsical Violence, able, according to the common course of Nature, to destroy and extinguish in the Body such an Aptitude as is indifpensably required to continue in Union with the Soul, he had no natural Prefervative; nor was it in the Power of his Soul to continue its Vital Conjun
ction unto his Body bereft of a Vital Disposition. Fohn 10. 18. It is true that Christ did voluntarily die, as he said of himself, No man
taketh away my Life from me, but I lay it down of my felf, I have power
Mark 15. 44.
lived longer to have their Legs broken, and to die by the Accession of another Pain: but we read not of luch long Furrows on their Backs as were made on his, nor had they such kind of Agony as he was in the Night before. What though he cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost? What though Nark 35. 37, the Centurion, when he saw it, said, Truly this man was the Son of God? 39. The Miracle was not in the Death, but in the Voice : the Strangeness was not that he should die, but that at the point of Death he should cry out lo loud : he died not by, but with, a Miracle.
Should we imagine Christ to anticipate the time of Death; and to substract his Soul from future Torments necessary to cause an Expiration ; we might rationally say the Jews and Gentiles were guilty of his Death, but we could not properly say they New him : guilty they must be, because they inflicted those Torments on which in time Death must neceffarily follow ; but Nay him actually they did not, if his Death proceeded from any other Cause, and not from the Wounds which they inflicted: whereas St. Peter expressly chargeth his Enemies, 2 Him ye have taken, and by wicked hands - Acts 2. 23: have crucified and sain; and again, bThe God of our fathers raised up Jefus; b akts 5. 30. whom ye few, and hanged on a tree. Thus was the Lamb properly Plain, in bestilo bucha and the Jews Authors of his Death, as well as of his Crucifixion.
places ihe Ori
sinal sewesh more expressly, that by their Crucifixion they few him : in the former thus, als xeogão áróuw wegconcernes úrráneo. In the latter thus, όν υμάς διεχαρίσαθε κρεμάσαντες επί ξύλα.
Wherefore being Christ took upon himself our Mortality in the highest fenfe, as it includeth a Necessity of dying; being he voluntarily submitted himself to that bloody Agony in the Garden, to the hands of the Plowers who made long their Furrows, and to the Nails which faftned him to the Cross; being these Torments thus inflicted and continued did cause his Death, and in this condition he gave up the ghost; it followeth that the only-begotten Son of God, the true Messias promised of old, did die a true and proper Death. Which is the second Conclusion in this Explication.
But, Thirdly, because Christ was not only Man, but also God, and there was not only an Union between his Soul and Body while he lived, but also a Conjunction of both Natures, and an Union in his Perfon : it will be farther necessary, for the understanding of his Death, to sew what Union was diffolved, what continued ; that we may not make that Separation either less or greater than it was.
Whereas then there were two different substantial Unions in Christ, one of the Parts of his Human Nature each to other, in which his Humanity did consist, and by which he was truly Man; the other of his Natures, Human and Divine, by which it came to pass that God was Man, and that Man God: First, It is certain, as we have already shewed, that the Union of the Parts of his Human Nature was dissolved on the Crots, and a real Separation made between his Soul and Body. As far then as Humanity consists in the essential Union of the Parts of Human Nature, fo far the Humanity of Christ upon his Death did cease to be, and consequently he ceased to be Man. But, Secondly, the Union of the Natures remained still as to the Parts, nor was the Soul or Body separated from the Divinity, but still subsisted as they did before, by the Subsistence of the Second Person of the Trinity.
