Owen, A Vindication... File 6
(... continued from File 5)
When I first considered these two last sections, I
did not suspect but that he had at least truly
represented my words, which he thought meet to reflect
upon and scoff at; as knowing how easy it was for any one
whose conscience would give him a dispensation for such
an undertaking, to pick out sayings and expressions from
the most innocent discourse, and odiously to propose
them, as cut off from their proper coherence, and under a
concealment of the end and the principal sense designed
in them. Wherefore I did not so much as read over the
discourse excepted against; only, once or twice observing
my words, as quoted by him, not directly to comply with
what I knew to be my sense and intention, I turned unto
the particular places to discover his prevarication. But
having gone through this ungrateful task, I took the
pains to read over the whole digression in my book, which
his exceptions are levelled against; and, upon my review
of it, my admiration of his dealing was not a little
increased. I cannot, therefore, but desire of the most
partial adherers unto this censurer of other men's
labours, judgements, and expressions, but once to read
over that discourse, and if they own themselves to be
Christians, I shall submit the whole of it, with the
consideration of his reflections upon it, unto their
judgements. If they refuse so to do, I let them know I
despise their censures, and do look on the satisfaction
they take in this man's scoffing reflections as the
laughter of fools, or the crackling of thorns under a
pot. For those who will be at so much pains to undeceive
themselves, they will find that that expression of the
"person of Christ" is but once or twice used in all that
long discourse, and that occasionally; which, by the
outcries here made against it, any one would suppose to
have filled up almost all the pages of it. He will find,
also, that I have owned and declared the revelation that
God has made of himself, the properties of his nature,
and his will, in his works of creation and providence, in
its full extent and efficacy; and that by the knowledge
of God in Christ, which I so much insist upon, I openly,
plainly, and declaredly, intend nothing but the
declaration that God has made of himself in Jesus Christ
by the gospel: whereof the knowledge of his person, the
great mystery of godliness, God manifested in the flesh,
with what he did and suffered as the mediator between God
and man, is the chiefest instance; in which knowledge
consisteth all our wisdom of living unto God. Hereon I
have no more to add, but that he by whom these things are
denied or derided, does openly renounce his Christianity.
And that I do not lay this unto the charge of this
doughty writer, is because I am satisfied that he has not
done it out of any such design, but partly out of
ignorance of the things which he undertakes to write
about, and partly to satisfy the malevolence of himself
and some others against my person: which sort of depraved
affections, where men give up themselves unto their
prevalence, will blind the eyes and pervert the
judgements of persons as wise as he.
In the first section of his fourth chapter I am not
particularly concerned; and whilst he only vents his own
conceits, be they never so idle or atheological, I shall
never trouble myself, either with their examination or
confutation. So many as he can persuade to be of his
mind, - that we have no union with Christ but by virtue
of union with the church (the contrary whereof is
absolutely true); that Christ is so a head of rule and
government unto the church, as that he is not a head of
influence and supplies of spiritual life (contrary to the
faith of the catholic church in all ages); that these
assertions of his have any countenance from antiquity, or
the least from the passages quoted out of Chrysostom by
himself; that his glosses upon many texts of Scripture
(which have an admirable coincidence with those of two
other persons whom I shall name when occasion requires
it) are sufficient to affix upon them the sense which he
pleads for, will many other things of an equal falsehood
and impertinency wherewith this section is stuffed, -
shall, without any farther trouble from me, be left to
follow their own inclinations. But yet, not withstanding
all the great pains he has taken to instruct us in the
nature of the union between Christ and believers, I shall
take leave to prefer that given by Mr Hooker before it,
not only as more true and agreeable unto the Scripture,
but also as better expressing the doctrine of the church
of England in this matter. And if these things please the
present rulers of the church, - wherein upon the matter
Christ is shuffled off, and the whole of our spiritual
union is resolved into the doctrine of the gospel, and
the rule of the church by bishops and pastors, let it
imply what contradiction it will, as it does the highest,
seeing it is by the doctrine of the gospel that we are
taught our union will Christ, and his rule of the church
by his laws and Spirit, - I have only the advantage to
know somewhat more than I did formerly, though not much
to my satisfaction.
