Now let us speak more plainly what we call person, or mean by that name, when we entreat of Christ, whether that, which is as it were compounded, of the Godhead taking, and of the flesh taken, so that, if it might be lawful for us to divide Christ into his parts, one part of his person should be his Godhead, and the other part his manhood?1 Not so at any hand, for Christ is not said or called a person properly in respect of his humanity or manhood, but of his divine nature only, and yet that not to be separated from his manhood. This is the cause or reason thereof: If Christs humane nature had been, before it was taken of the divine nature: that is to say, of the word, there should then be an unton of two persons, and not of two natures, and therefore Christ should be a person compact of two persons, whereupon ⟨p. 9⟩would ensue many absurd, unprofitable, yea altogether wicked & ungodly matters, whereof now there is neither time nor place to speak. Therefore thus it must be determined, that the divine nature took on it the humane nature, forming and fashioning it: and even whiles it was formed and fashioned, to have taken it unto it self, that is to say, that Christs humane nature was never extant, or had being, but in the Godhead: wherefore the humane nature in Christ,2 is not a person, but the humanity subsisteth, and hath his being in this person of the word, and therefore Christ is not either in imagination or in deed, a double person, but one person consisting of two natures. For the word is both a nature & a person, but the manhood is not of it self, any other thing than a nature, which (as they speak in the schools) is become a person,3 and is upholden in the godhead taking it unto it self, so that now there are not two sons, to wit, one eternal and natural, or of the substance and being of the father, and another created and adopted, but that only eternal Son of GOD, sustaining and upholding the nature united to himself, ⟨p. 10⟩so that also there are not two Christs, but one only, God and man together, from the time that he knit or united to himself the nature which he took. Now we learn what we may call the person of Christ,4 to wit, the son of God manifested in the flesh.
Now let vs speake more plainlie what we call person, or meane by that name, when we intreat of Christ, whether that, which is as it were compounded, of the Godhead taking, and of the flesh taken, so that, if it might be lawfull for vs to diuide Christ into his parts, one part of his person should be his Godhead, and the other part his manhood?1 Not so at anie hand, for Christ is not said or called a person properlie in respect of his humanitie or manhood, but of his diuine nature onelie, and yet that not to be separated from his manhood. This is the cause or reason thereof: If Christes humane nature had beene, before it was taken of the diuine nature: that is to say, of the word, there should then be an vnton of two persons, and not of two natures, and therfore Christ should be a person compact of two persons, whervpon ⟨p. 9⟩would insue manie absurd, vnprofitable, yea altogither wicked & vngodlie matters, whereof nowe there is neyther time nor place to speake. Therefore thus it must be determined, that the diuine nature tooke on it the humane nature, forming and fashioning it: and euen whiles it was formed and fashioned, to haue taken it vnto it selfe, that is to saie, that Christes humane nature was neuer extant, or had beeing, but in the Godhead: wherfore the humane nature in Christ,2 is not a person, but the humanitie subsisteth, and hath his being in this person of the word, and therfore Christ is not either in imagination or in deede, a double person, but one person consisting of two natures. For the word is both a nature & a person, but the manhood is not of it selfe, anie other thing than a nature, which (as they speake in the scholes) is become a person,3 and is vpholden in the godhead taking it vnto it selfe, so that now there are not two sonnes, to wit, one eternall and naturall, or of the substance and being of the father, and another created and adopted, but that onelie eternall sonne of GOD, sustaining and vpholding the nature vnited to himself, ⟨p. 10⟩so that also there are not two Christs, but one onelie, God and man together, from the time that he knitte or vnited to himselfe the nature which he tooke. Now we learne what we may call the person of Christ,4 to wit, the son of God manifested in the flesh.
- 1Christs manhood cannot properly be called a person, and the cause thereof.Christes manhood cannot properlie be called a person, and the cause therof.
- 2Christ as he is God, is a person, & his godhead is a nature, as also his manhood.Christ as hee is God, is a person, & his godhead is a nature, as also his manhood.
- 3There is but one sonne of God, as there is but one Christ.
- 4What the person of Christ is.
