of man, whom the Father exceedeth in greatness, both to be present everywhere as he is God, and also to be in the same temple of God as God dwelling there; and yet to be in some certain place of heaven according to the manner of his true body." The selfsame thing the same author as yet expoundeth more at large in his fiftieth treatise upon John3; and Contra Felicianum Arianum, cap. 9, 10, and 114; also in his treatise De Agone Christi, cap. 24 unto cap. 275. To

[2 Noli itaque dubitare, ibi nunc esse hominem Christum Jesum unde venturus est, memoriterque recole et fideliter tene Christianam confessionem: quoniam resurrexit a mortuis, ascendit in cœlum, sedet ad dexteram Patris, nec aliunde quam inde venturus est ad vivos mortuosque judicandos; et sic venturus est, illa angelica voce testante, quemadmodum ire visus est in cœlum, id est, in eadem carnis forma atque substantia, cui profecto immortalitatem dedit, naturam non abstulit. Secundum hanc formam non est putandus ubique diffusus. Cavendum est enim ne ita divinitatem astruamus hominis, ut veritatem corporis auferamus. Non est autem consequens, ut quod in Deo est ita sit ubique ut Deus. Nam et de nobis verissima scriptura dicit, quod in illo vivimus, movemur, et sumus; nec tamen sicut ille ubique sumus: sed aliter homo ille in Deo, quoniam aliter et Deus ille in homine, proprio quodam et singulari modo. Una enim persona Deus et homo est, et utrumque est unus Christus Jesus: ubique, per id quod Deus est; in cœlo autem per id quod homo... Nam spatia locorum tolle corporibus, nusquam erunt; et quia nusquam erunt, nec erunt. Tolle ipsa corpora qualitatibus corporum, non erit ubi sint, et ideo necesse est ut non sint... Christum autem Dominum nostrum, unigenitum Dei Filium, æqualem Patri, eundemque hominis filium, quo major est Pater, et ubique totum præsentem esse non dubites tanquam Deum, et in eodem templo Dei esse tanquam inhabitantem Deum, et in loco aliquo cœli propter veri corporis modum.-Augustin. ad Dardan. Ep. LVII. Opp. Tom. п. fol. 53. col. 3. fol. 54. col. 2. fol. 56. col. 1. Par. 1531.]

[3 Secundum præsentiam majestatis semper habemus Christum; secundum præsentiam carnis, recte dictum est discipulis, Me autem non semper habebitis.—Id. Tom. 1x. fol. 76. col. 3.]

[4 Fel. Scire cupio quo pacto ad filium transeat dignitas patris, et ad patrem non recurrat humilitas prolis? Aug. Non secundum naturam ista nunc dici, quotidianarum rerum exempla nos docent, &c.— Id. Tom. VI. fol. 160. col. 3.-This treatise is not genuine.]

[5 Nec eos audiamus qui negant tale corpus Domini resurrexisse, quale positum est in monumento, &c. c. 24. Nec eos audiamus qui negant ipsum corpus secum levasse in cœlum Dominum nostrum, &e. c. 25. Nec eos audiamus qui negant ad dextram Patris sedere Filium, &c. c. 26.-Id. Tom. III. fol. 164. col. 2. P.]

which we will also join the testimony of the holy martyr Vigilius, bishop of Trident. For he, disputing against Eutyches in the defence of both natures in Christ, saith: "If the nature of the Word and flesh be one, how is it that since the Word is everywhere, the flesh also is not found everywhere? For when the flesh was in earth, surely it was not in heaven; and because it is now in heaven, surely it is not in earth and so far is it from being in the earth, that according to flesh we do look for Christ to come from heaven, whom according to the Word we believe to be with us on earth. Therefore, according to your opinion, either the Word is contained with his flesh in place, or else the flesh with the Word is in every place: whereas one nature receiveth not into itself anything contrary and unlike. But it is contrary and far unlike to be limited within a place, and to be everywhere and because the Word is in every place, but his flesh is not in every place, it is evident that one and the selfsame Christ is of both natures; and that he is everywhere according to the nature of his Godhead, and is contained in place according to the nature of his manhood; that he is both created, and also without beginning; that he is subject to death, and also cannot die; one of which is agreeable to him by the nature of the Word, whereby he is God; the other by the nature of the flesh, whereby the selfsame God is man. Therefore one and the selfsame Son of God, being also made the Son of man, hath a beginning by the nature of the flesh, and hath no beginning by the nature of his divinity by the nature of his flesh he is created, and by the nature of his divinity he is not created: by the nature of his flesh he is limited in place, and by the nature of his divinity he is not contained in place: by the nature of his flesh he is inferior also to angels, and according to his divinity he is equal to the Father: by the nature of his flesh he died, but by the nature of his divinity he died not. This is the catholic faith and christian confession, which the apostles delivered, the martyrs confirmed, and the faithful even unto this day do observe and keep1." Hitherto we have rehearsed

