Chapter 4: A commentary or exposition, upon the five first chapters of… by William Perkins | AskReformation

Skip to content

:914p. 277–278§10

Again, the fathers of the old Testament before Christ, were but as children in respect of us now. Thus much saith Paul in express words. And they were so, two ways. First, in §15respect of the Mosaical regiment: because they were kept in subjection to more laws then we. Secondly, they were so in respect of revelation: because God hath revealed more to us, then to them. Read Luk. 10. 24. It may be said, we now are (the best of us,) but children to Abraham and the Prophets, whether §20we respect knowledge, or faith. Answ. It is so. If we compare person and person: but it is otherwise, if we compare body with body, and compare the Christian church, with the Church of the Jews before Christ: then we exceed them and they are but children to us. This must teach us all, to be careful §25to increase in knowledge, and in the grace of God, that we may be answerable to our condition, And to live in ignorance (as the most do) is the shame of us all. For in respect of the time, we should all be teachers, Heb. 5. 12. and yet God knows, the most are very babes. For ask a man how he looks to be saved, he will answer, by serving God, and by dealing truly. §30Now his serving of God, is his saying of his prayers: and his prayers are the Belief, and the ten Commandments. This is a poor serving of God, fitter for babes, then for men of years. It is further to be observed, that Paul saith, the fathers of the old Testament, were in bondage under the law, after the manner of §35servants, specially by reason of rites & ceremonies. And hence it follows, that the observation of a religion, in which are manifold bodily rites and figures, is a kind of bondage, and pertains ⟨p. 278⟩to the Church, for the time of her infancy or minority. Let this be remembered against the Romish religion: for it is like to that of the Jews, in the old Testament; standing for the greatest part, in bodily rites, in differences of meats, and drinks, in differences of times, places, garments; in exercises, and afflictions of the body, in local succession, in the collation §5of grace by the work done, and such like. This is manifest to them which know• the mass, which indeed is nothing but a mass of ceremonies. Therefore the Roman religion is a childish and babish religion: and if it were of God, yet is it not fit for the church of the new Testament, that is come forth of §10her minority.

Againe, the fathers of the olde Testament before Christ, were but as children in respect of vs now. Thus much saith Paul in expresse words. And they were so, two waies. First, in §15respect of the Mosaicall regiment: because they were kept in subiection to more lawes then we. Secondly, they were so in respect of reuelation: because God hath reuealed more to vs, then to them. Read Luk. 10. 24. It may be said, we now are (the best of vs,) but children to Abraham and the Prophets, whether §20we respect knowledge, or faith. Answ. It is so. If we compare person and person: but it is otherwise, if we compare bodie with bodie, and compare the Christian church, with the Church of the Iewes before Christ: then we exceede them and they are but children to vs. This must teach vs all, to be carefull §25to increase in knowledge, and in the grace of God, that we may be answerable to our condition, And to liue in ignorance (as the most doe) is the shame of vs all. For in respect of the time, we should all be teachers, Heb. 5. 12. and yet God knows, the most are very babes. For aske a man how he lookes to be saued, he will answer, by seruing God, and by dealing truely. §30Now his seruing of God, is his saying of his praiers: and his praiers are the Beleefe, and the ten Commandements. This is a poore seruing of God, fitter for babes, then for men of yeares. It is further to be obserued, that Paul saith, the fathers of the old Testament, were in bondage vnder the lawe, after the manner of §35seruants, specially by reason of rites & ceremonies. And hence it followes, that the obseruation of a religion, in which are manifold bodily rites and figures, is a kind of bondage, and pertaines ⟨p. 278⟩to the Church, for the time of her infancie or minority. Let this be remembred against the Romish religion: for it is like to that of the Iewes, in the olde Testament; standing for the greatest part, in bodily rites, in differences of meates, and drinkes, in differences of times, places, garments; in exercises, and afflictions of the bodie, in locall succession, in the collation §5of grace by the worke done, and such like. This is manifest to them which know• the masse, which indeede is nothing but a masse of ceremonies. Therefore the Romane religion is a childish and babish religion: and if it were of God, yet is it not fit for the church of the newe Testament, that is come forth of

:933p. 282–283§10

The second question is, how far forth the son of God, was made flesh? I answer three things. The first, that he took §15unto him the whole and perfect nature of man in respect of essence, namely, the entire substance of a reasonable soul, and humane body. Here remember, that quantity, that is, length, breadth, and thickness, is not an accident which may pass and repass, but it is of the substance of every body, & therefore of §20the body of Christ. And for this cause it is impossible that the body of Christ in his quantity, being four or five foot in length, should be included in the compass of a piece of bread that is but two or three inches in quantity. The second is, that the son of God •ooke unto him the properties of mans nature, §25the powers of life, sense, motion, the faculty of reason, will, and affection. The third is, that he took to him the infirmities, and miseries of mans nature. Here two caveats must be remembered. The first, that he took to him only such infirmities as are mere infirmities, and no sins. For example, upon §30the words of Christ, Let this cup pass, Matth. 26. some say, that their was oblivion in Christ: but this may not be said. For oblivion is a sin, namely, a forgetting of that which a man ought to remember: & there may be in Christ or other men, a suspending of the Memory, by some external and violent §35cause, without oblivion. The second caveat is, that the son of God took to him the infirmities which pertain to the nature of man, and not such as pertain to the persons of men, as dropsies, gouts, consumptions, and such like. For he took not the person of any man, but the nature of all men, with all the ⟨p. 283⟩appurtenances thereof, except sin.

The second question is, how farre forth the sonne of God, was made flesh? I answer three things. The first, that he tooke §15vnto him the whole and perfect nature of man in respect of essence, namely, the intire substance of a reasonable soule, and humane bodie. Here remember, that quantitie, that is, length, breadth, and thicknes, is not an accident which may passe and repasse, but it is of the substance of euery bodie, & therefore of §20the bodie of Christ. And for this cause it is impossible that the bodie of Christ in his quantitie, beeing foure or fiue foote in length, should be included in the compasse of a peece of bread that is but two or three inches in quantitie. The second is, that the sonne of God •ooke vnto him the properties of mans nature, §25the powers of life, sense, motion, the facultie of reason, will, and affection. The third is, that he tooke to him the infirmities, and miseries of mans nature. Here two caueats must be remembred. The first, that he tooke to him onely such infirmities as are meere infirmities, and no sinnes. For example, vpon §30the words of Christ, Let this cuppe passe, Matth. 26. some say, that their was obliuion in Christ: but this may not be said. For obliuion is a sinne, namely, a forgetting of that which a man ought to remember: & there may be in Christ or other men, a suspending of the Memorie, by some externall and violent §35cause, without obliuion. The second caueat is, that the sonne of God tooke to him the infirmities which pertaine to the nature of man, and not such as pertaine to the persons of men, as dropsies, gouts, consumptions, and such like. For he tooke not the person of any man, but the nature of all men, with all the ⟨p. 283⟩appurtenances thereof, except sinne.