Vindication of the Truth of the Christian Religion, Religious treatise · Section 4 · Subsection 9
IX Portraiture of the Chriſtian Religion; or, the Conformity of its Myſteries to the Lights of Reaſon.
HAving look'd into the Original of all our falſe Prejudices, 'tis now no difficult matter to diſtinguiſh Religion from Superſtition, and Divinity from Philoſophy. Without ſuch a Diſtinction we muſt inevitably fall into the greateſt Difficulties; and by it 'tis eaſy to demonſtrate, that Religion contains no greater Difficulties than even Nature it ſelf.
Thus the Doctrin of Predestination, of Grace and Original Sin, are ſuch unfathomable Depths as terrify at firſt view the Mind of him that endeavours to reconcile them to the Light of Nature, and methinks I already hear a Multitude of Doctors crying out againſt me, that I ought not to preſume to dive into thebottom of thoſe profound Myſteries, which confound their Reaſon, the more attentively they conſider and reflect upon them.
But I beg leave of thoſe worthy Men, to tell them, that all thoſe matters would ſeem to them leſs difficult than they do, were they leſs Philoſophers than they are. And I would have them always remember, that Faith and Reaſon, Divinity and Philoſophy are eſſentially diſtinct one from the other, in as much as the former barely perceives the Object it ſelf, without endeavouring to ſearch into the manner of it, and conſiſts in that Submiſſion which prevents its further Enquiries, Pride and Raſhneſs being contrary to it; whereas the latter continually endeavours to know both the things and the manner of them, together with the Phyſical Cauſes of them, having no greater Enemy than Ignorance, to oppoſe its Progreſs.
Accordingly a Divine ought only to enquire whether there be any ſuch thing as Grace, Predeſtination, Original Sin, &c. But a Philoſopher not ſatisfied-with a bare Knowledge of it, will yet further enquire, what is the order of the immutable Decrees of God, after what manner Grace determines our Free Will, and by what means Original Sin was tranſmitted from the firſt Man to his Poſterity.
The Apoſtles, who were the trueſt, and indeed only Divines, that confined themſelves within the due Limits of Divinity, have very largely inſtructed us in all thoſe Objects, by fully demonſtrating the truth and neceſſity of them; yet have not let fall the leaſt Word that could give us an Inſight into the manner of them. But the ſucceeding Chriſtians applying themſelves to the ſtudy of the Platonic and Ariſtotelian Philoſophy, really thought the knowledge of Salvation a Science as well as the reſt, and thereupon framed to themſelves many fruitleſs and unprofitable Speculative Systems, which in many places were repugnant to Piety, and perplex'd our Divine Religion with ſeveral humane Difficulties.
It would be injurious to imagin, that St. Paul in his large Diſcourſe about the Doctrin of Predeſtination, aimed at nothing elſe but to gratify the vain Curioſity of thoſe he addreſs'd himſelf to. All that he there ſays, tho' ſeemingly Speculative, is in reality Practical. The Queſtion was, Whether the Diſtinction that was between the Jews and Gtntiles was not wholly taken away; and if ſo, whether the Gentiles were not to make up one and the ſame Body with the beliving Jews? Thoſe of the Circumciſion being accuſtomed to look upon the Heathens as a People that were curſed, could not eaſily imagin that they ſhould ever enjoy the ſame Privileges with them. But St. Paul, the Apoſtle of the Gentiles, endeavours to confute this Prejudice of theirs; and to that purpoſe he ſhews them, that God is the God of all Men; that he ſuffered that all Men ſhould Sin, that he might thereby extend his Grace to all; that the Choice he made of the Jews for his peculiar People was a free and liberal Election; that 'twas by by Faith alone, and not by Works that the Patriarchs were acceptable to him; that his Mercies were not entailed upon the Poſterity of the Patriarchs; that the Circumciſion of the Fleſh was not the reaſon of their Acceptance with God; that the Law of it ſelf could not have that effect; that it was not for the Good Works of Jacob that his Poſterity was preferred before that of Eſau; for whilſt the Children were yet in their Mothers Womb, and had done neither Good nor Evil, it was told Rebekah, conſulting the Divine Oracle about them, that the Elder ſhould ſerve the Younger.
