This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this text, in whole or in part. Please contact project staff at eebotcp-info@umich.edu for further information or permissions.
1. Three premisses.
2. Christs, and his Apostles Temperancie.
3. The Paschall Supper a Sacrament Type of the New Old Testament. Christ ate of the three Suppers sparingly.
4. Christ did seldome eate flesh, Christ ate Butter and Honey. Christs knowledge to refuse the Evill and chuse the Good: The words Ad scire ipsum interpreted.
5. The Jewes blasphemie against Christ.
The words Emmanuel Samuel whence derived.
That Christ was God proved from Scriptures Rabbins and The word Emmanuel.
Difference betweene Emmanuel and Samuel.
6. The Iewes blasphemie against Christs Mother.
7. Christ borne according to the Scriptures: Borne of a Woman, not of a Girle. The Nobility of Christs Birth wherein it consisted.
8. Christ a Stone.
9. Gnalam, or Glialam: and Gnelem what it signifies.
10. Emmanuel. Iesus. is a name of Nature. Imposition.
11. Mary a Ʋirgin; Arons Rod; Christ borne of a Ʋirgin by Miracle; A three∣fold Ʋnion in Christ.
12. Christ made but one meale in one day. The aspersion of Gluttony, in him rejected. Christ fasted, even to a miracle: oft times. Christ as God knew all things.
13. Why Christ sought fruit on the Figtree? How Christ seemed ignorant of many things. Admiration is of doubtfull and great things.
In Christ a threefold knowledge: Divine: Infused: Experimentall. How Christ is said to wonder: No mans knowledge ever equall to Christs.
14. Why Christ cursed the Figtree?
15. Christs hunger, rather Volentary then necessary: Christ under-prised Temporall food in respect of Spirituall. Christs abstinence from flesh.
16. Difference betweene Christs Eating before his Death.
A double Digestion after his Resurrection.
MOst holy Lord God my gracious Father the life of my body, the light of my soule, I do most humbly beg at thy Mercie seat, that thou wilt vouch∣safe to guide a poore penitent ignorant wretch in the way of truth: O keepe me from error, and sharpen my desires to love thee, to feare thee: and through all obstacles, to search and finde thy divine verities. Amen.
ANd yet once more, before I particularly handle the Second Supper, with its Concomitants, I must premise some ne∣cessary matters: to prevent the Cavillous objections of Adversaries.
1. The first concerneth the temperancie, and abstemi∣ousnesse of Christ himself and his Apostles, which seemeth to be disproved from the threefold Supper, at which all they were, and all partakers of, in good likelyhood.
2. The second is a Disquisition, what severall Evangelists wrote of the sevē∣rall Suppers; and this chalketh out a way to avoid confusion.
3. The third point of inquirie is, Why there is no expresse mention of a Se∣cond Supper.
TO the first point; Because enemies to Christ and his Religion; and Epicurean Libertines who make their belly their god, and live to eate; and eate to drinke: and indeed whose Bibere is (more then in pronunciation) Vivere: I say, because they are likely to say, concerning our blessed Saviour; Is this that
immaculate Lambe of God, void both of Originall and Actuall sinne? Is this Hee whom yee beleeve to have fasted fortie dayes and fortie nights? and yet cannot one Supper content him? No nor the second Supper, but was at three Suppers in one night? Fabius Gurges grew not to that height of ingurgitation: No Gre∣cian, no Roman, no Effeminate Asiatique in one night ate of three Suppers: Nor the Rich man, though he fared deliciously every day. It is not for nothing that they of his owne time said: Matt. 11.19. Behold a man gluttonous and a wine bibber. And himselfe confessed, He came eating and drinking.
I Answer, The first Supper was onely a Sacrament of the Old Testament, and Type of the New Testament; whereof they ate but sparingly. For sacred morsels were never intended to be fill-bellies.
At the second Supper, he might eate a little. We read not expressely that hee ate much; discourse, and the workes of mercie, humblenesse, good advice, and the cleere manifestation of the Traitor was the meate he then principally ate, for ought that can be discerned, or is revealed in terminis. But collectively and infe∣rentially thus. 1. Cor. 11, 25. He tooke the Cup. Beza indeed hath it, postquam coe∣nati sunt: after they had supped: and the Arabick, postquam sumpsissent coenam su∣am: after they had received their Supper; Christ and his Apostles together: but Tremellius rendreth it from the Syriac, viz. postquam coenasset in the singular: When Hee had supped. Therefore he did eat and sup, and was not onely a beholder. Hee that eateth bread with me hath lift up his heele against me. Iohn 13.18. which words were spoken of Christ and Iudas, and are applyed to them. Therefore in proba∣bilite, then he did eate, and ate with Iudas himselfe: But this was at the second Supper. For one Supper was ended. Iohn 13.2. (and that was the Paschall) be∣fore Saint Iohn began his large discourse in the same Chapter.
The third Supper being the most blessed Sacrament of the New Testament, had onely a little bread, and a little wine (which they did rather taste of, then take in great quantitie) and doth wipe off the aspersion of Gluttony, or Drunken∣nesse, or of any kinde of Intemperancie in meate and drinke. Thus againe, Ne∣ver was any found fault withall, who ate but little of the Paschall Lambe. And lest any should force himselfe to eate too much, the remainders (how great in quantitie soever they were) were commanded to be burnt. Never were a whole companie or family commanded to eate all, and every part of the Paschall Lambe; so that nothing was to be left. A minde spiritually elevated, at holy feasts, little esteemeth muchnesse of eating and drinking.