The Truth of this Assertion appeareth, first, from the Language of this very ceriè non in Creed. For as we proved before, that the Only-begotten and Eternal Son of plum Deun God, God of God, very God of very God, was conceived and born, and fuf- & in Jeruin fered, and that the Truth of these Propositions relied upon the Communion Christum fili
un ejus unicum, Dominum noftrum. Modò totum dixi, in Jesum Christum filium ejus unicum, Dominum noftrum, totuin ibi intellige, & verbum, & animam, & carnem. Sed utique confiteris etiam illud quod habet eadem Fides, in eum Chriftum te credere qui crucifixus eft & fepuitus. Ergo etiam fepultum Chriftun efle non negas, &tan en fola carofepulta cí. Sieniin erat ibi anima, non erat mortuus; si autein vera inors erat, & cju; vera fit reiurreétio, fine anima fuerat in fepulchro, & tamen fepultus eli Chriftus. Ergo Christus erat etiain sine anima caio, quia non est icpulia nifi caro. S. aug. in Jch. Tr. 48.
of Properties, grounded upon the Hypoftatical Union : fo while the Creed in:
, it shewerh that neither bis Body, in respect of which
Again, as we believe that God redeemed us by his own Blood, so also it hath been the constant Language of the Church, that God died for us: which cannot be true, except the Soul and Body in the instant of Separation, were united to the Deity.
Indeed, being all the Gifts of God are without Repentance, nor doth he ever substract his Grace from any without their Abuse of it, and a sinful Demerit in themselves; we cannot imagine the Grace of Union should be taken from Christ, who never offended, and that in the highest act of Obedience, and the greatest Satisfaction to the Will of God.
'Tis true, Christ cried upon the Cross with a loud Voice, saying, My God, * Greg. Nyp: my God, why hast thou forsaken me? * But if that Dereli&tion should signifie Sur. "OXov 2.a solution of the former Union of his Natures, the Separation had been made avogurtor aš not at his Death, but in his Life. Whereas indeed those words infer no more Oš docê
than that he was bereft of such Joys and Comforts from the Deity, as should προς εαυτόν av exodotas asfwage and mitigate the Acerbity of his present Torments. eis Jeteen φύσιν με ασκόυάσαν7%, εν τω καιρώ τα τι πάθο- οικονομίας και θαλές μέρες το άπαξ εΓκραθεν ανεχώρησεν αμελαμέλητα και τα Θιά τα χαρίσμα α' αλλά τα ψυχίω τ8 Cώμα7G- ή θεότης έκεσίως διάζευξιν, έωτίω 3 ν αμφοθέesις μίασαν Youge.
It remainech therefore, that when our Saviour yielded up the Ghost, he fuffered only an external Violence; and what was subject to fuch corporal Force did yield unto those dolorous Impressions. Being then such is the imbecility and frailty of our Nature, that Life cannot long subsist in exquisite Torments; the Disposition of his Body failed the Soul, and the Soul deserted his Body. But being no Power hath any force against Omnipotency, nor could any corporal or finite Agent work upon the Union made with the Word, therefore that did still remain entire both to the Soul and
to the Body. The Word was once indeed without either Soul or Body ; * This is the but * after it was made Flesh, it was never parted either from the one or Conclusion of S. Auguft. Ex from the other. quo Verbum caro factum est, ut habitaret in nobis, & susceptus est à Verbo homo, id eft totus homo, anima & caro, quid fecit paflio, quid fecit mors, nisi corpus ab anima leparavit? animam verò à Verbo non separavit. Si enim mortuus eft Dominus - fine dubio caro ipfius exspiravit animam, (ad tempus enim exiguum aniina deseruit carnem, fed redeunte animâ resurrecturam) à Verbo autem animam feparatam esse non dico. Latronis animæ dixit, Hodiè mecum eris in Paradiso. Fidelein latronis animam non deferebat, & deferebat fuam ? Ablit: fed illius ut Dominus cuftodivit, fuain verò inseparabiliter habuit. Si autem dixerimus, quia ipsa se anima pofuit, & iterum, ipfa le fumplit, absurdiflimus sensus est: non enim quæ à Verbo non erat separata à feipsa potuit feparari. Tract. in Joh. 47.,
This Christ did really and truly die, according to the condition of Death to which the Nature of Man is subject: but although he was more than Man,
he died no more than Man can die; a Separation was made between his
Soul and Body, but no disunion of them and his Deity. They were dif* 'Ercü diz toi joined one from another, but not from him that took them both together ; po to avog ómi- * rather by virtue of that remaining conjunction they were again united after Cúlegge pea, their Separation. And this I conceive fufficient for the third and last part
The Necessity of this part of the Article is evident, in that the Death of Christ is the most intimate and essential part of the Mediatorship, and that which most intrinsically concerns every Office and Function of the Mediator, as he was Prophet, Priest, and King.