Now the Reflections to be made upon this Doctrin of St. Paul, are theſe, 1. That the abſolute Neceſſity there was then to treat of thoſe matters, and the urgent occaſion that obliged the Apoſtles to ſpeak of them is now wholly at an end; for there's none among the Chriſtians, that either calls or ought to call in Queſtion the Election of thoſe Gentiles who ſincerely believed the Goſpel: So that if we happen now adays to be ingaged in any eager Diſputes about thoſe matters, 'tis meerly out of a Principle of Vanity, or Obſtinacy, or a raſh and impious Curioſity. Every thing was practical in St Paul's Diſcourſe of Predeſtination, whereas thoſe are wholly Speculative that are in theſe latter Days compoſed about it. St. Paul had no other Deſign but to create Peace and Charity between the Jews and Gentiles, by ſhewing them that they were both the Object of the Divine Election: But now this Doctrin is changed into Speculation and Philoſophy, and has no other uſe but to create Scandalous Diviſions in Christian Societies.
2. The beſt and ſureſt Method in this Caſe is to imitate the Modeſty of St. Paul, who barely aſſerted the thing, taking great care not to ſearch into the manner of it. He only ſpoke of Election in general. And when his curious and impertinent Reaſon went about to examine the performance of it, he only cryed out; O the Depth of the Riches! &c. It muſt be confeſſed St. Paul had as much Wit as any modern Divines can pretend to, and ſo could have framed as probable Syſtems of the Conſent and Harmony of the Decrees of God, or have found out either in the ill uſe we make of our Free Will; or in the Springs of our Soul, wherewith to ſolve theſe Difficulties. Yet he never attempted it. And the reaſon was, he was a true Divine, and not a meer Philoſopher, and knew very well that the moſt eſſential part of Faith conſiſts in humbly caſting down our Eyes before the dark ſide of the Myſtery.
3. But becauſe we are allowed to conceive divine matters after our own way, and that it would otherwiſe be utterly impoſſible for us to ſpeak of them, ſo may we alſo diſtinguiſh the ſeveral Decrees of God; We may conceive them depending upon, and ſubordinate one to another; but ſtill remembring the Truth of this Principle, Deus non vult hoc propter hoc, ſed vult hoc eſſe propter hoc, yet we ſhould appear no more reaſonable for urging againſt Religion the Difficulties which ariſe from this Order of the Decrees of God, than if a Man ſhould pretend to raiſe very ſerious Objections againſt the Diſtinction we conceive between the Hands and Feet and Eyes of God. For as we ſhould readily anſwer the the latter, that he did not do well in urging too far thoſe figurative and humane ways of ſpeaking; ſo ſhould we tell the former, that there being no real dependence or diſtinction in the Decrees of God, he need not be perplexed at thoſe Difficulties that ſeem to take their riſe from it.
4. In the mean while I grant it ought to be our chiefeſt Concern to range thoſe Decrees in an order moſt conformable to our own Reaſon, and moſt worthy the Majeſty of God. Being therefore obliged to conceive God under the notion of a Man, it is but reaſonable we ſhould conceive him under the notion of a Wiſe and Prudent one. It muſt be confeſſed that there can be no greater Extravagance than that of thoſe Philoſophical Divines, who maintain ſo fierce a War about the manner of conceiving the Order of the Decrees of God. The Apoſtles themſelves never argued about them. They were neither Supralapſarians, nor Ʋniverſaliſts, nor Particulariſts, for they deſired not to frame Syſtems of their own, nor did they deſign to prefer Speculation before Practice. What was then the Doctrin of the bleſſed Apoſtles? The ſame that is common to all thoſe ſeveral ſorts of Divines; that which is contained in our Catechiſms; which does not require we ſhould go through a Courſe of Philoſophy, before we can underſtand its Precepts; that which teaches us purely the Thing it ſelf, and not the Manner after which it is brought to paſs; that, in ſhort, which procures Peace and good Underſtanding among Chriſtians, and not that which is the univerſal Cauſe of all their Diſſentions.
5. There are Two things to be conſidered in the Doctrin of Predeſtination, as it is offered to us by St. Paul; The Expreſſion, and the Thing it ſelf. The Expreſſion indeed may ſometimes ſeem to us ſtrange and unuſual, becauſe we are not very well acquainted with the Hebraiſms the Apoſtles were often wont to uſe in their Diſcourſes. Thus for inſtance, this Expreſſion God hardeneth, which ſeems to denote a poſitive act unworthy of God, ſignifies only, that God does not uſe to take away the hardneſs of Heart. As for the Thing it ſelf, there are two ſeveral Elections, a general, and a particular Election, both which may well be ſuppoſed to be ſpoken of in the 9th. Chap. of the Epiſtle to the Romans.