But he that shall consider what reflections are cast
in this discourse on the necessity of satisfaction to be
made unto divine justice, and from whom they are
borrowed; the miserable, weak attempt that is made
therein to reduce all Christ's mediatory acting unto his
kingly office, and, in particular, his intercession; the
faint mention that is made of the satisfaction of Christ,
clogged with the addition of ignorance of the philosophy
of it, as it is called, well enough complying with them
who grant that the Lord Christ did what God was satisfied
withal, with sundry other things of the like nature; will
not be to seek whence these things come, nor whither they
are going, nor to whom our author is beholden for most of
his rare notions; which it is an easy thing at any time
to acquaint him withal.
The second section of this chapter is filled
principally with exceptions against my discourse about
the personal excellencies of Christ as mediator; if I may
not rather say, with the reflections on the glory of
Christ himself. [As] for my own discourse upon it, I
acknowledge it to be weak, and not only inconceivably
beneath the dignity and merit of the subject, but also
far short of what is taught and delivered by many ancient
writers of the church unto that purpose; and [as] for his
exceptions, they are such a composition of ignorance and
spite as is hardly to be paralleled. His entrance upon
his work is (p. 200) as followeth: - "Secondly, Let us
inquire what they mean by the person of Christ, to which
believers must be united. And here they have outdone all
the metaphysical subtilties of Suarez, and have found out
a person for Christ distinct from his Godhead and
manhood; for there can he no other sense made of what Dr
Owen tells us, - that by the 'graces of his person' he
does not mean the 'glorious excellencies of his Deity
considered in itself, abstracting from the office which
for us, as God and man, he undertook; nor the outward
appearance of his human nature, when he conversed here on
earth, nor yet as now exalted in glory: but the graces of
the person of Christ, as he is vested with the office of
mediation, - his spiritual eminency, comeliness, beauty,
as appointed and anointed by the Father unto that great
work of bringing home all his elect into his bosom.' Now,
unless the person of Christ as mediator be distinct from
his person as God-man, all this is idle talk; for what
personal graces are there in Christ as mediator which do
not belong to him either as God or man? There are some
things, indeed, which our Saviour did and suffered, which
he was not obliged to, either as God or man, but as
mediator; but surely he will not call the peculiar duties
and actions of an office personal graces."
I have now learned not to trust unto the honesty and
ingenuity of our author, as to his quotations out of my
book; which I find that he has here mangled and altered,
as in other places, and shall therefore transcribe the
whole passage in my own words, p. 51: "It is Christ as
mediator of whom we speak; and therefore, by the 'grace
of his person,' I understand not, first, The glorious
excellencies of his Deity considered in itself,
abstracting from the office which for us, as God and man,
he undertook; nor, secondly, The outward appearance of
his human nature, neither when he conversed here on
earth, bearing our infirmities (whereof, by reason of the
charge that was laid upon him, the prophet gives quite
another character, Isa. 52: 14), concerning which some of
the ancients are very poetical in their expressions; nor
yet as now exalted in glory; - a vain imagination whereof
makes many bear a false, a corrupted respect unto Christ,
even upon carnal apprehensions of the mighty exaltation
of the human nature; which is but to 'know Christ after
the flesh,' - a mischief much improved by the abomination
of foolish imagery. But this is that which I intend, -
the graces of the person of Christ as he is vested with
the office of mediation, his spiritual eminency,
comeliness, and beauty, etc. Now, in this respect the
Scripture describes him as exceeding excellent, comely,
and desirable, - far above comparison with the chiefest,
choicest created good, or any endearment imaginable;"
which I prove at large from Ps. 45: 2; Isa. 4: 2; Cant.
5: 9, adding an explanation of the whole.
