Doct. 3. Antichristian teachers deny the Father, and the Son.

Before, he had said they deny the Christ, but he goes further, and saith, They deny the Father, and the Son, because he that denies the Son denies the Father; the reason is because of that neer relation that is betwixt them, vers. 23. and so contrariwise; the truth of this appears in Saint Johns time, for some made themselves the Christ, and some God the Father, as Simon Magus, and Menan∣der made themselves the Christ, and so took away the Father-hood, and the Son-ship; some againe taught, that the Father came down and took flesh, and was buried, and so often descended into cloven Tongues, so that they deni∣ed the several Persons.

But that great 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Antichrist of Rome, he denies the Father, and the Son.

1 He denies the Son; if you speake of the God-head of Christ.

1 They say we are in an errour to say Christ is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but from God, from the Father, and they will not take the true sence, but say, Christ hath a derived God-head, but so they make him no God-head, though Bellarmin blame them for it, yet some of them vehemently accused him for it; so that we say the Person of Christ is from the Father, but his God head is the same with the Father, There are not three Gods but one God; and if you make it a derived God-head, you make three Gods.

2 They as much wrong his Man-hood; for when they say the Priest hath a power to create, so they take away his Man-hood; whilst they say the Priests makes Integrum Christum, in truth they abbrogate the very Man-hood of Christ, for it is incompatible to Humane Nature to make any living Crea∣ture; and when they say, Hoc est Corpus meum, they make the body.

2 Whilst they say, that the whole body of Christ is in a Thousand Chur∣ches together, now every Communicant receives whole Christ, they say; now if Christ have so many bodies, he is a Monster; nay, they say still his Body sits at Gods right hand, a strange Lye; are they not the great Lyars? so that the Pope said to Cardinal Bembus, Vide quantum fabula ista de Christo nobis prodest; and when he was dying they comforted him with the consideration of Christ, but he said, Quanta in his fabula, and no wonder, for that Christ they describe is no better than a Fable, and so they deny the Son, and in denying him, they deny the Father, for uno sublato, alterum tollitur.

3 When they take away all assurance of favour with God through Christ, and say, it is presumption to be ascertained to the favour of God, as a Father through Christ; I ascend to my Father and your Father; if he be the Father of Christ, he is the Father of all his Members, and therefore if they take away all assurance of Gods love, as a Father, they deny the Father.

Ʋse 1. It may teach us something concerning God, it shews us a reference between the Father and the Son, and first, if there be a reference betwixt them, then,

1 It is manifest they have a living and reasonable nature, for Father and Son is compatible only to rationall beings, not to Beasts and Trees, therefore if we that are Fathers, and Children, have reasonable nature, much more God the Father, and the Son.

Page  1822 If there be this relation, then they are both of the same nature: a Man doth not beget a Beast, but one of the same nature, and therefore when the Fa∣ther begets the Son, it implies the Son is of the same nature with the Father, each of them an eternal being, Joh. 10.32. to 36. when as Christ did deliver himselfe to be the Natural Son of God, they conceived that he made himselfe God, which they thought Blasphemy, so that being the Son of God, he is the same Divine essence.

3 If Christ be the Son of God, then he is equal with the Father; if he be the Son, he is God, and if God, there is not one superiour, and another infe∣riour, but he must be equal with the Father.

Obj. But the Son is oft greater than the Father, and the Father than the Son?

Ans. True, amongst men, but in the God-head no person can be superiour to another, there are no distempers, nor misery, Pater & Filius in Divinis sunt aequales.

2 As there is a Reference▪ so there is also a Distinction, for the Father can∣not be the Son in the same relation; nor contrarily, the Son in the same relati∣on cannot be the Father, which cuts off the errour of Sabellius, which said, the same God the Father took upon him, and was the Son; but this is an hor∣rible errour, for the Father cannot be a Son to himselfe, nor the Son a Father.

Ʋse 2. If such be Antichrists as deny the Father and the Son, then the Anti∣ent Hereticks, Simon Magus, and Menander are convinced.

3 The same Doctrine condemns the Antichristian Teachers, for though they say they teach the same with us, yet it is manifest they deny the Son, for he that makes him a derived God-head, makes him no God, and so when they say his body is in divers places at once, they deny his Man-hood, for one can∣not be many, and many cannot be one.

4 It may teach us to magnifie the mercy of God, that hath delivered us from this lying Doctrin which our fore-fathers lived in, and we it may be should have followed as greedily; therefore let us abhor their Doctrin, and cleave to the truth, and walke in the truth of Christ.