As for the general Election of the Jewiſh Nation St. Paul undertakes to ſhew that it did not depend upon any external Cauſes, but that it proceeded from the ſole Will and good Pleaſure of God. He tells us, it was not on the account of the Righteouſneſs of Jacob, (as the Jews imagined) that Iſrael had been preferred before the Poſterity of Edom, ſince long before the Children had done either Good or Evil. Rebekah was told that ſhe carried two great Nations in her Womb, meaning her two Sons, and that the Elder ſhould ſerve the Younger. And that the Apostle ſpeaks in this place of a general Election of the People of the Jews, is eaſy to perceive from this Text of Malachi, Chap. 1. v. 2, 3. which he quotes as follows, I have loved you, ſaith the Lord; yet ye ſay, wherein haſt thou loved us? Was not Eſau Jacob's brother? ſaith the Lord: Yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Eſau, and laid his Mountains and his Heritage Waſte, for the Dragons of the Wilderneſs. Whereas Edom ſaith, we are impoveriſhed, but we will return, &c. 'Tis paſt all diſpute that Malachi ſpeaks here of the two Nations, from whence we cannot but conclude, that 'tis alſo the intent of St. Paul to ſpeak of their Election in the 9th. of the Romans, which exactly agrees with the precedent and following Words. For in the foregoing Verſes he ſhews us, that in order to be admitted into the Covenant, 'tis not ſufficient to be of the Poſterity of Abraham according to the Fleſh, but 'tis further requiſite we ſhould be ſo by Faith, beca…ſe it was ſaid, in Iſaac ſhall thy ſeed be called; …nd that Iſaac was the Son of the Promiſe. And in the following Verſes, the Apoſtle introduces Hoſea ſpeaking after this manner, I will call them my people which were not my people; and her beloved which was not beloved.
It cannot be ſuppoſed but that St. Paul ſpeaks alſo of the Election of private perſons, and makes mention of it in thoſe excellent words of the foregoing Chapter, where he ſays, whom he did foreknow, he alſo did predeſtinate to be conformed, &c. Moreover, whom he did predeſtinate, them he alſo called; and whom he called, them he alſo juſtified; and whom he juſtified, them he alſo glorified, &c. and a little further he adds, Who ſhall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect, &c. Now 'tis obſervable, that this continued Chain of Benefits does not make make any Order in the Decree it ſelf, but in its execution. So that the Sum of all that may be gathered from theſe Words, is to this effect, that God predeſtinates us, and that having predeſtinated us, he calls us, he juſtifies us, and he glorifies us; all which thus far admits of no conſiderable Difficulty.
Let us not then carry our Enquiries higher than that Apoſtle did his; and ſince he never argued Philoſophically concerning the Order of the Decrees of God, let us lay aſide all thoſe unprofitable Speculations, which will vaniſh of themſelves, when we have ſuppoſed the Simplicity of the Divine Nature; or if we muſt needs Philoſophize upon it, let us at leaſt ſeparate our Philoſophy from our Faith, and make a Difference betwixt our own Reaſoning, and the Notions of the Holy Ghoſt; let us not vainly contend barely about the manner of conceiving the nature of things.
Were there are a right underſtanding amongſt Chriſtians, to make that happy Diſtinction between Philoſophy and Divinity, which we require of them, by keeping themſelves within the Bounds of Revelation, which barely informs us of the nature of the thing, and rejecting in matters of Religion all Philoſophy which endeavours to dive into the manner of it, it would be the ſureſt method to extinguiſh all thoſe Sects which rage among us, and reſtore all things to the primitive Unity and Simplicity of the Apoſtolical Religion.
The Doctrin of Predestination would then be no longer a confuſed Heap▪ of Darkneſs, Contradictions, and endleſs Difficulties, as it is now adays, through the fault and neglect of Men; 'Twould then appear to us more conformable to Reaſon to hold Predeſtination than otherwiſe. For if there be a God, he cannot but foreſee what will become of Men, and that they will fall into Miſery and Sin. And if ſome of them be ſaved, 'twould be very abſurd to think that God deſigned them not unto Salvation.
And this Doctrin of Predeſtination, when diſtinguiſhed from the Speculations of Schoolmen, and vain inquiries of humane Curioſity, is wholly compriſed in theſe two Propoſitions; God foreſees the Sin and Miſery of Mankind, and ſome part of them he deſigned to Save, according to that of the Apoſtle, thoſe whom he did foreknow, he alſo did predeſtinate, &c. Now can any thing be more reaſonable than theſe two Principles are?
For if a wiſe Man can be ſaid to foreſee the Time to come by the Rules of his Prudence and Conduct, would it not be below the Majeſty of God, to ſuppoſe him ignorant of Futurity, who was the Author of Time? Is it poſſible he would not as yet be concerned in the Salvation of Mankind? And can it be ſuppoſed that Man ſhould be ſaved as it were by an unforeſeen Chance, againſt his Will? What would become of his Mercy, if what he did, proceeded not from the Deſign he had to ſave us? Could he have ſent his Son into the World, and yet deny Salvation to thoſe who were to be born after the coming of our Saviour Jeſus Chriſt?
