Filter authors and titles

A14216:1537

The Sum of Christian Religion

Name: The Sum of Christian Religion
Author: Zacharias Ursinus

The sum of Christian religion: delivered by Zacharias Ursinus in his lectures upon the Catechism authorised by the noble Prince Frederick, throughout his dominions: wherein are debated and resolved the questions of whatsoever points of moment, which have been or are controversed in divinity. Translated into English by Henry Parry, out of the last & best Latin editions, together with some supply of wa[n]ts out of his discourses of divinity, and with correction of sundry faults & imperfections, which are [sic] as yet remaining in the best corrected Latin.

:1534p. 547

Now that those things which in the person & office of the Mediator are and abide proper unto one nature, neither are made, nor are, by reason of the union, common to both natures; ma•• be showed at large, but now let these few suffice.

Now that those things which in the person & office of the Mediatour are and abide proper vnto one nature, neither are made, nor are, by reason of the vnion, common to both natures; ma•• be shewed at large, but now let these few suffice.

:1535p. 547

First: Such as is the union of the natures, such is the communicating of the properties. But the union of the natures was not made in the natures, or into one nature, but in the person, or unto one person. Therefore the communicating of the properties was made in the person, not in the natures; that is, the union maketh the properties of both natures common, not to one nature but to one person. For not one nature, but one person, hath truly, as two natures, so also double properties and operations, and those infinitely differing, created and increate, finite and infinite. Wherefore as by union the man-hood was not made the God-head or God, so neither is it immense, infinite, and omnipotent. But contrariwise, man nevertheless is truly and really as God eternal, so omnipotent also, and everywhere, and giver of the Holy Ghost. The reason is, Because not the manhood, but the Man Christ hath indeed in his substance the eternal and immense God-head.

First: Such as is the vnion of the natures, such is the communicating of the properties. But the vnion of the natures was not made in the natures, or into one nature, but in the person, or vnto one person. Therefore the communicating of the properties was made in the person, not in the natures; that is, the vnion maketh the properties of both natures common, not to one nature but to one person. For not one nature, but one person, hath truly, as two natures, so also double properties and operations, and those infinitely differing, created and increate, finite and infinite. Wherefore as by vnion the man-hoode was not made the God-head or God, so neither is it immense, infinit, and omnipotent. But contrariwise, man neuerthelesse is trulie and reallie as God eternal, so omnipotent also, and eueriewhere, and giuer of the Holy Ghost. The reason is, Because not the manhood, but the Man Christ hath indeed in his substance the eternall and immense God-head.

:1536p. 547

Secondly, That which is proper to one can not be common to moe, that is, can not exist or be found together in other subjects also of divers nature. For to be proper and to be common, are contradictory & therefore in farthest repugnancy.

Secondly, That which is proper to one can not bee common to moe, that is, can not exist or be found together in other subiects also of diuers nature. For to be proper and to be common, are contradictory & therfore in fardest repugnancie.

:1537p. 547

Thirdly, There can not be made, one omnipotency, and one omnipotent operation to be of both natures, whereby as well the manhood, as the Godhead, should be really omnipotent and work divine things: but there must needs be also one essence of both, whereby the manhood also must be really God. For the omnipotency, which they will have one and the same to be communicated unto the flesh, is the Godhead it self.

Thirdlie, There can not be made, one omnipotencie, and one omnipotent operation to be of both natures, whereby as well the manhood, as the Godhead, should be reallie omnipotent and worke diuine thinges: but there must needes be also one essence of both, whereby the manhood also must bee reallie God. For the omnipotency, which they wil haue one and the same to be communicated vnto the flesh, is the Godhead it selfe.

:1538p. 548

Fourthly, If Christs humanity, in the office of the Mediator, doth it self really & effectually perform not only that which belongeth unto the flesh, but also those things which are proper unto the Godhead, then either his Godhead shall be idle and do nothing in the work of our redemption, or surely the flesh assumed shall do more, and more shall be due and yielded unto, it, than to the Word which assumed and took it.

Fourthly, If Christs humanitie, in the office of the Mediator, doth it selfe reallie & effectuallie perfourme not onely that which belongeth vnto the flesh, but also those thinges which are proper vnto the Godhead, then either his Godhead shall bee idle and doe nothing in the woorke of our redemption, or surelie the fleshe assumpted shall doe more, and more shall be due and yeelded vnto, it, than to the Word which assumed and tooke it.