Sure it is, that what Christ with desire desired to eate, viz. the Passeover; he did eate it; he was not frustrated in his desires; and the prosperous meanes led him on fairely, to the end of his intentions. The Passeover was prepared for Christ. Mat. 26.17. Where wilt Thou that we prepare for Thee to cate the Passeover? Mark 14.12. Where wilt Thou, that we go, and prepare, that Thou maiest eate the Passeover? Thou principally. For Thee, emphatically. Therefore we must say, He did eate part. Besides, He said, I will not any more eate thereof. Luke 22.16. Therefore He did then eate of it, or else the speech were improper. When Hee dipped in the dish. Mat. 26.23. He dipped with intent to take up something, and to eate of it.
That He ate much of the Paschall Lambe, and sower Hearbs, I wholly denie. And cleerely, there are more passages, to prove the Apostles eating at the Passe∣over, then our Saviours: As they sate and did eate Mark 14.18. (Iesus fell to discourse) as they did eate, He said, Ʋerily, &c. Mat. 26.21. In both these places, the words are spoken exclusively, concerning Christ. As if it had beene said, He was none of them, that at that instant did eate. Whilst they did eate, Christ did not. At those speeches He ate not.
In conclusion; Of the Paschall Supper, Hee neither ate much, nor nothing;
His end approaching, and He knowing the wonderfull paines He was to endure, He had little stomack to eate much. Yet duty and Religion both sharpened his desire to eate some, and his actuall-orall-manducation followed.
Concerning the second Supper, it cannot be proved, that He did partake much of it; nor is there any great likelihood for it. For, He was tronbled in Spirit. Iohn 13.21. And such have no great appetite to their victuals. Indeed Hee tooke a sop, and dipped it; and gave it to Iudas. Iohn 13.26. But there is altum silenti∣um, not a word concerning his owne free eating of any thing largely, in this second Supper. Therefore no imputation of intemperancie can fasten hold on him.
So in the third Supper, the Scripture mentioneth not, either that he did, or did not eate. And many thinke Hee gave it, and administred it; but are not of it himselfe; though I opine, He did taste of both kindes. But of this hereafter.
This sufficeth to cleare our blessed Saviour from any shadow of excesse at a∣ny, or at all of these three Suppers in one night. The phrase of three Suppers in one night, sounding in some mens eares very prophanely; but being in truth farre more holy, then onely one ordinary Supper of civill men.
TO the other parts of the Epicureans exception, who would willingly shelter themselves under our Saviours example, that they might bee intemperate lawfully: I answer; that when I have produced what I can, to shew our blessed Saviours most temperate behaviour; I doubt not but any different man will say, that Christ went beyond all that ever were renowned in Heathen story, for their moderation in meats and drinks.
First we read not that Christ ever tasted of any flesh, nor can it be evinced by deduction mediate, or immediate, except onely when He aswell as all others were commanded to eate, when He are the Passeover, or was at the great Feast appointed in the Law, though He were at many Feasts, made for his sake, both by his Disciples and other Iewes, and partaked of them; Yet I doubt not but He was left to chuse his owne dyet. So it is onely probable, not certaine, that He are of flesh at any civill Feasts, Esay•••• 15, it was fore-prophecied of him: Butter and Honey shall be eate; And sure Hee did so. But what is the meaning of the following words? That he may know to refuse the evill and to chuse the good. I an∣swer, The words in the Originall are, Ad scire ipsum; as Montanus on Esay hath it in his Comment; or as it is in the Interlineary, Adsciendum ipsum reprobare in malo, & eligere in bono; And the word [That] is not meere finale nor causale, as if Butter, and Honey, or the eating thereof made one wise, or knowing, rather his knowledge made him eate Butter and Honey; but ostentionale or discretivum; as if it had beene said, other young children chuse not their meate by discretion, but take whatsoever is given them, But if any should offer any bad meate to Christ, He shall refuse it: if they offer good, He shall take it: He shall have that know∣ledge being a child, that others shall not have at a faire age. Butter and Honey shall He eate: noysome things He shall avoid. I have eaten my Hony-combe with my Honey: I have drunke my Wine with my Milke, (saith Christ) Cant. 5.1. But∣ter, Hony, and Hony-combe, Milke, and Wine, were fore-prophecied food, and are the most agreeable things to the nature of Infants.
Or this way; The words Adsciendum or ad scire, in Latine may be interpre∣ted; Butter and Honey shall He eate; that yee may know, He chuseth the Good and refuseth the Evill. The knowledge of Good and Evill, which Adam and Eve had not in their Innocencie, Christ had in his Infancie. By this choyce and refusall it might be discerned: He had a prerogative above all other children; for God was with him: and his name was Emmanuel, vers. 14. He knew all things, ab in∣stanti Conceptionis, saith the Schoole, as soone as ever Hee was conceived in the womb. See Gregory de Ʋalentia Tom, 4. pag. 254. But the Hebrew will not beare
this exposition; nor the Greeke nor English.
It ever digression merited pardon, I hope the next will.