There occurs in all this but one Difficulty, which is the ſame that St. Paul urged to himſelf, when he ſaid, Thou wilt ſay then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath reſiſted his Will? Are we guilty then, will the Gentiles ſay, becauſe we were not ſooner partakers of his Light? Or how can I be ſaved, the Reprobate will cry out, ſince God did not predeſtinate me to Salvation? To this we reply, We muſt not call in Philoſophy to our aſſiſtance to avoid this Difficulty, which is common to all Syſtems, and in ſome becomes greater. St. Paul went no further than this; let us in imitation of him ſtop there alſo: Let the Bounds of Revelation, be thoſe alſo of our vain Curioſity. The greater skill Philoſophy affords us to ſolve this Objection, the further it removes us from the Truth, which ſeemed wholly impenetrable to a Writer far more learned than us, and who was forced to cry out when he reflected upon it, O the Depth, &c.
'Tis eaſy to ſhew that this is a common Difficulty. We cannot own the Existence of God, without aſcribing to him a Fore-knowledge of the Time to come; and it is certainly true, that to explicate the Divine Preſcience, will produce in us the ſame intricate Doubts, as Predeſtination; ſo that both of them being infallibly true, 'tis utterly impoſſible to go againſt either of them.
'Tis further evident, that this Difficulty is no leſs conſiderable in natural things, than it is in thoſe that concern Religion. For if God can foreſee the Time to come, he muſt of neceſſity have foreſeen and ſet Bounds to our Lives; which if true, we may eat, or not eat, we may preſerve, or not preſerve our Selves, it being all one; ſince we cannot exceed, or come ſhort of thoſe Limits which the Almighty has preſcribed us.
Whence I conclude, That the Doctrin of Predeſtination contains two ſorts of Difficulties; the firſt, which ſpring from the too refined Notions of Philoſophy, which ought not to perplex our Minds; for we are not obliged to anſwer them: The ſecond, which are natural, and common to all the Affairs of Life, ſo ſoon as you have laid down this Principle, That there is a God who made us, and that he can foreſee that which will certainly come to paſs. For if we are taught both by Experience and Reaſon that God hath a knowledge of Futurity, and that he hath foreſeen and foretold it upon many Occaſions, as it appears by the fulfilling of Prophecies, 'tis evident from thence, that both Experience and Reaſon perſwade us to receive the moſt difficult things, or rather the only Difficulty that is implied in the Doctrin of Predeſtination.
The ſame might eaſily be proved in Original Sin, and the Efficacy of Grace, if we diſtinguiſh between the manner and the thing it ſelf: It is true, we are Originally defiled with Sin, having been ſhapen in iniquity, and conceived in Sin, and being by nature Children of Wrath. The Holy Scripture informs us of the thing it ſelf, becauſe abſolutely neceſſary to our Humility and Sanctification. 'Twas unneceſſary to know the manner of it, ſince it is to no purpoſe for a Man to know how he fell into a Pit; his buſineſs then being to find the means how to get out of it. And therefore the Holy Scripture is ſilent as to the manner in which Original Sin was tranſmitted to us, that is, as to the Phyſical manner of its infecting the whole Race of Mankind. All the Queſtions which Divines generally Start, are meerly Philoſophical, containing ſuch Difficulties as we are not obliged to anſwer. If we diſtinctly underſtood the union of our Soul and Body, we might very clearly explain that incomprehenſible Tranſmiſſion of Original Sin; but ſince our Learning can never arrive to that Height, we have great Reaſon to diſtruſt our Philoſophy; but be it as it well, the Difficulties proceeding from our vain Curioſity ought not to be taken for the Effects of Faith.
Faith and Reaſon are here in a perfect union, by keeping themſelves within their due Bounds. Faith teaches us the thing it ſelf, and Reaſon aſſents to it. Reaſon comprehends not the manner of it, and Faith ſuppoſes it incomprehenſible.
If Reaſon could deny that Men were from their Cradles inclinable to Evil, it would be contrary to Faith, which teaches us that Principle. And if Faith ſhould flatter us with the hopes of freeing that Object from all the Difficulties occuring to thoſe who endeavour to ſearch into the bottom and manner of it, it would be alſo contrary to Reaſon, which knows Faith wholly incapable of ſuch an attempt. But ſince it is not ſo, nothing hinders but that we acknowledge the agreement between Faith and Reaſon.