:1539p. 548

Fifthly, If the flesh, because it is said to be quickening, is also omnipotent, and doth by proper virtue regenerate mens hearts: after the same sort also may it be said, that the God-head also, because it is redemptresse, is subject to suffering and did suffer. For both quickening and redeeming, are properties of the office, common to both natures, but not after one and the same manner.

Fiftly, Jf the flesh, because it is saide to bee quickning, is also omnipotent, and doth by proper vertue regenerate mens hartes: after the same sort also may it bee saide, that the God-head also, because it is redemptresse, is subiect to suffering and did suffer. For both quickning and redeeming, are properties of the office, common to both natures, but not after one and the same manner.

:1540p. 548

Sixthly, The whole majesty of the God-head is, that it is an essence, existing, not of another, but of it self, and subsisting by it self, spiritual or incorporeal, eternal, immense, unchangeable, of infinite power, wisdom, goodness &c. That is, the whole Majesty compriseth all the perfections and operations proper unto the Godhead. But omnipotency is the whole majesty of the God-head, according to the supposition of the Ubiquetaries: For so Schmideline writeth in the 142. conclusion of his disputation, of the Lords Supper, & of the communicating of the properties, had at Tubinge in the year M.D.LXXXII. In the word omnipotency I comprise the whole majesty of the godhead: And in his 143. conclusion, Omnipotency is the very essence it self of the God-head. &c. Therefore if Gods omnipotency be really communicated to Christs humanity, so that this also is by reason of the omnipotency communicated unto it, really omnipotent▪ of necessity then by reason of the same omnipotency really communicated Christs humanity shall be indeed an essence, subsisting of it self and by it self, incorporeal, eternal, immense, creatress of all things, that is, God himself blessed for ever, and so by consequent, the divine person. For an essence intelligent, subsisting by it self, & which also is God, must needs be the person. And these are the fruits of real communicating of properties in natures.

Sixtly, The whole maiesty of the God-head is, that it is an essence, existing, not of another, but of it selfe, and subsisting by it selfe, spirituall or incorporeal, eternall, immense, vnchaungeable, of infinite power, wisedom, goodnes &c. That is, the whole Maiesty compriseth all the perfections and operations proper vnto the Godhead. But omnipotencie is the whole maiestie of the God-head, according to the supposition of the Vbiquetaries: For so Schmideline writeth in the 142. conclusion of his disputation, of the Lords Supper, & of the communicating of the properties, had at Tubinge in the yeare M.D.LXXXII. In the word omnipotencie I comprise the whole maiestie of the godhead: And in his 143. conclusion, Omnipotencie is the verie essence it selfe of the God-head. &c. Therefore if Gods omnipotencie bee really communicated to Christs humanitie, so that this also is by reason of the omnipotency communicated vnto it, reallie omnipotent▪ of necessity then by reason of the same omnipotency really communicated Christes humanitie shall bee indeed an essence, subsisting of it selfe and by it selfe, incorporeall, eternall, immense, creatres of all thinges, that is, God himselfe blessed for euer, and so by consequent, the diuine person. For an essence intelligent, subsisting by it selfe, & which also is God, must needs be the person. And these are the fruits of reall communicating of properties in natures.

:1541p. 548–549

The participation of the God-head, exaltation and majesty of the flesh and such like, is not a real communicating of the essential properties of the God-head made into the humane nature, ⟨p. 549⟩or an omnipresence, omniscience, omnipotency, that is, a God-head of the man-hood: For such a communicating should not perfect but destroy the man-hood, and convert it into the God-head, and dissolve the personal union of distinct natures: but it is, First, the very union of the humanity with the Word in such sort, as it being created & finite, doth together with all the essential properties thereof subsist, not in a created person of the same humane nature, but in the increate and eternal person of God the Word: by reason of which union, God the Word (but not the God-head) is & is called truly man▪ and contrary, man (but not the manhood) is and is called truly eternal God.

The participation of the God-head, exaltation and maiestie of the flesh and such like, is not a real communicating of the essentiall properties of the God-heade made into the humane nature, ⟨p. 549⟩or an omnipresence, omniscience, omnipotency, that is, a God-head of the man-hood: For such a communicating should not perfect but destroy the man-hoode, and conuert it into the God-head, and dissolue the personal vnion of distinct natures: but it is, First, the verie vnion of the humanitie with the Word in such sort, as it being created & finite, doth together with al the essential properties therof subsist, not in a created person of the same humane nature, but in the increate and eternal person of God the Word: by reason of which vnion, God the Word (but not the God-head) is & is called trulie man▪ and contrarie, man (but not the manhood) is and is called truly eternall God.