[1 Si Verbi et carnis una natura est, quomodo cum Verbum ubique sit, non ubique inveniatur et caro? Nam quando in terra fuit, non erat utique in cœlo: et nunc quia in cœlo est, non est utique in terra; et in tantum non est, ut secundum ipsum Christum spectemus ven

one person

undivided.

the words of Vigilius, martyr and bishop, to this end, that the most notable agreement of the holy scripture, of the universal church, and of the most godly and learned fathers in this principle might be understood, wherein we confess that christ in the properties of both natures in Christ remain unconfounded. remaineth Again, we must by all means take heed, lest through defending and retaining the properties of the two natures we divide and pull asunder the unity of the person; as though there were two Christs, whereof the one should be subject to suffering and mortal, the other not subject to suffering and immortal. For there is but one and the same Christ, who according to his Godhead is acknowledged immortal, and mortal according to his manhood. Nestorius denied that the blessed virgin Mary was the mother of God; for he said God was unchangeable, and therefore that he could not be born, and that he had no mother. Whereupon sprang a suspicion, that he should say the Lord was bare man, and that he should maintain the heretical opinion of Paulus Samosatenus and Photinus: which thing Socrates handleth at large, Historiarum Lib. vii. cap. 322. But Nestorius was turum de cœlo, quem secundum Verbum nobiscum esse credimus in terra. Igitur secundum vos aut Verbum cum carne sua loco continetur, aut caro cum Verbo ubique est, quando una natura contrarium quid et diversum non recipit in seipsa. Diversum est autem et longe dissimile circumscribi loco et ubique esse; et quia Verbum ubique est, caro autem ejus ubique non est, apparet unum eundemque Christum utriusque esse naturæ; et esse quidem ubique secundum naturam divinitatis suæ, et loco contineri secundum naturam humanitatis suæ ; creatum esse, et initium non habere; morti subjacere, et mori non posse: quod unum illi est ex natura Verbi, qua Deus est; aliud ex natura carnis, qua idem Deus homo est. Igitur unus Dei Filius idemque hominis factus filius habet initium ex natura carnis suæ, et non habet initium ex natura divinitatis suæ; creatus est per naturam carnis suæ, et non est creatus per naturam divinitatis suæ; circumscribitur loco per naturam carnis suæ, et loco non capitur per naturam divinitatis sua; minor est etiam angelis per naturam carnis suæ, et æqualis est Patri secundum naturam divinitatis suæ; mortuus est natura carnis suæ, et non est mortuus natura divinitatis suæ. Hæc est fides et confessio catholica, quam apostoli tradiderunt, martyres roboraverunt, et fideles nunc usque custodiunt.-Vigilii contra Eutychen. Lib. IV. fol. 73. Tigur. 1539.]

[2 Socratis Hist. Eccles. Lib. VII. cap. 32. De Anastasio presbytero, a quo Nestorius ad impietatem perductus est. ed. Cantab. pp. 380, 381.]

Cor. ii.

injurious to the scripture and to true faith.

For Elisabeth,

the wife of Zachary and the mother of St John Baptist, being full of the Holy Ghost, in express words saluteth the holy virgin Mary, and calleth her the mother of the Lord, that is, the mother of God. And albeit his heavenly nature be without generation and corruption, yet notwithstanding it is most certain that he whom Mary brought forth was God in very deed. For "that which is born of her," saith the angel, "is the Son of God:" therefore she brought forth God, and she worthily is called the mother of God. For if she bare not God, she brought forth bare man, neither hath the Son of God coupled man unseparably to himself. In like manner, since God of his own nature is immortal, truly he cannot die: but if any man for that cause should absolutely deny that God was crucified and offered, yea, and died for us, he should gainsay Paul saying, "Had they known it', they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." But who is ignorant that the God of glory, or glorious God, cannot be crucified? In the meanwhile, since he which according to the flesh suffered and was nailed on the cross was God, not bare man only, we rightly say that God suffered and was nailed on the cross for us; though he which suffered suffered according to that only [1 Pet. iv. 1.] which could suffer. For Peter the apostle saith, "Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh." The first Toletan council following him decreed in these words: "If any shall say or believe that the Godhead may be born, let him be accursed. If any shall say or believe that the deity of Christ may be turned, changed, or subject to suffering, let him be accursed. If any shall say or believe that the nature of the Godhead and the manhood is one in Christ, let him be accursed." And Damasus bishop of Rome saith: "If any shall say, that in suffering on the cross the Son of God and God suffered pain, and not the flesh with the soul which he put on in the form [1 ipsum, Lat. ; him.]