The ſame proportion there is between Reaſon and Faith, is alſo betwixt Reaſon and Senſe: And as Faith is above Reaſon, ſo is Reaſon above Senſe. 'Tis an undeniable Truth, that Reaſon and Senſe never oppoſe one another, altho one of theſe Faculties cannot comprehend the manner of thoſe things which the other does. Thus for inſtance, Senſe teſtifies that there is an ebbing and flowing of the Sea; and Reaſon which is truly convinced by this Teſtimony, together with the unanimous Conſent of Men, agrees to the Truth of it, tho wholly ignorant of its Phyſical Cauſe: If Senſe could certify that this Phenomenon could be perfectly known, it would be contrary to Reaſon, which ſcarce underſtands it at all; and if Reaſon abſolutely denied there were any ſuch Phenomenon, it would be alſo contrary to Senſe, ſince all unanimouſly teſtify there is ſuch a thing. But Senſe certifies the Exiſtence of that Phenomenon, and Reaſon is truly perſwaded that it is ſo. Reaſon thinks it a very hard matter to underſtand, and Senſe affirms not the contrary; Reaſon therefore and Senſe perfectly well agree together, and ſuch is likewiſe the joint Agreement of Faith and Reaſon in the greateſt Myſteries of Religion.
Thoſe are Difficulties indeed worthy to be admired, which Philoſophy ſo confidently ſtarts up in matters of Divinity. There are many things in Nature, whoſe Exiſtence we readily own, but nothing, tho inconſiderable in it ſelf, the manner of which we can comprehend; and yet it never came into any Man's Mind, that had but common Senſe, to call them in queſtion. If then we ſhew our ſelves ſo very reaſonable in Natural things, why ſhould we prove ſo ſenſeleſs in matters of Religion? In common things our Underſtanding acts naturally, but in Religion 'tis deluded by the Paſſions which continually ſeek how to ſuggeſt to it new occaſions of Doubting.
We may paſs the ſame Judgment upon matters of Grace. Do but diſtinguiſh Philoſophy from Divinity, and you will avoid thereby an infinite number of Difficulties; it being certain that for the moſt part they proceed, either from the eager deſire we have to underſtand what is altogether incomprehenſible, or from the Speculations we have already made upon that we could not comprehend. Now to know the Injuſtice of Men in this, we need but obſerve that moſt of them being fully perſwaded, that God preſerves us, nouriſhes, and ſupports us by his perpetual Concurrence, without which the Meat we eat, and the Care we have of our Preſervation would ſtand us in no ſtead, and by which we immediately Subſiſt; yet we never heard that any one did ſeriouſly conclude from thence, that we ought wholly to lay aſide the Care of our own Preſervation, and ſolely rely on the Concurrence of God. We never ſaw any one ſo ſenſleſs as to perplex himſelf with theſe ſorts of needleſs Queſtions; If it can be ſaid, that I nouriſh my ſelf by taking thoſe Aliments as are abſolutely requiſite for my Preſervation, how can it be reaſonably affirmed that God nouriſhes, or preſerves me? Or if it be God as nouriſhes me, how do I lie under an Obligation of doing it my ſelf? I ſay, we never heard any of thoſe Difficulties objected againſt Natural things; whereas it appears they are continually ſtarted in matters of Religion. However, there are as good Grounds for them in the one as the other; becauſe they conſiſt in the Dependence we have upon the Deity, either in our being Creatures already, or being born again, or becoming new Creatures.
In Nature, we all know we ſubſiſt only by the Concurrence of God, without inquiring into the manner of it. But in Religion we are not content to know that we are Regenerated by Grace; we further deſire to ſearch into the manner of that Operation, and our principal care is how to find it out; ſo that thoſe very Difficulties which could not perplex Men in matters of Eating and Drinking, ſeem terrible and frightful to them, when 'tis requiſite they ſhould lead a good Life. If you would know the reaſon of it, you muſt conſult the Heart of Man. 'Twill be ſufficient for us if we Act with as much reaſon in Religion as we do in civil Life.
If we conſult the pureſt Lights of Reaſon, it will inform us that 'tis as neceſſary the New Creature ſhould have its Dependence upon God, as that the Creature ſhould depend upon him; becauſe God himſelf is as well the Author of the one as of the other; and as our Bodies have neither Life, Motion nor Being but from him, ſo our Souls have no Faculties, Knowledge, or Affections, but what they derive from thence. Every Being comes from him, and nothing but what is defective can have any other Principle.
