A26923:114
An end of doctrinal controversies which have lately troubled the churches
An end of doctrinal controversies which have lately troubled the churches by reconciling explication without much disputing. Written by Richard Baxter.
London: printed for John Salusbury, 1691
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
3. And so there is also a relative difference, in that the Divine Nature, by a fixed Decree and Will, united it self for this work, to this one humane nature, even for all futurity. It may be some that are wiser can better tell wherein the Hypostatical Union consisteth.
§. 6. As to the Question, Whether the divine and humane nature be two or one, it is to ask, Whether the nature of God and his Creatures be two or one? They may be called one as we are one with Christ, as conjunct, related and consenting: But not one and the same essential nature.
§. 7. But the great difficulty is, whether the two natures constitute one Person, or two. Nestorius is accused (Derodon saith falsely, citing his own plain words) to have held, That Christ was two Persons, divine and humane. But what is to be held, the School-Doctors make a difficult question; that is, whether the humane nature be either a Person, or any part of the Person of Christ. 1. They say, that Christ was a divine Person from Eternity, and therefore began not to be such at his Incarnation. 2. That the divine nature cannot be pars personae, for that would be to be imperfect and not divine: Therefore that the humane ⟨p. xxvii⟩nature is no part, but an adjunct to the Person of Christ. (And if the humane nature be an Accident to the divine in Christ, why must we deny Creatures to be Accidents of God?) But most plain Christians would be startled to hear a Preacher say, that the Humanity is no part of the Person of Christ.
§. 7. But the great difficulty is, whether the two natures constitute one Person, or two. Nestorius is accused (Derodon saith falsly, citing his own plain words) to have held, That Christ was two Persons, divine and humane. But what is to be held, the School-Doctors make a difficult question; that is, whether the humane nature be either a Person, or any part of the Person of Christ. 1. They say, that Christ was a divine Person from Eternity, and therefore began not to be such at his Incarnation. 2. That the divine nature cannot be pars personae, for that would be to be imperfect and not divine: Therefore that the humane