In the digression, some passages whereof he carps at
in this section, my design was to declare, as was said,
somewhat of the glory of the person of Christ. To this
end I considered both the glory of his divine and the
many excellencies of his human nature; but that which I
principally insisted on was the excellency of his person
as God and man in one, whereby he was meet and able to be
the mediator between God and man, and to effect all the
great and blessed ends of his mediation. That our Lord
Jesus Christ was God, and that there were, on that
account, in his person the essential excellencies and
properties of the divine nature, I suppose he will not
deny; nor will he do so that he was truly man, and that
his human nature was endowed with many glorious graces
and excellencies which are peculiar thereunto. That there
is a distinct consideration of his person as both these
natures are united therein, is that which he seems to
have a mind to except against. And is it meet that any
one who has aught else to do should spend any moments of
that time which he knows how better to improve, in the
pursuit of a man's impertinencies, who is so bewildered
in his own ignorance and confidence, that he knows
neither where he is nor what he says? Did not the Son of
God, by assuming our human nature, continuing what he
was, become what he was not? Was not the person of
Christ, by the communication of the properties of each
nature in it and to it, a principle of such operations as
he could not have wrought either as God or mere,
separately considered? How else did God "redeem his
church with his own blood?" or how is that true which he
says, John 3: 13, "And no man has ascended up to heaven,
but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man,
which is in heaven?" Was not the union of the two natures
in the same person (which was a property neither of the
divine nor human nature, but a distinct ineffable effect
of divine condescension, wisdom, and grace, which the
ancients unanimously call the "grace of union," whose
subject is the person of Christ) that whereby he was fit,
meet, and able, for all the works of his mediation? Does
not the Scripture, moreover, propose unto our faith and
consolation the glory, power, and grace of the person of
Christ as he is "God over all, blessed for ever;" and his
love, sympathy, care and compassion as man; yet all
acting themselves in the one and self same person of the
Son of God? Let him read the first chapter of the Epistle
to the Hebrews, and see what account he can give thereof.
And are not these such principles of Christian religion
as no man ought to be ignorant of, or can deny, without
the guilt of the heresies condemned in the first general
councils? And they are no other principles which my whole
discourse excepted against does proceed upon. But saith
our author, "Unless the person of Christ as mediator be
distinct from his person as God-man, all this is idle
talk." Very good! and why so? Why, "What personal graces
are there in Christ as mediator, which do not belong unto
him either as God or man?" But is he not ashamed of this
ignorance? Is it not a personal grace and excellency that
he is God and man in one person? which belongs not to him
either as God or man. And are there not personal
operations innumerable depending hereon, which could not
have been wrought by him either as God or man; as raising
himself from the dead by his own power, and redeeming the
church with his blood? Are not most of the descriptions
that are given us of Christ in the Scripture, most of the
operations which are assigned unto him, such as neither
belong unto nor proceed from the divine or human nature,
separately considered, but from the person of Christ, as
both these natures are united in it? That which seems to
have led him into the maze wherein he is bewildered in
his ensuing discourse, is, that considering there are but
two natures in Christ, the divine and the human, - and
nature is the principle of all operations, - he supposed
that nothing could be said of Christ, nothing ascribed to
his person, but what was directly, formally predicated of
one of his natures, distinctly considered. But he might
have easily inquired of himself, - that seeing all the
properties and acts of the divine nature are absolutely
divine, and all those of the human nature absolutely
human, whence it came to pass that all the operations and
works of Christ, as mediator, are theandrical? Although
there be nothing in the person of Christ but his divine
and human nature, yet the person of Christ is neither his
divine nature nor his human; for the human nature is, and
ever was, of itself, "anupostatos"; and the divine, to
the complete constitution of the person of the Mediator,
in and unto its own hypostasis assumed the human: so
that, although every energy or operation be "drastike tes
fuseos kinesis", and so the distinct natures are distinct
principles of Christ's operations, yet his person is the
principal or only agent; which being God-man, all the
actions thereof, by virtue of the communication of the
properties of both natures therein, are theandrical. And
the excellency of this person of Christ, wherein he was
every way fitted for the work of mediation, I call
sometimes his personal grace, and will not go to him to
learn to speak and express myself in these things. And it
is most false which he affirms, p. 203, "That I
distinguish the graces of Christ's person as mediator
from the graces of his person as God and man." Neither
could any man have run into such an imagination who had
competently understood the things which he speaks about;
and the bare proposal of these things is enough to defeat
the design of all his ensuing cavils and exceptions.