The thing it ſelf then is very certain, I mean that there is ſuch a Grace to which we muſt neceſſarily refer all the good that is within us, and that belongs to Divinity. But the manner of its operation, that is, the degree of virtue it diſplays over us, the manner in which it determines our Free-will, its minuteſt Conjunctures, &c. may be hidden Myſteries belonging to the conſideration of Philoſophy, but not in the leaſt prejudicial to our Faith, which conſiſts in an humble Submiſſion, as well as in Knowledg, and can as readily profeſs its utter Ignorance of a hidden Myſtery, as it gladly perceives it when revealed.
I queſtion, whether Divines have obſerved, that when the Apoſtles are pleaſed to point out to us what is moſt eminent in Myſteries, they neither examine the Order of the Decrees of God, nor the inconceivable Tranſmiſſion of Original Sin, whereby the Wickedneſs of the Firſt Man was conveyed down to us; nor why Grace ſeems incompatible with Free-will: Whence proceeds this, if not from their Ignorance of Philoſophy and want of vain Curioſity, which by their own Example they deſigned to teach us to avoid?
What is then, according to them, the great Myſtery of Godlineſs? This is it, God was manifeſt in the Fleſh, juſtified in the Spirit, ſeen of Angels, believed on in the World, preached unto the Gentiles, received up into Glory, Tim. 3. 16.
The Incarnation which is expreſſed in theſe Words, God was manifest in the Fleſh, is a great and ſublime Myſtery; but if we lay aſide our Prejudices, we ſhall find it conformable to our Reaſon.
1. For it muſt be firſt of all granted, that in this Covenant, the Almighty debaſes not himſelf in favour of thoſe with whom he makes it, as we ſee in diſhonourable Treaties, where a King is upon equal terms with his Subjects. This is a Covenant wherein God unites himſelf to the Creature, without diminiſhing his Greatneſs and Glory, and where the Creature unites it ſelf to God without loſing its due ſenſe of Humility. The Sun unites himſelf with the Cloud where it imprints its Brightneſs, without an Eclipſe; and why ſhould not God unite himſelf with an innocent Nature, without leſſening his real Worth and Dignity?
2. We have an excellent Repreſentation of this Truth, in the Union of our Soul and Body, where two Subſtances diſtinct in the higheſt degree are united together, without having any natural proportion betwixt them. What has the Soul to do with the Body? And how can there be any Affinity betwixt things of ſo different a Nature? It may perhaps be anſwered, that there is a greater Diſparity betwixt the Humane and Divine Nature, than the Soul and the Body. I agree, that the Diſparity is infinitely greater; but the Diverſity is ſtill the ſame; and there is a great deal of difference betwixt an Union which carries a mutual dependence along with it, ſuch as that of our Soul and Body, and an Union, which contains the dependence only on the one part, ſuch as that which is betwixt the Divine and Humane Nature. And what is moſt ſurpriſing, in the former of thoſe two Unions, is to ſee that the Soul, which is ſo noble a Being, ſhould be ſo cloſely faſtened and united to Matter, and even depend upon it in all its Operations. Now 'tis not ſo with the Incarnation of Chriſt: And it can never be ſaid, that the Divine Nature depends on the Humane; but contrariwiſe, 'tis the Humane Nature which depends on the Divine. In this Union God remains the ſame as before, All-perfect, All-mighty, All-full, Eternal and Immutable; but Man is changed, and ſanctified, and exalted by it. What Inconveniency then can there reſult from it? As it is ſurpriſing to ſee a moſt noble Being ſubject to a leſs perfect Being; ſo it is natural for a leſs perfect Being to be ſubject to one more Noble. Now the latter of theſe the Myſtery of the Incarnation evidently demonſtrates; and the Union of the Soul with the Body diſcovers the former. It follows hence therefore, that the Union of the Soul with the Body is in ſome ſenſe very extraordinary, and far more ſurpriſing than the Myſtery of the Incarnation.
3. If ſtill you require another Repreſentation of this Object, that might further give you a clearer Notion of the ſame, Conceive a falſe Sun, compoſed of two different things, ſo cloſely united together, that they ſeem as it were confounded together, viz. A Cloud, and the Light of the Sun. The Cloud is not the Sun, nor is the Sun the Cloud; And thus the Humane Nature of Chriſt is not the Divine Nature the ſame with the Humane. This falſe Sun, is a Sun, and yet a Cloud; ſo likewiſe Chriſt is God, and Chriſt is Man. This falſe Sun is formed of the Subſtance of the Earth, becauſe it is compoſed of a Cloud, which is nothing elſe but the Vapours of it; and of the Sun himſelf, being formed out of thoſe Beams in which the Body of that Planet conſiſts; ſo in likemanner Chriſt is taken from the Earth and is a part of the common Lump of Mankind, becauſe he is Man, which does not hinder him from being the Subſtance of the Father, ſince he is the Brightneſs of his Glory. This is a very juſt Repreſentation of that great Myſtery, but not perfect. But we hope every juſt and equitable Reader will eaſily forgive the Defects of this Compariſon in a Subject that is ſo far exalted above our weak Imagination.
