THE PRECEDING DISCOURSE. S31
triflings, 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. v. 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, Avill 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 afore. 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 O'wn 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 formally 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 medi- atory 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 pre- tends 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 judgment and ingenuity throughout this censure.
332 A VINDICATION OF
Hence lie 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 contradic- tion, that by the graces of his person, he meant neither the excel- lencies of his divine nor human nature ; yet he hath a salvo which will deliver him both from contradiction and from nonsense, — that he doth 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 imto 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 media- tor 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 doth, or hath 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 proper- ties 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 gTace 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 determina- tions of the j^rimitive church. But the person of Christ, wherein these two natures arc united, is of another distinct consideration; and such things are spoken thereof as cannot, under any single enuncia- tion, 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. ix. 6 ; 1 Tim. iii. 1 6 ; John i. 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 Avas ever designed to be, or can be, considered as God-man, and not as mediator. And thence he would ' Page 59 of present volume.