And as to what he closets withal, that "Surely I
will not call the peculiar duties and actions of an
office personal graces;" I suppose that he knoweth not
well what he intends thereby. Whatever he has fancied
about Christ being the name of an office, Jesus Christ,
of whom we speak, is a person, and not an office; and
there are no such things in rerum natura as the actions
of an office. And if by them he intends the actions of a
person in the discharge of an office, whatever he calls
them, I will call the habits in Christ, from whence all
his actions in the performance of his office do proceed,
"personal graces," and that whether he will or no. So he
is a "merciful, faithful, and compassionate high priest,"
Heb. 2: 17, 4: 15, 5: 2. And all his actions, in the
discharge of his office of priesthood, being principled
and regulated by those qualifications, I do call them his
personal graces, and do hope that, for the future, I may
obtain his leave so to do. The like may be said of his
other offices.
The discourse which he thus raves against is
didactical, and accommodated unto a popular way of
instruction; and it has been hitherto the common
ingenuity of all learned men to give an allowance unto
such discourses, so as not to exact from them an accuracy
and propriety in expressions, such as is required in
those that are scholastical or polemical. It is that
which, by common consent, is allowed to the tractates of
the ancients of that nature, - especially where nothing
is taught but what, for the substance of it, is consonant
unto the truth. But this man attempts not only a severity
in nibbling at all expressions which he fancieth liable
unto his censures, but, with a disingenuous artifice,
waiving the tenor and process of the discourse, which I
presume he found not himself able to oppose, he takes
out, sometimes here, sometimes there, up and down,
backward and forward, at his pleasure, what he will, to
put, if it be possible, an ill sense upon the whole. And,
if he have not hereby given a sufficient discovery of his
good-will towards the doing of somewhat to my
disadvantage, he has failed in his whole endeavour; for
there is no expression which he has fixed on as the
subject of his reflections, which is truly mine, but that
as it is used by me, and with respect unto its end, I
will defend it against him and all his co-partners,
whilst the Scripture may be allowed to be the rule and
measure of our conceptions and expressions about sacred
things. And although at present I am utterly wearied with
the consideration of such sad trifling, I shall accept
from him the kindness of an obligation to so much
patience as is necessary unto the perusal of the ensuing
leaves, wherein I am concerned.
First, p. 202, he would pick something, if he knew
what, out of my quotations of Cant. 5: 9, to express or
illustrate the excellency of Christ; which first he calls
an "excellent proof," by way of scorn. But as it is far
from being the only proof produced in the confirmation of
the same truth, and is applied rather to illustrate what
was spoken, than to prove it, yet, by his favour, I shall
make bold to continue my apprehensions of the occasional
exposition of the words which I have given in that place,
until he is pleased to acquaint me with a better; which,
I suppose, will be long enough. For what he adds, - "But,
however, white and ruddy belong to his divine and human
nature, and that without regard to his mediatory office;
for he had been white in the glory of his Deity, and
ruddy with the red earth of his humanity, whether he had
been considered as mediator or not," - it comes from the
same spring of skill and benevolence with those store.
For what wise talk is it, of Christ's being God and man,
without the consideration of his being mediator! as
though he were ever, or ever should have been, God and
man, but with respect unto his mediation? His scoff at
the red earth of Christ's humanity, represented as my
words, is grounded upon a palpable falsification; for my
words are, "He was also ruddy in the beauty of his
humanity. Man was called Adam, from the red earth whereof
he was made. The word here used points him out as the
second Adam, partaker of flesh and blood, because the
children also partook of the same." And if he be
displeased with these expressions, let him take his own
time to be pleased again; it is that wherein I am not
concerned. But my fault, which so highly deserved his
correction, is, that I apply that to the person of Christ
which belongs unto his natures. But what if I say no such
thing, or had no such design in that place? For although
I do maintain a distinct consideration of the excellency
of Christ's person, as comprising both his natures
united, - though every real thing in his person belongs
forma]ly and radically unto one [or other] of the natures
(those other excellencies being the exurgency of their
union), whereby his person was fitted and suited unto his
mediatory operations, which in neither nature, singly
considered, he could have performed, - and shall continue
to maintain it against whosoever dares directly to oppose
it; yet in this place I intended it not, which this man
knew well enough, - the very next words unto what he
pretends to prove it [by], being, "The beauty and
comeliness of the Lord Jesus Christ, in the union of both
these in one person, shall afterward be declared." And so
we have an equality in judgement and ingenuity throughout
this censure.
