Two discourses concerning the Holy Spirit, and His work the one, Of the Spirit…

SECONDLY, It is not a Presence by Virtue of a Metonymical Denomination, or an Expression of the Cause for the Effect, that is intended. The meaning of this Promise, The Spirit shall dwell in you, is not, He shall work graciously in you; for this he can without any especial Presence. Being essentially every where, he can work where and how he pleaseth, without any especial Presence. But it is the Spirit himself that is promised, and his Presence in an especial manner, and an especial manner of that Presence; he shall be in you, and dwell in you, as we shall see. The only Enquiry in this matter is, whether the Holy Spirit himself be promised unto Believers, or only his Grace, which we shall immediately enquire into.

SECONDLY, It is not a Presence by Vertue of a Metonymical Denomination, or an Expression of the Cause for the Effect, that is intended. The meaning of this Promise, The Spirit shall dwell in you, is not, He shall work graciously in you; for this he can without any especial Presence. Being essentially every where, he can work where and how he pleaseth, without any especial Presence. But it is the Spirit himself that is promised, and his Presence in an especial manner, and an especial manner of that Presence; he shall be in you, and dwell in you, as we shall see. The only Enquiry in this matter is, whether the Holy Spirit himself be promised unto Believers, or only his Grace, which we shall immediately enquire into.

THIRDLY, The dwelling of the Person of the Holy Spirit in the Persons of Believers, of what Nature soever it be, doth not effect a Personal Union between them. That which we call a Personal Union, is the Union of Divers Natures in the same Person, and there can be but one Person by Virtue of this Union. Such is the Hypostatical Union in the Person of the Son of God. It was our Nature he assumed, and not the Person of any. And it was impossible he should so assume any more but in one Individual Instance: For if he could have assumed another Individual Being of our Nature, then it must differ personally from that which he did assume. For there is nothing that differs one Man from another, but a distinct Personal Subsistence of each. And it implies the highest Contradiction, that the Son of God could be Hypostatically united unto more than one: For if they