THe accursed Iewes do blasphmously declaym against our most blessed Saviour, against his most holy Mother; against religious Ioseph, calling them by most odious false names, which you may read in Munster, in his Annotations on the first Chapter of S. Matthew, toward the beginning; you shall not in my writings: Especially they laugh at us, for proving Christ to be God, from the word Emma∣nuel. Then (say they) Samuel is a God; for the word Samuel signifieth, Nomen ejus Deus i.e. His name is God. Read the answer in Munster, even from Rabbi Kimhi, I meddle not with that.
Others derive the word Shemuel from Shaal, which signifieth to aske:* 1.1 keeping onely the first radicall from it. Secondly, from Min, or of the prapositi∣on. Thirdly, from the Pronoune Affix, which is rendred, Him: and fourthly, from El, betokening God, I have asked him of God; and how is Samuel to be cal∣led a God, as the Iewes say, from this his name? When hee was called Sa∣muel, because I had asked him of the Lord, as his Mother said, 1. Sam. 1.20. is all that is asked of God, and obtained from God, God himselfe?
But setting aside uncertaine nicities of the Iewes, this I say: Wee have many more proofes both from Scriptures, and the Rabbins themselves, that the Mes∣siah was to be God, besides the firme argument from the word Emmanuel.
Secondly, I say; There was a maine difference betweene our glorious Savi∣our, and his Mother; and betweene Hannah the Mother of Samuel, and him∣selfe. For Hannah was married, and had long, and much company of her hus∣band; and was beloved of him more then the fruitfull Peninnah. 1. Sam. 1.5. And no Rabbin ever held Samuel to be a God, whose Father and Mother were so notably knowne: which much varieth the case betweene the two children. The rather also, because the spirit of God, by the Iewes confession set the name of Emmanuel upon Christ. But Hannah, or Elkanah, on humane consideration en∣tituled the child Samuel.
BUt their more particular belchings against Christ, and his Mother, are in shew more pithy, sharp-pointed, vivid, and specious unto any ignorant man, or ill-aff••cted unto Christ; whilst thus they object, as it is in the first Chapter of Saint Matthew in Hebrew, and the Annotations of Munster on it, saying: Qua∣le novum est, quod puella fit gravida, juxta morem universae terrae per copulam viri? What new thing is this; That a Virgin should bee with child, by copulation with a man, according to the manner of all flesh? And thus againe they rave, in Munsters Annotations on the second chapter of Saint Matthew. Si juxta verba vestra natus est (Christus) sine patre; quare ostendit vim suam in filia tredecum an∣norum, quae apla erat conceptui, & partui? Potius ostendere debuit potentiam suam in s••liatrium, aut quatuor annorum, quae non est apta conceptui: & tunc potuisset mun∣dus cognoscere signum illud novum, est a saeculo inauditum. If according to your own words, Christ were borne without a Father; Why did he shew forth his pow∣er in a daughter of thirteene yeeres of age, which was apt for conception, and child bearing: He ought rather to have shewed his power in a daughter of three or foure yeeres old, which was not apt for conception: And then might the world have knowne that New-Signe, which was not heard of from the begin∣ning of the world? Munster saith, hee answered the Iewes in Hebrew. Abunde magnum signum esse, Nasci de Ʋirgine, juxta Propheitam illam Esaiae, Ecce Virgo im∣pregnata pariet filium. It is a wonder strange enough, to bee borne of a Virgin, according to that Prophecie of the Prophet Esaiah: Behold a Virgin shall conceive and beare a sonne•• Let me enlarge his too concise answer, thus: or rather to de∣clare mine owne answer, to the blind-folded, yea blinde Iewes. Shall Christ bee
borne according to the fancies of man, or according to the will of God? What Christ said to them, I wish they would observe Iohn 5.39. Search the Scriptures: and they are they which testifie of mee. The very manner of his suffering and resur∣rection, was fore-prophesied, Luk: 24.46. Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer: And, All things must be fulfilled, which was written in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets and in the Psalmes concerning mee, vers. 44. especially concerning Christ's Incarnation, and his Birth, All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the Prophet, saying, Behold a Virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a Sonne, and his name shall be called Emmannel, which being interpreted is GOD WITH ƲS, Mat. 1.22. & 23. vers.
I resume mine old Quaere; and turne it into this Thesis, Christ was not to be borne according to the humerous discourses, or partiall reason of man; but accor∣ding to the Scriptures, and the fore-running prophesies, dictated unto holy men by God himselfe, This is a ground worke, on which both Jewes and Christians do build, and is confessed by all. The deniall of this Thesis preferreth mans judge∣ment before the wisedome of God: and floting imaginations of silly ignorants, before the stable power, and perfection of Holy Scripture. Let us now assume: But the Prophets no where foretold, that Christ was to be borne of a young Girle, or child of three yeares or foure, as the Jewish argument would enforce; But the heavenly inspired Scriptures, did fore-divine, that Christ should be borne of a Virgin of ripe years,* 1.2 of a woman fit for so great a worke, rather than an unfit in∣fant. Let us come to the Prophet Ieremy 31.22. Foemina circundabit virum: A woman shall compasse a man. Nekebak (with Koph) is not taken any where pro pu∣ellula: for a young wench of three or foure yeares of age: but for a female of ripe yeares 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & Nekebah, foeminam woman, in adulta: viz. aetate, in a ripe age. Gen. 1.27. If a man would reason against God, according as the Jewes doe, against both him and Christ: One might say; It had beene a great wonder indeed, if Adams wife had beene but three or foure yeares of age, and had brought him forth children. But we may more truly say concerning both Eve, and the blessed mother of our Lord, Gods will was his law: what he decreed, was performed: what was performed, was best of all; what God spake before by his holy Pro∣phets, must be accomplished, however the folly of man, would seeme to project better courses.