Hence he leaps to p. 64 of my book, thence backwards
to p. 53, and then up and down, I know not how nor
whither. He begins with p. 64 - "And in his first
digression concerning the excellency of Christ Jesus, to
invite us to communion with him in a conjugal relation,
he tells us that Christ is exceeding excellent and
desirable in his Deity, and the glory thereof; he is
desirable and worthy our acceptation as considered in his
humanity, in his freedom from sin, fulness of grace, etc.
Now, though this looks very like a contradiction, that by
the graces of his person, he meant neither the
excellencies of his divine nor human nature; yet he has a
salvo which will deliver him both from contradiction and
from nonsense, - that he does not consider these
excellencies of his Deity or humanity as abstracted from
his office of mediator, though he might if he pleased:
for he considers those excellencies which are not
peculiar to the office of mediation, but which would have
belonged unto him as God and man, whether he had been
mediator or not. But what becomes of his distinction of
the graces of Christ's person as mediator from the graces
of his person as God and man, when there are no personal
graces in Christ but what belong to his Deity or his
humanity?"
I am sufficiently satisfied that he neither knows
where he is nor what he does, or has no due comprehension
of the things he treats about. That which he opposeth, if
he intend to oppose any thing by me asserted, is, that
whereas Christ is God, the essential properties of his
divine nature are to be considered as the formal motive
unto, and object of, faith, love, and obedience; and
whereas he is man also, his excellencies, in the glorious
endowment of his human nature, with his alliance unto us
therein, and his furniture of grace for the discharge of
his office, are proposed unto our faith and love in the
Scripture. And of these things we ought to take a
distinct consideration; our faith concerning them being
not only taught in the Scripture, but fully confirmed in
the confessions and determinations of the primitive
church. But the person of Christ, wherein these two
natures are united, is of another distinct consideration;
and such things are spoken thereof as cannot, under any
single enunciation, be ascribed unto either nature,
though nothing be so but what formally belongs unto one
of them, or is the necessary consequent and exurgency of
their union. See Isa. 9: 6; 1 Tim. 3: 16; John 1: 14. It
is of the "glory of the Word of God made flesh" that I
discourse. But this man talks of what would have belonged
to Christ as God-man, whether he had been mediator or
not; as though the Son of God either was, or was ever
designed to be, or can be, considered as God-man, and not
as mediator. And thence he would relieve himself by the
calumny of assigning a distinction unto me between the
graces of Christ's person as mediator, and the graces of
his person as God and man (that is, one person); which is
a mere figment of his own misunderstanding. Upon the
whole, he comes to that accurate thesis of his own, -
that there are no personal graces in Christ but what
belong to his Deity or humanity. Personal graces
belonging unto the humanity, or human nature of Christ, -
that nature being "anupostatos", or such as has no
personal subsistence of its own, - is a notion that those
may thank him for who have a mind to do it. And he may do
well to consider what his thoughts are of the grace of
our Lord Jesus Christ, mentioned Phil. 2: 6-11.