:1542p. 549

No dignity & eminence can be imagined greater than this, neither doth it agree to any but to the flesh of Christ only. Secondly, It is the excellency of gifts. For these christs humanity received without measure, that is, all whatsoever, and most great, and most perfect, that may fall into a created and finite nature. Thirdly, The office of the mediator, to the performing whereof the united but yet distinct properties and operations of both natures do necessarily concur. Fourthly, The honour and worship, which by reason of the Mediatorship, agreeth & is given to whole christ according to b•th natures, keeping still, as was before said, the difference of properties and operations in natures.

No dignitie & eminence can be imagined greater than this, neither doth it agree to anie but to the flesh of Christ onely. Secondly, Jt is the excellencie of gifts. For these christs humanitie receiued without measure, that is, all whatsoeuer, and most great, and most perfect, that maie fall into a created and finite nature. Thirdly, The office of the mediator, to the perfourming whereof the vnited but yet distinct properties and operations of both natures doe necessarily concur. Fourthly, The honor and worship, which by reason of the Mediatorship, agreeth & is giuē to whole christ according to b•th natures, keeping still, as was before saide, the difference of properties and operations in natures.

:1543p. 549–550

Now whatsoever testimonies some bring either out of the Scriptures, or out of the Fathers which were sound in faith, thereby to prove that their Eutychian transmutation, and a third kind of communicating forged by themselves, that is, exequation or equalling of natures, all those testimonies indeed belong either to the grace of union of the natures, which is signified by the communicating of properties; or to the grace of Christs Headship, which compriseth the office and honour of the Mediator, which are affirmed of whole Christ by way of communicating: or to the habitual grace, that is, the created gifts, which Christ received without measure, which are properly affirmed of the flesh or humanity. These gifts which are also called graces, are not properly effects of the personal union, as are the attributes or properties of the natures and office. First, because they are communicated to the manhood as well of the Father and the Holy Ghost, as of the Word or Sonne. For he is said to have received of ⟨p. 550⟩the Father the spirit without measure, that is, abundantly: likewise to be anointed with the Holy Ghost. And, if the gifts were effects of the union, it would follow of necessity, that the flesh was united not to the Son only, but to the Father also and the holy Ghost. Secondly, The union of the flesh with the Word, was from the very moment of the conception always most perfect: But the consummation and perfection of gifts was not until the accomplished time of his resurrection & ascension. For he was indeed humble, weak, and contemned: he was indeed ignorant of some things: he did indeed increase in wisdom, stature, and in favour not with men only, but also with God himself. Thirdly, The flesh, when it was in the state of humility, had not immortality or a nature not subject to sufferings or the like, and yet remained it always united with the Word. Wherefore the habitual gifts or graces of the humanity, for which it is also in it self really wise, mighty, just, holy, follow not the personal union in respect of dependency, as the effect followeth and dependeth of this cause, but only in respect of order: Because namely, the humane nature was first to subsist and be, before it were enriched with gifts: and it subsisteth united to the Word in the very first moment of the conception.

Now whatsoeuer testimonies some bring either out of the Scriptures, or out of the Fathers which were sound in faith, thereby to proue that their Eutychian transmutation, and a third kind of communicating forged by themselues, that is, exequation or equalling of natures, all those testimonies indeed belong either to the grace of vnion of the natures, which is signified by the communicating of properties; or to the grace of Christes Headship, which compriseth the office and honour of the Mediatour, which are affirmed of whole Christ by waie of communicating: or to the habituall grace, that is, the created giftes, which Christ receiued without measure, which are properly affirmed of the flesh or humanitie. These giftes which are also called graces, are not properlie effectes of the personal vnion, as are the attributes or properties of the natures and office. First, because they are communicated to the manhoode as well of the Father and the Holie Ghost, as of the Word or Sonne. For he is said to haue receiued of

:1544p. 550

But after what manner the humanity is united unto the Son of God, hath been said before. For by the special and miraculous working of the holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgin, of her blood was the flesh of christ formed, sanctified, and united according to subsistence, or personally unto the Word.

But after what maner the humanitie is vnited vnto the Sonne of God, hath beene said before. For by the special and miraculous working of the holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgine, of her blood was the flesh of christ formed, sanctified, and vnited according to subsistence, or personally vnto the W•ord.