Whereas the Jewes object: God hath created a new thing in the earth: A woman shall compasse a man; and most carnally and cursedly say: Is this a New thing for a woman to be with child? It is the ordinariest, and commonest matter in the world.
I answer. These obstinate Jewes consider not, that the novelty consisteth not in this, that a woman was with child: but this was the greatest new thing in the world, that a virgin without the helpe of a man should be with child. Adam came into the world without the helpe either of man or woman; Eve of a man without any ayde from any woman: other men not without the helpe both of man and woman: The Newest thing, the greatest wonder was, Christ was to come, and did come of a pure Virgin without the helpe of Man.
A Second Prophet divinely describeth him, calling him the stone that was cut out without hands, Dan. 2.34. that was cut out of the mountaines without hands. v. 45. a stone he is called otherwhere, a living stone. 1 Pet. 2.4. A chiefe corner stone, elect and pretious, a tryed stone; a sure foundation, Esay 28.16. Christs holy mo∣ther may be called a Mountaine, a fruitfull Mountaine for us; from which this stone was taken without hands, or the ayde of man; not without the oversha∣dowing of the Holy-Ghost. Shee was Virgo à viro, virgo a part••s, semper virgo. Avirgin free from a man; a virgin after shee had brought forth a man, alwaies a virgin▪ maugre the hellish opposition of the Jewes. Virgo concipies, virgo pariet,
Virgo quà virgo. A Virgin shall conceive, a Virgin shall bring forth, a Virgin, a true Virgin.
YEa, but say the Jewes Gnalmah, doth not signifie a virgin.* 1.3
I answer, 1 challenging them to shew a place where it meaneth a fe∣male young childe, or a gristle of three or foure yeares old, as they expound it; and therefore say that Christ should have beene borne of such a childish girle, if God would shew his extraordinary power: Gnelem,* 1.4 is constantly taken for a youth, or stripling, not for a tender bread and butter boy, of three or foure years, unable to put on his owne clothes. 1 Sam. 20.35. Jonathan tooke a little lad with him, yet was he not so little or young, as a trimulus or quadrimulus: but a Lad of fourteene or fifteene yeares, or thereabouts, a pretty page; for Ionathan gave his Artillery to the Lad, and said, Goe carry them to the City, verse 40. which a small child could not doe. So Gnalmah, is commonly taken for a Virgin,* 1.5 or Woman about twelve yeares of age, or more. in annis adolescentiae virgo, a virgin in the yeares of her youth. Exod. 2.4, 5. Moses his sister, who was to watch the mo∣tion of the Arke of bulrushes, is called Gnalmah. But a child of three or foure yeares of age could never so handsomely have insinuated her selfe into the com∣pany of Pharaoh his daughter; nor have wrought her mothers and her owne desires, and her brothers good, so ingeniouslie, so suddenly, capiens consilium e're nata: cooperating with so faire an oportunity. Who would trust so little a child with so great a matter, as for to negotiate for the life of a child, and to prevent the effusion of blood? Shee had beene impar negotio; unfit for such a businesse, if she had beene so young, & infrarem commissam: unworthy for so great a charge.
Againe, Gen. 24.43. Rebekah was able to draw water out of a well, which is no worke for small children, especially to satisfie both man and beasts, especially the vast camels, which when they do drinke, drinke very much, yet she is called Gnalmah; a virgin, faire, very faire: neither had any man knowne her, (saith the Spirit of God) vers. 16. implying shee might have beene knowne before, as a little while after shee was knowne by man, in holy wedlocke. The pitcher also on her shoulder probablizeth, that it was a great pitcher, greater than little payles carried in womens hands: and so unfit to be borne by a girle of foure yeares. See more in Pagnine, who citeth to this purpose Gnalmah, being used for a full growne virgin, Prov. 30.19. Cant. 1.3. and other places.
The Prophet Esaias by that word, & virginem, & adolesculam aetaie, paritu∣ram veluit dicere▪ did meane a virgin: a young one, yet so old; that she might be fit to bring forth a child. If he had called her Bethulah, and onely so, status tantum, non etiam aetatis, nomen fuisset: it had beene a name onely of condition, and not of age: it might have betokened a very young virgin. But let any shew me any one place, where ever Gnalmah was used for a Virgin under five yeares. I confesse a child may be said to be, foemina, a woman; as foemina, a woman, is opposed to mas a man▪ and a child of two yeares of age, may be said to be Virgo a Virgin: as Virgo a Virgin, is opposed to Marita, or Maritata, a married Woman, or Ʋxor, a Wife; or Concubina, a Concubine: but so it is not here. The conclusion then is this. Let Christ be borne, (as was foretold by Ieremy, and Esay he must be borne) of a pure Virgin; nubilis, marriageable, and fit for such a worke, and might not be borne of a child of three or foure yeares.