Firft, It was necessary, as to the Prophetical Office, that Christ should die; to the end that the Truth of all the Doctrine which he delivered might be çonfirmed by his Death. He was a the true and faithful witness, bwho before a Rev. 3. 14. Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confeffion. “This is he that came by wa-bi Tim. 6.12. ter and blood: and there are three that bare witness in earth, the pirit,
1 Joh: 5.6,8. the water, and the blood. He preached unto us a new dand better cove- dHeb. 8.6. nant, which was established upon better promises, and that was to be ratified with his Blood; which is therefore called by Christ himself the Blood of the Mat. 6.28. New Testament, or, Everlasting Covenant : for that Covenant was also a Luke 22. 20. Testament ; and 8 where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the Hel. 13.2.0
. death of the testator. Beside, Christ, as a Prophet, taught us not only by $ Heb. 9.16. Word, but by Example ; and though every Action of his Life who came to fulfil the Law, be most worthy of our Imitation; yeț the most eminent Example was in his Death, in which he taught us much Variety of Christian Vertues. What Example was that of Faith in God, h to lay down his life, b Jahr 10.17. that he might take it again; in the bitterness of his Torments to commend Luke 2 3. 46. his spirit into the hands of his Father; and ( for the joy that was set bae- * Heb. 12. 2. fore him, to endure the cross, and despise the foame? What a Pattern of Meekness, Patience, and Humility, for the Son of man to came not ta be mi-1 Mar. 20. 28. nistred unto, but to minister, and give his life a ranfome for many; to be »Afts 8. 32. led like a sheep to the slaughter, and like a Lamb dumb before the fearer, not to open his mouth; to endure the contradictions of sinners againft bim- » Heb. 12. 3. self, and to humble himself unto death, even the death of the çrojf? What go Phil
. 2. 8. Precedent of Obedience, for the Son of God to learn Obedience by the things Heb. s. 8. that he suffered; to be made under the Law, and, though he never broke Gal. 4. 4. the Law, to become obedient unto death; to go with Chearfulness to the Cross Phil. 2. 8. upon this Resolution, as my Father gave me commandment, evén se I do 3. John 14. 31. What Exemplar of Charity, to die for us while we were yet finners and ene- Rom. 5.8. mies, when greater love hath no man than this, to lay down his life for his John 15. iz. friends; to pray upon the Cross for them that crucified him, and to apologize for such as barbarously New him; Father, forgive them for they know not Luke 23. 34. what they do? Thus Christ did fuffer for us, leaving us an example that we 1 Pet. 2. 21. should follow his steps, that as he suffered for us, in the flesh, we would arm 4.1, 2. our selves likewise with the fame mind. For he that hath suffered in the flesh, hath ceased from fin: That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh, to the lufts of men,
but to the will of God. And fo his Death was necessary for the Confirmation and Completion of his Prophetical Office.
Secondly, It was necessary that Christ thould die, and by his Death perform the Sacerdotal Office. For every High-priest taken from among men, is or- Heb. 5. 1. dained for men in things
pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins. But Christ had no other Sacrifice to offer for our Sins than himself. For it was not possible that the blood of bulls and goats Jould take Heb. 10. 4. away sins: and therefore when Sacrifice and Offering God would not, then Ver. 8, 9. said be, Lo, I come to do thy will, o God; then did Christ determine to offer up
himself for us. And because the Sacrifices of old were to be sain, and generally without shedding of blood there is 20 remission; therefore if he will Heb. 9. 22. offer Sacrifice for Sin he muft of Necessity die, and so make bis Soul an,Offer- 1/2. 53. 10. ing for Sin. If Christ be our Passover, he must be sacrificed for us. We were fold under Sin, and he which will redeem us must give his Life for our Redemption : for we could not be redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and Pet
. I. 18, gold, but only with the precious blood af. Chrift, as of a Lamb without ble