:1545p. 550

4 Why it was necessary, that the two natures should be united in the person or subsistence of the son of God.

4 Why it was necessarie, that the two natures should bee vnited in the person or subsistence of the sonne of God.

:1546p. 550–551

FOR what cause Christ our Mediator was to be together both a true and perfect just man, and true, that is, by nature GOD, hath been declared of us before in the common place of the Mediator, in the 4 question pag. 237. For the work of our redemption could not have bin compassed and finished by the Mediator without the concurrence of divers natures & operations in the same person. For albeit he suffered & died in the flesh, yet his passion and suffering would not have that force and efficacy to redeem, justify, & sanctify us, neither could christ have applied ⟨p. 551⟩those benefits unto us except he had bin withal true and natural God.

FOR what cause Christ our Mediatour was to bee together both a true and perfect iust man, and true, that is, by nature GOD, hath beene declared of vs before in the common place of the Mediatour, in the 4 question pag. 237. For the woorke of our redemption could not haue bin compassed and finished by the Mediator without the concurrence of diuers natures & operations in the same person. For albeit he suffred & died in the flesh, yet his passion and suffering would not haue that force and efficacy to redeeme, iustifie, & sanctifie vs, neither could christ haue applied ⟨p. 551⟩those benefites vnto vs except he had bin withal true and natural God.

:1547p. 551

Of the Incarnation of the Word, the confession made by the Fathers of Antioch against Paulus Samosatenus, TAKEN OUT OF THE ACTS OF THE FIRST EPHESINE COUNCIL. WE confess our Lord Jesus Christ begotten before all worlds of his Father, but in the last times borne according to the flesh of the Virgin by the holy Ghost, subsisting in one person only, made of the celestial God-head and humane flesh. Whole God, and whole man. Whole God also with his body but not according to his body, god. Whole man also with his God head, but not according to his God head, man. Again, whole adorable also with his body, but not according to his body, adorable. Whole adoring also with his Godhead, but not according to his godhead, adoring. Whole increate also with his body, but not according to his body, increated. Whole formed also with his Godhead, but not according to his godhead, formed. Whole consubstantial with god also with his body, but not according to his body, consubstantial: as neither also, according to his Godhead he is coessential with men: but he is according to the flesh consubstantial unto us existing also in his Godhead. For when we say he is according to the spirit consubstantial with God, we do not say he is according to the spirit coessential with men. And contrarily, when we affirm him to be according to the flesh consubstantial with men, we do not affirm him to be according to the flesh consubstantial with God. For as according to the spirit he is not consubstantial with us▪ (For according to this he is consubstantial with God:) So of the other side he is not according to the flesh coessential with god: but according to this he is consubstantial with us. And as we pronounce these to be distinct & diverse one from the other, not to bring in a division of one undivided person, but to note the distinction and unconfoundablenes of the natures and properties of the Word and the flesh; so we affirm and worship those as united, which make to the manner of the undivided union or composition.

Of the Incarnation of the Word, the confession made by the Fathers of Antioch against Paulus Samosatenus, TAKEN OVT OF THE ACTES OF THE FIRST EPHESINE COVNCEL. VVEE confesse our Lord Iesus Christ begotten before all worlds of his Father, but in the last times borne according to the flesh of the Virgine by the holy Ghost, subsisting in one person onely, made of the celestiall God-head and humane flesh. Whole God, and whole man. Whole God also with his bodie but not according to his body, god. Whole man also with his God head, but not according to his God head, man. Againe, whole adorable also with his bodie, but not according to his bodie, adorable. Whole adoring also with his Godhead, but not according to his godhead, adoring. Whole increat also with his body, but not according to his body, increated. Whole formed also with his Godhead, but not according to his godhead, formed. Whole consubstantial with god also with his body, but not according to his body, consubstantiall: as neither also, according to his Godhead he is coessentiall with men: but hee is according to the flesh consubstantiall vnto vs existing also in his Godhead. For when wee say hee is according to the spirit consubstantiall with God, wee doe not say hee is according to the spirit coessentiall with men. And contrarily, when wee affirme him to bee according to the flesh cnsubstantiall with men, we doe not affirme him to bee according to the fleshe consubstantial with God. For as according to the spirit he is not consubstantial with vs (For according to this he is consubstantial with God:) So of the other side he is not according to the flesh coessentiall with god: but according to this he is consubstantiall with vs. And as wee pronounce these to bee distinct & diuerse one from the other, not to bring in a diuision of one vndiuided person, but to note the distinction and vnconfoundablenes of the natures and properties of the Word and the flesh; so we affirme and worship those as vnited, which make to the manner of the vndiuided vnion or composition.