I Hope I have stopped the mouthes of the barking Jewes. May I now proceed. Yet two or three things I must adde out of Porchetus his victory against the Hebrewes: Part. 2. c. 14. fol. 81. De virginitate Matris Dei: whereas the Jewes object, that Christs holy mother never called him Emmanuel, but Jesus: & tota Christianitas, all Christendome calls him Jesus, and not Emmannel: Porchetus
answereth, aliud est nomen naturae, aliud impositionis: the name of nature is one thing; and the name of imposition another, For Nature giving a forme, gives a name, as the name of Man is man, for he is called a man from the nature of man, which he doth participate. So the Messiah our Lord Jesus Christ is called Emma∣nuel; that is, God is with us: and is called GOD and man, by the Holy Spirit, and his Mother; and is so beleeved of all Christians; because hee par∣taked of two Natures; the Divine, and the Humane. But Jesus was the name of our Saviour, secundum impositionem; by imposition: Emmanuel, and other names, according to the condition of both Natures▪ and so nothing is amisse. Againe, they sometimes called him one name, sometimes another: Andrew calls him Messiah: Iohn 1.41. Peter called him Iesus, Act. 2.22. and singly Christ. Act. 2.30, 31. and Jesus Christ of Nazareth, Act. 3.6. and the same Jesus, is both Lord and Christ, Act. 2.••6. That Jesus is the Christ, the sonne of God, saith Iohn 20.31. Hee was called sometimes God, sometimes Lord: Thomas stiled him, His Lord and his God: Iohn 20.28. Thou shalt call his name Iesus, saith the Angel to the blessed Virgin, Mat. 1.21. and they shall call his name Emmanuel; saith the same Angel. vers. 23. or his name shall be called Emmanuel, as others translate it: how was this Angelicall prediction fulfilled, if they did not sometimes call him Emmanuel, God? Angels do not prophesie false things.
THe second is out of Mahomets Alcoran. Mary said, how shall I have a child, when a man hath not touched mee? nor have I beene lascivious; The Angel from God answered, This is easie for mee, both to make a miracle for men, and mercy from my selfe. And so it came to passe, shee kept her selfe chast; Et insufflavimus in eum de spiritu nostro: and wee breathed into him of our Spi∣rit, saith God: So much Mahomet himselfe confesseth. When the Devill spea∣keth truth, will the Iew continue incredulous?
Ebi Horarai the fellow of Mahomet, heard Mahomet say; None is borne whom Satan toucheth not, when he is borne; and therefore the child cryeth; except Mary and her Sonne. Much more hee addeth to good purpose, as that May (as a Virgin) brought forth a Saviour, &c. But the words of Saint Augustine, cited by Porchetus, pag. 87. are worth the transcribing. The rod of Aron against the universall lawes of Nature, did fitly or conveniently bring forth Almonds, which neither came from seed nor roote: Shall a sticke or rod contrary to na∣ture bring forth fruit; and may not an holy Virgin against nature at the com∣mand of God, bring forth a Sonne? Let the incredulous Iew shew mee, how a dry and withered rod did flourish, beare leaves, and fruit, ripe fruit: and I will shew him how a Virgin may bring forth the Sonne of God. Let them thinke of Sarah their mother, who was old, and well stricken in age: Gen. 18.11. and it ceased to be with her after the manner of women, for she was 90. yeares old ere a Sonne was promised, Gen. 17.17. But is any thing too hard for the Lord? Gen. 18, 14.
The Iewes beleeve (saith Porchetus) that Eve was created of the body of Adam: but they say, this was miraculous, according to the disposition of the Di∣vine will. We say the same concerning the Na••ivitie of Christ by a Virgin. The course of Nature is not to be enquired after in the Divine will. For Moses his rod, against the course of Nature, by the will of God, did with a touch divide the Sea. What Moses saw in a bush burning, and not consuming: what was shewed to Aaron in a dry rod flourishing: what to Gedoen in his wooll, and the dew: Salomon saw plainly in the strong woman: Ieremy morē plainly fore-tels of a woman, and a man compassed, I say as most apparently speakes of a Virgin, and God: till Gabriel presented it really at the Salutation. So farre Porchetus: and so he endeth that chapter. But I will end with Simon de Cassia 1.2. Quibus anthoribus, quibus ministris fuit incarnatio? Who was Author, who were ministers at Christs Incarnation? The Father sent, the Holy Ghost overshadowed, the
Sonne descended: an Angel fore-told: Mary agreed: So in the Virgins wombe, the increated Word, the Eternall Word, the Word with the Father, the Word in the Father, the Word from the Father, and with the Father inef∣fable, incomprehensible, incircumscriptible, was made flesh, flesh of flesh, in the flesh, among flesh, below flesh, besides flesh, against the flesh (hee might well have added) above the flesh, in that instant when Mary said, Be it unto mee according to thy Word. Luk 1.37.
Nature changed her course. There was but one: a Mother, and a Virgin: a God, and a Man▪ Temporall and Eternall me•• in one; Old and New kissed one another.
In the same instant wherein Christs soule was created, there was a three fold Union, (saith the same Simon) The Union of the Deity to the Soule: of the flesh to the Soule: and of the Deity to the flesh. There was a Divine substance, di∣stinct in three persons; a spirituall substance created with three powers or facul∣ties, and a bodily substance of the foure Elements, which made one person: as the three persons have one essence or substance: so these three fore-named sub∣stances made one person of Christ. More I will not say, wonder will I more and more: abhorring ever the Jewes malignant reasonings, whil'st they swallow downe other things above reason precontrary to it.