4. Moreover of all thoſe who pretended to treat of the Nature of the Deity, none but the Epicureans, who thought it was idle and lazy, divided it entirely from its Creatures; and all other Men beſides, looked upon it as united to its Works. The Heathens, for inſtance, imagined it was affixed to their Temples and Statues, to which they ſuppoſed it conſtantly united. But the Jews more properly looked upon God as being united in a more partilar manner to a Buſh, or a Cloud, or the Ark. And ſeveral of the Incredulous now adays repreſent the Deity to themſelves as an Ʋniverſal Soul affixed to univerſal Matter, juſt as our Soul is united to our Body. If then it be ſo common to Men to conceive God as being united to his Works, why ſhould it ſeem ſo ſtrange to them to repreſent him as cloſely united to the Humane Nature of Chriſt, and that too in a more particular manner than to any of his other Creatures? For if there be any Creature which the Deity may be united to, it muſt neceſſarily be ſuch an holy and innocent Creature as that is. And if it be poſſible for God to unite himſelf to any living Body, it is much more likely he ſhould impart himſelf to the Soul of Jeſus Christ. If an Ark was capable to be filled with the Preſence of God, there is not the leaſt Difficulty in conceiving that Humane Nature being pure and holy, and far perfecter than all the Arks in the World, ſhould have been thus honoured in a more particular manner. And if Men, in ſhort, ſtick not to make the Ʋniverſal Soul as it were depending upon Matter by its Union to it, why ſhould we refuſe to admit of an Union which leaves to God his intire Independence and Liberty, and aims at nothing elſe but the bringing the Body and Soul of Christ in a greater ſubjection to Him?
We no ſooner embrace the Myſtery of the Incarnation, but every thing that ſeems offenſive in the Doctrin of Chriſtian Religion, will preſently vaniſh. We ſhall then eaſily comprehend that 'twas poſſible for Chriſt to die, ſince he was Man; and that his Death is infinitely valuable, ſince he was God. And ſo great is the Dignity which proceeds from the Union of thoſe two Natures, that it makes the Death of Chriſt equivalent to the Puniſhments our Sins had ſo juſtly deſerved.
We ſhall not then think it difficult to be fully convinced of the Truth of the Reſurrection of our Lord; for it would be unreaſonable to ſuppoſe, that a Nature as had been honoured with ſo particular an Union to the Deity, ſhould yet have been for ever diſſolv'd, and remain'd to all Eternity under the Power of Death: But we ſhall think it very reaſonable to imagin that it could not but have riſen from the Grave, into which it had been pleaſed to deſcend. If then Chriſt be truly riſen from the Dead, can our Incredulous Reaſon ſtill refuſe to believe that we ſhall alſo riſe again?
But how can that Reaſon contradict a Truth which the Diſciples ſaw? They beheld the Glory of Chriſt, both in the Miracles which he performed, and in his Holineſs of life: They ſaw God manifeſted in the Fleſh, and were Witneſſes of the Reſurrection of our Lord: They perceived Angels coming down towards him: The Goſpel was preached to the Gentiles by their Miniſtry: The World believed on their Preaching; and Laſtly, they ſaw Chriſt aſcending into Heaven, all which were very ſenſible and evident matters of Fact.
The Myſtery then of the Incarnation, tho the hardeſt to comprehend of all thoſe of Chriſtian Religion, implies however nothing contrary to Reaſon. But we muſt except the moſt Holy and everbleſſed Trinity, another Myſtery, which being infinitely exalted above the reach of our ſhallow Capacity, is not eaſily reconcilable to it. Nevertheleſs 'tis moſt certain, that the Sublimity of its Nature renders it not any ways repugnant to Reaſon. 1ſt. Becauſe the word Perſon is not to be taken in the ſame ſenſe with that of Eſſence. I grant that three Perſons and one Perſon, one Eſſence and three Eſſences implie a Contradiction; but the Notion of one Eſſence and three Perſons is not liable to any, after you know the Signification of thoſe two Terms▪ 2ly. Becauſe the Deity is ſo great and ſo ſublime a Subject, that we ought not to wonder if we can't reach to the Greatneſs of it by our weak Imagination. 3dly. Becauſe for ought we know, the moſt conſiderable Difficulties of this Myſtery proceed from a Defect of Revelation; or the ſilence which holy Writ obſerves on that account. Perhaps we ſhould not think it at all hard to conceive, if the Holy Ghoſt had been pleaſed to reveal its Nature a little more clearly to us▪ But ſuch is the wonderful Conduct of God, who is reſolved to humble us, and not to ſatisfy our vain Curioſity nor indulge the Pride of our Underſtanding, which is too greedy of Knowledge. 4thly. Becauſe we are not wholly deſtitute of Images, there being ſeveral capable to illuſtrate that Object, tho never ſo incomprehenſible in it ſelf. Thus for inſtance, the ſame Soul is an Ʋnderſtanding, as it perceives; a Will, as it has a deſire; and a Memory, as it recalls the things paſt to the Mind; all which three Faculties are comprehended in one and the ſame Underſtanding. In like manner alſo the ſame Light is in the Heavens a Sun; in the Air, Brightneſs; and in the Cloud, a falſe Sun. 5thly. To all this we may yet further add, that the greateſt Difficulties of this Myſtery proceed from thoſe Speculations in which School Divinity has involved it, to the great Scandal of our Faith, and eternal Confuſion of our Reaſon.