:1548p. 551–552

Vigilius Lib. 4. against Eutyches. IF there be one nature of the Word & the flesh, how then, seeing the Word is every where, is not the flesh also found every where? For when it was in the earth, it was not verily in heaven: and now ⟨p. 552⟩because it is in heaven, it is not verily in the earth: and in so much it is not, as that as touching it we look for Christ to come from heaven, whom as touching the Word we believe to be in the earth with us. Wherefore according to your opinion, either the Word is contained in place with the flesh, or the flesh is every where with the Word, where as one nature doth not receive any contrary or divers thing in it self, and it is a thing diverse and far unlike, to be circumscribed in place, and to be every where: and seeing the Word is every where, and the flesh is not every where; it is apparent, that one and the same Christ is of both natures, and is every where as touching the nature of his Godhead, but is not everywhere as touching the nature of his manhood: is created, and hath no beginning: is subject to death, and cannot die: the one he hath by the nature of the Word, whereby he is god▪ the other by the nature of his flesh, whereby the same God is man. Wherefore that one son of God, and the same made the son of man, hath a beginning by the nature of his flesh, and hath no beginning by the nature of his Godhead: was created by the nature of his flesh, and was not created by the nature of his godhead: circumscribed in place by the nature of his flesh, and not contained in any place by the nature of his Godhead: is lower also than the Angels by the nature of his flesh, and is equal with the father according to the nature of his God-head: died by the nature of his flesh, and never died by the nature of his Godhead. This is the Catholic faith and confession, which the Apostles delivered, the martyrs established, and the faithful hitherto hold and maintain.

Vigilius Lib. 4. against Eutyches. IF there be one nature of the Word & the flesh, how then, seeing the Word is euery where, is not the flesh also found euery where? For when it was in the earth, it was not verily in heauen: and now ⟨p. 552⟩because it is in heauen, it is not verily in the earth: and in so much it is not, as that as touching it wee looke for Christ to come from heauen, whom as touching the Word we beleeue to bee in the earth with vs. Wherefore according to your opinion, either the Word is cōteined in place with the flesh, or the flesh is euery where with the Word, where as one nature doth not receiue any contrarie or diuers thing in it selfe, and it is a thing diuerse and far vnlike, to be circumscribed in place, and to be euerie where: and seeing the Word is euerie where, and the flesh is not euerie where; it is apparent, that one and the same Christ is of both natures, and is euerie where as touching the nature of his Godhead, but is not eueriewhere as touching the nature of his manhood: is created, and hath no beginning: is subiect to death, and cannot die: the one he hath by the nature of the Word, whereby hee is god the other by the nature of his flesh, whereby the same God is man. Wherefore that one son of God, and the same made the sonne of man, hath a beginning by the nature of his flesh, and hath no beginning by the nature of his Godhead: was created by the nature of his flesh, and was not created by the nature of his godhead: circumscribed in place by the nature of his flesh, and not conteined in any place by the nature of his Godhead: is lower also than the Angels by the nature of his flesh, and is equal with the father according to the nature of his God-head: died by the nature of his flesh, and neuer died by the nature of his Godhead. This is the Catholique faith and confession, which the Apostles deliuered, the martyrs established, and the faithfull hitherto holde and mainetaine.

:1549p. 552

Now have we in few words expounded those articles of the Apostolic creed, which entreat of the person of Christ; and have withal declared in the exposition thereof; those things which are necessary for us to know, both of the divinity of Christ, and of his humane nature, which was taken by the Word of the seed of David, united personally with the Word by the virtue of the holy ghost, and begotten in marvellous nanner of the Virgins substance. And it was requisite not to suffer that any sin should pass or be derived into his substance, 1. Because he was to satisfy for sin. 2. Because it was not convenient or meet that the Word the son of God, should take a nature defiled with sin.

Now haue wee in few wordes expounded those articles of the Apostolique creede, which intreate of the person of Christ; and haue withall declared in the exposition thereof; those things which are necessarie for vs to knowe, both of the diuinitie of Christ, and of his humane nature, which was taken by the Word of the seede of Dauid, vnited personally with the Word by the vertue of the holy ghost, and begotten in maruelous nanner of the Virgines substance. And it was requisite not to suffer that any sinne should passe or bee deriued into his substance, 1. Because hee was to satisfie for sinne. 2. Because it was not conuenient or meet that the Woorde the sonne of God, should take a nature defiled with sinne.

Reformers309

Puritans1,782

Westminster Assembly24

Evangelicals36

4 Why it was necessary, that the two natures should be united in the person or subsistence of the son of God.

4 Why it was necessarie, that the two natures should bee vnited in the person or subsistence of the sonne of God.