[2 Si quis dixerit vel crediderit Deitatem nascibilem esse: anathema sit. Si quis dixerit vel crediderit Deitatem Christi convertibilem fuisse, vel passibilem: anathema sit. Si quis dixerit vel crediderit Deitatis et carnis unam in Christo esse naturam: anathema sit.-Assertio Fidei Concil. Toletan. I. Magd. Centur. Cent. v. cap. 9. foll. 467, 468. Basil. 1624. The first of these three determinations is not found, and the second is given somewhat differently, in Concil. Labb. et Coss. Tom. 11. col. 1228.]

of a servant, which he took on him as the scripture saith, let him be accursed3." Therefore, whereas Paul saith, that "God hath purchased to himself a church with his own Acts xx. blood," who is so mad to believe that the divine nature hath or ever had blood? In the meanwhile who is such a dorhead that he understandeth not, that the flesh which God took hath blood? And since that God accounteth not that as another's, but his own, which he took unto himself; we most truly say, that God with his own blood redeemed the world. Whereupon Theodoretus also, bishop of Cyrus, Dialog. Eran. 3, a little before the end, saith: "If Christ be both God and man, as both the holy scripture teacheth, and as the most blessed fathers have always preached, then as man he suffered, but as God he was not subject to suffering. But when we say the body, or flesh, or humanity suffered, we do not separate the divine nature for as it was united to his human nature, which was hungry and thirsty, and weary, yea, and slept also, yea, and was vexed with sorrow and heaviness for the passion which he should suffer, abiding indeed none of those, but suffering that to abide the affections and passions of nature; even so it was joined unto him when he was crucified, and permitted that his passion should be throughly ended, that by his passion he might suffer death, not feeling grief truly by his passion, but making his passion agreeable and convenient for himself as the passion of his temple or dwelling-place and of his flesh joined unto him; by the which also they that believe are called the members of Christ: he himself is called the head of those that believe"," far he.

Thus

[3 Εἴ τις εἴπῃ, ὅτι ἐν τῷ πάθει τοῦ σταυροῦ τὴν ὀδύνην ὑπέμεινεν ὁ Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ θεότητι, καὶ οὐχὶ σαρκὶ καὶ ψυχῇ λογικῇ, ἥνπερ ἀνέλαβεν ἐν τῇ τοῦ δούλου μορφῇ, ὡς εἴρηκεν ἡ ἁγία γραφὴ, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.—Damasi Opp. Epist. ad Paulin. Thessalon. Episc. p. 116. Romæ, 1638.]

[4 tam stupidus, Lat.; dor, a drone. Johnson.]

[5 Εἰ ὁ Χριστὸς καὶ Θεὸς καὶ ἄνθρωπος, ὡς καὶ ἡ θεία διδάσκει γραφὴ, καὶ οἱ πανεύφημοι πατέρες κηρύττοντες διετέλεσαν, ὡς ἄνθρωπος ἄρα πέπονθεν, ὡς δὲ Θεὸς διέμενεν ἀπαθής.... Οταν τὸ σῶμα, ἢ τὴν σάρκα, ἢ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα πεπονθέναι λέγωμεν, τὴν θείαν οὐ χωρίζομεν φύσιν· ὥσπερ γὰρ ἤνωτο πεινώσῃ καὶ διψώσῃ καὶ κοπιώσῃ, καὶ μέντοι καὶ καθευδούσῃ, καὶ ἀγωνιώσῃ τὸ πάθος, οὐδὲν μὲν τούτων υφισταμένη, συγχωροῦσα δὲ ταύτῃ δέχεσθαι τὰ τῆς φύσεως πάθη· οὕτω συνῆπτο καὶ σταυρουμένῃ, καὶ συνε