For who can endure the Liberty thoſe Metaphyſical Divines have taken, in pretending to form and decide ridiculous, raſh, and impious Queſtions concerning that greateſt Myſtery of our Religion? Can we think any reaſonable Man could read all their impertinent Queſtions without Indignation? As, whether ſeveral Divine Perſons could take but one and the ſame Perſon? Whether the Word could have taken upon him in an Hypoſtatical Union the Form of an Angel, of a Beaſt, of a Woman, of an inſenſible Being, of an Accident, of an Act of Sin, of a Devil; ſo that if theſe Propoſitions were true, God is a Sin, a, &c. Whether the Word has taken the Soul in an Hypoſtatical Union rather than the Body, or the Body rather than the Soul? Whether, if Man had not Sinned, the Word would not have taken our Fleſh upon him? Whether Humane Nature was firſt united to the Eſſence, or the Perſon? Whether the Humane Nature was united to the Divine by ſeveral Unions? Whether a Divine Perſon may take upon it ſelf the Form of a created Perſon? Whether Humanity was united to the Perſon of Christ by way of Accident, or of Subſtance? Whether the Humane and the Divine Nature are a part of Christ, and whether Christ be two ſeveral things? Whether Christ be of a create or uncreate Unity? How it came to paſs he did not take upon him the very individual Nature of Adam? Whether this Propoſition, Chriſt is Man, was true during thoſe three Days he remained in the Grave? Laſtly, Whether Chriſt ſhould have died of old Age, had he not been crucified in his Youth, &c.
Theſe are the only Difficulties that occur in the Chriſtian Religion. As for the reſt 'tis ſo eſſentially, ſo viſibly, and ſo neceſſarily agreeable to Reaſon, that we cannot but wonder that our Incredulous Adverſaries have not yet perceived it. This we have already ſufficiently proved in ſeveral places of this Work, and we cannot well inſiſt further upon it, without repeating again what has been already ſaid.
It is ſufficient therefore to obſerve, that Chriſt is as it were the Reaſon of Nature, Society and Religion. He is the Light enlightening every thing, without which we ſhould fall into infinite Troubles and Perplexities. Chriſt is the Center of all Events, which ſeemingly relate to his coming; he is the Center of Truths, which are the more clearly revealed the nearer we approach him; the Center of all the Moſaical Ceremonies, which are meer Extravagance in themſelves if they relate not to him; the Center of all Virtues, which have no ſufficient Force or Motives able to induce us to practiſe them, but by the conſideration of Life and Immortality revealed to us in Chriſt; the Center and Foundation of the inviolable Rule of Conſcience, which would be nothing elſe but Errour and Illuſion, if the Chriſtian Faith were a Fable. The Center of all thoſe Characters of Wiſdom viſibly diplay'd in all the Works of God, ſince nothing but the Chriſtian Religion can lead Man to the true End of his Creation; none but that can juſtify the Wiſdom of God; the Center of all the Hopes of Man; for what is there that he could hope for, if Chriſtianity were a Lye? The Center of all the Evidence and Certainty that is in our Knowledge; for what is there that we could be certain of, if our Soul were only a Diſpoſition of Atoms, and had no ſuch Spirituality and Immortality as that imputed to it by the Chriſtian Religion? There need have been only a different Configuration of Parts to form first Notions quite contrary to thoſe we now have. Let any one therefore cloſely conſider the Matter, and it will appear to him, that if we deny Chriſt, who teaches to know our own ſelves in revealing to us Life and Immortality, no Salvation can be expected either for Reaſon or Conſcience.