SEcondly, I reade not that ever our holy Lord made above one meale in one day. Hee did O'meale himselfe perpetually (so farre as is likely) but when he fasted he fasted wholly. His Disciples were gone to buy meate Iohn 4.8. Sure it was he was weary, wearinesse may come by fasting: Fasting breedeth thirst: because the naturall heat by fasting feedeth strongly on the radicall humour.
Nor did Iudian the Apostata, who was a man of a spare diet, accuse our Sa∣viour, as a Gurmandizer, so farre as my memory carrieth it. Vidi monstrum in natura (saith Plato) hominem uno die bis saturum. I have seene a monstrous thing in Nature; namely, that a man should make two meales in one day. None but such as sinne against the Holy Ghost will accuse Christ of such a sinne; for hee did not glut himselfe at any time. As for their foule aspersion who said, Behold a gluttonous man and a wine-bibber, it is no more to be esteemed, than other their words, who said, Ioh. 8.48. Hee was a Samaritan, and had a Devill. Or the Scribes scandall, who sayd, he had Beelzebub, and by the Prince of Devils did cast out Devills, Mark. 3.22. It is good to be evill spoken of by evill men, Ab iis laudari vituperari est (saith Seneca) and it is discommendation by such to be commended. But Wisdome is justified of her children, Matt. 11.19. And with this faire sweete answer, or appeale from malitious false wise men, Christ wipeth off the false imputation of gluttony, and wine-bibbing, that it should not fasten on him.
I must boldly tell you my beleese concerning my most blessed Saviour Jesus Christ Saturivit uunquam: sitivit saepe: esurivit saepe, & usque ad miraculum. When Christ did cast out the deafe, and the dumbe spirit, and the Apostles could not, because that kinde could come forth by nothing but by prayer and fasting, Mark. 9.29. Do not the words evince, that Christ did fast? yea, fast much, when the Apostles did not fast? Belike our Saviour had fasted much before, for in the morning, as he returned into the city, He hungred, Matt. 21.18. and came to a fig-tree, and looked for figges on it, but found none. And though Christs words were onely. Let no fruit grow on thee from henceforth for ever. So that it might have growne many yeares, and bore boughes, and leaves, and afforded shadow, notwithstanding the letter and words of the curse: yet the earth denyed sap, and juyce, and sustenance to the roots: the rootes to the branches, and both heaven and earth conjoyned to hasten it's destruction: so that presently the fig-tree withered away, yea the fig-tree in the morning, was dryed up from the
rootes. Mark 11.20. If Calvin writ that Christ knew not the tree afarre off: or thought it to be another tree: or was ignorant, that fruit was not on it, Calvin much forgot himselfe; and it derogateth too much from our Saviours perfecti∣on. Even the day of judgement, though he knew it not by any naturall know∣ledge, discourse, or understanding, no more then the Angels did: yet he knew it perfectly, as he was taught of God, (which point the Angels knew not by any infused knowledge) for Hee knew the Father, which is a farre greater know∣ledge; And he was the wisedome of God, and all the treasures of divine know∣ledge were hid in him.
Moreover he made all things, and was ever workman ignorant of his owne wo••ke? Quomodo rem aliquam ignor at ipsa sapientia (saith Gregory Nazienzen) Ille sae∣culorum factor—ille rerum quae geruntur finis, ille ea, quae Dei sunt, non minus co∣gnoscens, quam spiritus hominis ea, quae in ipso sunt. How can wisdome it selfe be ig∣norant of any thing? That maker of the world, that end of all things, which are done here in this world; he that knoweth the things of God, as well as the spi∣rit of man knoweth the things that are in a man. Esay 11.2. The spirit of wis∣dome and understanding shall rest upon him, the spirit of counsell, the spirit of know∣ledge; vers. 3. He shall make him of quick understanding, under which is compri∣sed, Omne scibile, every thing that may be knowne; All Theory, Wisdome reacheth to the knowledge of all divine things, understanding pierceth into all Immateri∣als. The spirit of God searcheth out all conclusions. To counsell belongeth the un∣derstanding, rerum omnium Agibilium: of all practicall affaires and things Agible.
Whosoever desires a further examination of Christs knowledge, let them con∣sult with the Schoolemen. Tertia parte in Thomam Quaestionibus. 9.10.11.12. Amongst other things he shall finde that Christ knew Omnia singularia praesentia, praeterita & futura, All and every particular thing, present, past, and to come. And could he be ignorant what tree he saw? But of Christs extraordinary know∣ledge we spake before.
IF any for Calvin do object, why came he thither to thē treē, and sought fruit, if he knew there were no fruit on it? and why did he curse the tree, when the time of Figs was not yet? Mark 11.13.
To the first I answer; He tooke an occasion to worke a miracle: and by that miracle to signifie, that he would roote out the Iewish Synagogue for not bearing fruit. Indeed there are many places of Scripture, the resultancē whereof may seeme to bee this: That Christ was ignorant of many things: For hee asked, Iohn 21.5. Children have you any meate? If hee knew it himselfe, what need he aske them? So Luke 24.41. he enquired: Have yee here any meate? But Disquisition is of matters doubtfull, or unknowne. And yet ere this morta∣lity, was swallowed up of immortality; and he had an incorruptible body, and a beatified soule in a superlative degree (for he was risen from the dead) There∣fore, it seemes this was spoken to confirme the doubtfull.
