Christus in corde, or, The mystical union between Christ and believers considered in its…

The Vine and the Branches have one nature, so have Christ and Believers; he took ⟨p. 76⟩an humane nature, that he might be a Vine to us, and we Branches in him; that he might communicate spiritual sap unto us, and in virtue of it we might bring forth fruit unto God. The Arians of old argued from this place against the Deity of Christ; The Vine (said they) is of the same nature with the branches, but not of the same nature with the Husbandman; Christ is consubstantial with us who are the Branches, but not with the Father who is the Husbandman. To which I answer, this parable of the Vine proves Christs Deity as well as his humanity; he must be, not a mere man, but God-man in one person, else he could not be such a Vine as he is here described to be. Were he only God, he could not be an homogeneal Vine, and have one nature with us; were he only man, he could not be an influxive Vine, and communicate spiritual life unto us, it being beyond the sphere of a mere creature to do it: Were he (as the Arians would have him) no more than so, all the Branches in him would be dry and withered, no sap of Grace or spiritual Life would be found among men. It's true, the earthly Vine hath not the same nature with the Husbandman, but the spiritual one hath it; here the Husbandman is the root of the ⟨p. 77⟩Vine it self; here the Vine calls the Husbandman Father, My Father (saith our Saviour) is the Husbandman; this Vine in eternity sprung out of the Fathers bosom, and in time sprung out of the Virgins womb; so he is consubstantial with the Father as to his Divinity, and consubstantial with us as to his humanity.

The Vine and the Branches have one nature, so have Christ and Believers; he took ⟨p. 76⟩an humane nature, that he might be a Vine to us, and we Branches in him; that he might communicate spiritual sap unto us, and in vertue of it we might bring forth fruit unto God. The Arrians of old argued from this place against the Deity of Christ; The Vine (said they) is of the same nature with the branches, but not of the same nature with the Husbandman; Christ is consubstantial with us who are the Branches, but not with the Father who is the Husbandman. To which I answer, this parable of the Vine proves Christs Deity as well as his humanity; he must be, not a meer man, but God-man in one person, else he could not be such a Vine as he is here described to be. Were he only God, he could not be an homogeneal Vine, and have one nature with us; were he only man, he could not be an influxive Vine, and communicate spiritual life unto us, it being beyond the sphear of a meer creature to do it: Were he (as the Arrians would have him) no more than so, all the Branches in him would be dry and withered, no sap of Grace or spiritual Life would be found among men. It's true, the earthly Vine hath not the same nature with the Husbandman, but the spiritual one hath it; here the Husbandman is the root of the