But he will now discover the design of all these
things, and afterward make it good by quotations out of
my book. The first he does, p. 203, and onwards: "But
whatever becomes of the sense of the distinction, there
is a very deep fetch in it, the observing of which will
discover the whole mystery of the person of Christ and
our union to him. For these men consider that Christ
saves us as he is our mediator, and not merely considered
as God or man; and they imagine that we receive grace and
salvation from Christ's person just as we do water out of
a conduit, or a gift and largess from a prince, - that it
flows to us from our union to his person; and therefore
they dress up the person of the Mediator with all those
personal excellencies and graces which may make him a fit
Saviour, that those who are thus united to his person (of
which more in the next section) need not fear missing of
salvation. Hence they ransack all the boundless
perfections of the Deity, and whatever they can find or
fancy speaks any comfort to sinners, this is presently a
personal grace of the Mediator; - they consider all the
glorious effects of his mediation; and whatever great
things are spoken of his gospel, or religion, or
intercession for us, these serve as personal graces: so
that all our hopes may be built, not on the gospel
covenant, but on the person of Christ. So that the
dispute now lies between the person of Christ and his
gospel, - which must be the foundation of our hope, -
which is the way to life and happiness"
First, We do consider and believe that Christ saves
as a mediator; that is, as God and man in one person,
exercising the office of a mediator, and not merely as
God or man. This we believe with all the catholic church
of Christ, and can with boldness say, He that does not
so, let him be anathema maran-atha. Secondly, We do not
imagine, but believe from the Scripture, and with the
whole church of God, that we receive grace and salvation
from the person of Christ in those distinct ways wherein
they are capable of being received; and let him be
anathema who believes otherwise. Only, whether his
putting of grace and salvation into the same way of
reception belong unto his accuracy in expressing his own
sentiments, or his ingenuity in the representation of
other men's words, I leave undetermined. The similitudes
he useth to express our faith in these things, show his
good-will towards scoffing and profaneness. We say, there
is real communication of grace from the person of Christ,
as the head of the church, unto all the members of his
mystical body by his Spirit, whereby they are quickened,
sanctified, and enabled unto all holy obedience: and, if
it be denied by him, he stands anathematised by sundry
councils of the ancient church. We say not, that we
receive it as "water out of a conduit," which is of a
limited, determined capacity; whereas we say, the person
of Christ, by reason of his Deity, is an immense,
eternal, living spring or fountain of all grace. And when
God calls himself a "fountain of living water;" and the
Lord Christ calls his Spirit communicated to believers
"living water" (under which appellation he was frequently
promised in the Old Testament); as also the grace and
mercy of the gospel, the "water of life," inviting us to
receive them, and to drink of them, this author may be
advised to take heed of profane scoffing at these things.
Whether any have said, that we receive grace and
salvation from Christ, as "a gift or largess from a
prince," I know not; if they have, the sole defect
therein is, that the allusion does no way sufficiently
set forth the freedom and bounty of Christ in the
communication of them unto sinners; and wherein else it
offends, let him soberly declare, if he can. This is the
charge upon us in point of faith and judgement; which, in
one word, amounts to no more but this, - that we are
Christians: and so, by the grace of God, we intend to
continue, let this man deride us whilst he pleaseth.
Thirdly, His next charge concerns our practice in the
pursuit of these dreadful principles, which, by their
repetition, he has exposed to scorn: "And therefore they
dress up," etc. What does this poor man intend? what is
the design of all this profaneness? The declaration of
the natures and person of Christ, - of his grace and
work, - the ascribing unto him what is directly and
expressly in terms ascribed unto him in the Scripture, or
relating, as we are able, the description it gives of
him, - is here called, "Dressing up the person of the
Mediator with all those personal graces that may make him
a fit Saviour." The preparation of the person of Christ
to be a fit and meet Saviour for sinners, which he
profanely compares to the dressing up of -, is the
greatest, most glorious, and admirable effect that ever
infinite wisdom, goodness, power, and love wrought and
produced, or will do so unto eternity. And those on whom
he reflects design nothing, do nothing in this matter,
but only endeavour, according to the measure of the gift
of Christ which they have received, to declare and
explain what is revealed and taught in the Scripture
thereof; and those who exceed the bounds of Scripture
revelation herein (if any do so) we do abhor. And as for
those who are united unto Christ, although we say not
that they need not fear missing of salvation, seeing they
are to be brought unto it, not only through the exercise
of all graces, whereof fear is one, but also through such
trials and temptations as will always give them a fear of
heed and diligence, and sometimes such a fear of the
event of things as shall combat their faith, and shake
its firmest resolves; yet we fear not to say, that those
who are really united unto Jesus Christ shall be
assuredly saved; which I have proved elsewhere beyond the
fear of any opposition from this author, or others like
minded. Fourthly, He adds "Hence they ransack," etc. But
Owen, A Vindication...
(continued in File 7...)
----------------------------------------------------
file: /pub/resources/text/ipb-e/epl-09: owvin-06.txt
.