Likewise in his naturall life hee seemed ignorant of divers things which hee knew well enough; as when he said John 11.34. Where have you laid Lazarus? which words from any other man had argued Nesciencie. So he said, Iohn 5.6. to him that had an infirmitie, 38. verses. Wilt thou be made whole? When as both Christ, and others knew; the man waited for it. Mark 7.18. Are yee so without understanding also? He questioned what he knew, that they were without un∣derstanding in that point. Mat. 22.20. Whose is this Image and Superscription, saith Christ; Yet knew he that before, and thence drew the argument to reprove the Iewes. Matthew. 22.12. How camest thou in hither, not having a wedding garment? Christ marvelled at the Centurions faith. Matthew 8.10. whereas no man useth to marvēll at such things as are evident to his knowledge.
As for Christs words concerning the Centurion, I answer: First they were
spoken (saith Aquin. 3. parte. Quaest. 15.) as if the Centurions faith were won∣derfull to other men; and in regard of other mens faith: Not in respect of Christ himselfe. Let me adde. Sure it is, that Christ infused that faith into the Centu∣rion, and therefore must needs know it: In the Schoole termes take it thus, Christ as God knew all things; Christ as Man, and considered as a Comprehen∣sor, had Cognitionem facialem, and was not ignorant: the same Christ as hee was Viator had knowledge infused, which was great: and acquired knowledge also in matters experimentall; Nor can he bee blamed for having some Nesciencie, since Ignorantia negativa non habet formale peccati: Negative ignorance hath not the formality of sinne.
A second answer is, indeed commonly among men Admirans dubitat, He that wondreth, doubteth: Aristotle saith so in the first of his Metaphysicks. And ad∣miration groweth from precedent Nescience; yet Christs divine knowledge could not wonder, nor his infused knowledge: but the experimentall knowledge in Christ might wonder. Thus did he learne obedience by the things he suffered, Heb. 5.8. and therefore knew them not before.
Thirdly, Plato saith, Admiramur propriè magna, wee properly admire great things. And therefore the Centurions faith being great, Christ is said to won∣der; Not as if any thing were strange to Christ: but because thereby He did stir up those that followed him, to wonder at his faith: tacitly recommending the like great faith unto them.
Fourthly, he is said to wonder, as he is said to be angry; not properly, but per 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: assuming unto himselfe like passions of men, spea∣king of himselfe as other men do, and as a wondring man doth wonder indeed. Such an one did Christ resemble, when it is said He wondred: Though his name shall be called wonderfull: Isaiah 9.6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. It is Admirabilis, not Admirabundus, He is one to be wondred at; not one that did wonder. The ob∣ject of wonder to others, not the subject of wonder in himselfe. Wonderfull, Ef∣ficienter, efficiently; for He onely doth wonderfull things. Psal. 72.18. Not won∣dring ignoranter, ignorantly, or ex antecedente Nescientia: & nupera consecuta cogni∣tione. Out of former antecedent Nesciencie, and new-found knowledge. Againe, though the rest of the fore-named Scriptures seeme to imply Christs Nesciencie, yet indeed they do not: Christ was ignorant of nothing, though he propounded many questions, for he questioned many matters, and seemed a learner, whilst hee intended to teach; and I am bould to say, that, nor Solomon, nor Adam himselfe, nor the best, and skilfulest of men put to them, could co-equall the knowledge of Christ. Lord thou knowest all things. Iohn 21.17. When he said to his Apostles: How many loaves have yee? Goe and see: Mark 6.38. It is said indeed there, When they knew: which words argue, they knew not before: But no such word is said of Christ. And when Christ said to Philip, Iohn 6.5. Whence shall we buy bread that these may eate? The holy spirit incloseth it with a Parenthesis, vers. 6. This Christ said to prove Philip: for He himselfe knew what he would doe: Not onely what Hee could doe; but what he would doe also, nothing was, is hid from him. Hell is open: destruction hath no covering.
TO the second objection, to wit, Why He would curse the tree, for not bea∣ring fruit, when the time of ripe figges was not come.
I answer briefly, That Christ did not curse the tree in any anger: nor was the tree sensible of the curse. Nor were the Iewes accursed for not bringing forth fruit before the due time. To say thus, were to wring bloud out of the Scrip∣tures, and in every minute particular to expect a correspondencie with the Type; Whereas we must rest content, when the maine intent holdeth.
And yet, if I should say, That our blessed Saviour did cause the tree to wither for not bearing fruit, though the time was not come: to intimate unto us, That,
if he were so severe against a plant, a tree, a meere vegetative creature for not bearing fruit: it behooveth us reasonable men to bring forth fruit, with all pos∣sible speed: since the time of bearing fruit is alwayes present with us: and there is none houre, but wee may, wee must doe good; and, if the holy spirit related, that the time was not come, to quicken us men; what inconvenience ariseth? And so I part with this point.
WHen Christ had fasted fortie dayes and fortie nights, He was afterwards an hun∣gred: Matthew 4.2. Yet was he not so hungry as to tempt God: or to make bread of stones, as he could have done. Wherefore God sent unto him, at the end of the temptation, the help of Divine Servitors. They will not grudge the name. Behold, Matthew 4.11. Angels came and ministred unto him; and no question brought him food. Let Ravens wait on Elias: The Angels of Heaven joy to serve Christ.
Iesus being wearied with his journey, said to the woman of Samaria, Give me to drinke; for his Disciples were gone away unto the Citie, to buy meat. Iohn 4.6. &c. we read that the woman left her water-pot, vers. 28. But that she drew water for him, or that he dranke we read not. It may be he did by the wa∣ter, as he did after by the meat, when they prayed him: Master eate, vers. 31. He said unto them: I have meate to eate that yee know not of. vers. 32. And vers. 34. My meate is to doe the will of him that sent me, and to finish his worke. But wee read not that He did there eate. His hunger was rather voluntary than necessary.
Temporall food he alwayes under-prised in regard of the spirituall. Iohn 6.27. Labour not for the meate which perisheth, but for that meate which endureth unto everla∣sting life. Matthew 6.25. Take no thought, what yee shall eate, or what yee shall drink. Iohn 21.4. When the morning was come, Iesus stood on the shore, and said; Children, have yee any meate? In all likelyhood Christ said so to refresh his wearied Disci∣ples; not for himselfe. For we do not read that hee then ate: but gave to them both bread and fish: vers. 13. So Luke 24.30. He sate at meate with the two A∣postles (that were going to Emmaus) and tooke bread and blessed it, and brake and gave it to them. That himselfe did eate, I read not, I beleeve not.
He that fed many thousands, are not then himselfe, for ought that is revealed: He who was the Bread of Life, and heavenly Bread, and better then Manna, yet often fasted. He thirsted also who cried out, If any man thirst, let him come to me, and drinke. The water that I shall give him, shall be in him a Well of water springing up unto everlasting life. Iohn 4.14. Indeed, Luke 24.41. hee enquired, Have yee here any meate? And they gave him a piece of a broyled fish, and of an honey-combe. 42. And he took it and did eate before them. verse. 43. Act. 10.41. We did eate and drink with him after he rose from the dead. Augustinus Epist. 49. Propter dubitantes cibum, & po∣tum sumere voluit, non semel, sed saepius, ne illum non corpus, sed spiritum esse arbitra∣rentur; & sibi non solide, sed imaginaliter apparere. Hee received meat, and drink not once alone, but oftentimes for their sakes that doubted; left they should thinke him not to be a body, but a spirit: and that he did appeare unto them not indeed, but onely in conceipt. All this was done after his Resurrection, and be∣fore his Ascention: And out of question, they did eate, and drinke with Him of∣ten, farre oftner even in his naturall life: Yet neither before his death, nor after his Resurrection is there any demonstrative argument, that he ate flesh, save one∣ly of the Paschall Lambe.
YEt is there a great diversity betweene his eating as he was a mortal man be∣fore his death: and his eating after his Resurrection. Whilst hee lived a∣mongst men, what hee did eate, converted, as other mens meate doth, into the substance of his body, and nourished it: for, He was like unto us in all things, sinne
onely excepted. But after his Resurrection, as wee are to know, Hee did not eate phantastically: so He did not delude their senses: but did orally and really.
And whatsoever He did then eate, turned not into any nutriment, became not flesh, not bloud, none was chymified, nor chylified; but consumed, or vanished; Whatsoever Durandus Sentent: 3. Distinct: 2. Quaest. 6. ad 2. imagineth to the contrary.
Augustinus in his 49. Epist. to Deogratius, toward the beginning thus. Christus post resurrectionem cibatus est: & legimus Angelos ejusmodi escas, eodemque modo sumpsisse non ficto, & inam phantasmate: sed manifestissima viritate: nec tamen neces∣sitate sed potestate. Aliter enim absorbet terra aquam sitiens, aliter solis radius candens. Illa indigentiâ: iste potentiâ. Futurae resurrectionis corpus imperfectae foelicitatis erit, si cibos sumere non potuerit: imperfectae foelicitatis, si cibis eguerit. Which is thus translated. Christ did eate after his Resurrection; and wee read that the Angels did eate meate, and after the same manner, not in a fained and emptie phantasie: but in most apparent truth. Not by necessity: but by power. The thirsty ground drinkes up the water one way: the hot rayes of the Sunne consume it another way. That through need, or want; This through power. A body after its Re∣surrection shall have but imperfect felicity, if it cannot take meate: or if it stand in neede of meate. Let me adde; or if it could not consume the meate in the pas∣sage, before it come to any immutation, or any degree of concoction.
Some over-nicely distinguish a double digestion: The first reaching from the lips, and mouth to the taste: The second digestion from the palat to the ventricle, and so farre (say they) the meate came: but I say, not so farre: but either was changed into some more subtle substance: or vanished as it were into the aire: or was consumed some other unknowne way. But it was truly eaten.
MOst glorious and blessed Saviour, the more I thinke of thee, the more I love thee: the more I search into thee, the more I adore thee. In all thy workes thou art wonderfull, in all thy words powerfull, in all thy thoughts most holy: Frame me sweet Iesu! by little and little to be like unto thee, though I be wounded with a crowne of thornes, though I taste of the gall which was offered thee: give mee grace I beseech thee patiently to runne through these or other crosses, that thou mayest receive me into the Kingdome, and crowne mee with some portion of glory. Amen.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