so become worse than the Jews themselves, who crucified the Lord of life without the walls of Jerusalem, and for that unparalleled sin were delivered into the hands of the Romans, into whose hands they delivered him, and at the same walls in such multitudes were crucified, till there wanted room for crosses, and crosses for their bodies.*

Lastly, By the public visibility of this death, we are assured that our Saviour was truly dead, and that all his enemies were fully satisfied. He was crucified in the sight of all the Jews, who were made public witnesses that he gave up the ghost. There were many traditions among the heathen, of persons supposed for some time to be dead, to descend into hell, and afterwards to live again; but the death of these persons was never publicly seen or certainly known. It is easy for a man that liveth, to say that he hath been dead; and if he be of great authority, it is not difficult to persuade some credulous persons to believe it. But that which would make his present life truly miraculous, must be the reality and certainty of his former death. The feigned histories of Pythagoras and Zamolxis, of Theseus and Hercules, of Orpheus and Protesilaus, made no certain mention of their deaths, and therefore were ridiculous in the assertion of their resurrection from death.† Christ, as he appeared to certain witnesses after his resurrection, so he died before his enemies visibly on the cross, and gave up the ghost conspicuously in the sight of the world.

And now we have made this discovery of the true manner and nature of the cross on which our Saviour suffered, every one may understand what it is he professeth when he declareth his faith, and saith, I believe in Christ crucified. For thereby he is understood and obliged to speak thus much: I am really persuaded, and fully satisfied, that the only-begotten and eternal Son of God, Christ Jesus, that he might cancel the handwriting which was against us, and take off the curse which was

Προσήλουν δ ̓ οἱ στρατιῶται δι ̓ ὀργὴν καὶ μῖσος τοὺς ἁλόντας, ἄλλον ἄλλῳ σχήματι πρὸς χλεύην, καὶ διὰ τὸ πλῆθος χώρα τε ἐνε λείπετο τοῖς σταυροῖς, καὶ σταυροὶ τοῖς σώς μασιν. Joseph. de Bell. Jud. l. vi. c. 28.

This is excellently observed and expressed by Origen, who returneth this answer to the objection made by the Jews in Celsus, of those fabulous returns from the dead : Φέρε παραστήσωμεν, ὅτι οὐ δύνα ται τὸ κατὰ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἱστορούμενον, ἐκ νεκρῶν ἐγηγέρθαι, τούτοις παραβάλλεσθαι. Εκαστος μὲν γὰρ τῶν λεγομένων κατὰ τοὺς τόπους ηρώων βουληθεὶς ἂν ἐδυνήθη ἑαυτὸν ὑπεκκλέψαι τῆς ὄψεως τῶν ἀνθρώπων, καὶ πάλιν κρίνας ἐπανελθεῖν πρὸς οὓς καταλέλοιπεν· Ἰησοῦ δὲ σταυρωθέντος ἐπὶ πάντων Ἰουδαίων, καὶ καθαιρεθέντος αὐτοῦ τοῦ σώμα τος ἐν ὄψει τοῦ δήμου αὐτῶν, πῶς οἴονται παι

ξαπλήσιον πλάσασθαι λέγειν αὐτὸν τοῖς ἱστου ρουμένοις ἥρωσιν εἰς ᾅδου καταβεβηκέναι, και κεῖθεν ἀνεληλυθέναι; φάμεν δ ̓ ὅτι μήποτε πρὸς ἀπολογίαν, τοῦ ἐσταυρώσθαι τὸν Ἰησοῦν καὶ τοιοῦτον λέγοιτ' αν, μάλιστα διὰ τὰ περὶ τῶν ἡρώων ἱστορηθέντα τῶν εἰς ᾅδου καταβε βηκέναι βιαζομένων. ὅτι εἰ καθ ̓ ὑπόθεσιν ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἐτεθνήκει ἀσήμῳ θανάτῳ, οὐκ ὥστε δῆλος εἶναι ἀποθανὼν ὅλῳ τῷ δήμῳ τῶν Ἰου δαίων, εἶτα μετὰ τοῦτ ̓ ἀληθῶς ἦν ἀναστὰς ἐκ νεκρῶν, χώραν εἶχεν ἂν τὸ ὑπονοηθὲν περὶ τῶν ἡρώων καὶ περὶ τούτου λεχθῆναι· μή ποτ' οὖν πρὸς ἄλλοις αἰτίοις τοῦ σταυρωθῆναι τὸν Ἰησοῦν καὶ τοῦτο δύναται συμβάλλεσθαι τῷ αὐτὸν ἐπισήμως ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ ἀποτεθνηκέναι, ἵνα μηδεὶς ἔχῃ λέγειν, ὅτι ἑκὼν ὑπεξέστη τῆς ὄψεως τῶν ἀνθρώπων, καὶ ἔδοξεν ἀποτεθνηκέναι, οὐκ ἀποτέθνηκε δέ· ὅτ ̓ ἐβουλήθη πάλιν ἐπι φανεὶς ἐτερατεύσατο τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀνάστασιν Adv. Celsum, l. ii. §. 56.

due unto us, did take upon him the form of a servant, and in that form did willingly and cheerfully submit himself unto the false accusation of the Jews, and unjust sentence of Pilate, by which he was condemned, according to the Roman custom, to the cross; and upon that did suffer servile punishment of the greatest acerbity, enduring the pain; and of the greatest ignominy, despising the shame. And thus I believe in Christ

CRUCIFIED.

Dead.

THOUGH Crucifixion of itself involveth not in it certain death, and he which is fastened to a cross is so leisurely to die, as that he being taken from the same may live; though when the insulting Jews in a malicious derision called to our Saviour to "save himself, and come down from the cross;" (Mark xv. 30.) he might have come down from thence, and in saving himself have never saved us: yet it is certain that he felt the extremity of that punishment, and fulfilled the utmost intention of crucifixion: so that, as we acknowledge him cruci fied, we believe him dead.

For the illustration of which part of the Article, it will be necessary, first, To shew that the Messias was to die; that no sufferings, howsoever shameful and painful, were sufficiently satisfactory to the determination and predictions divine, without a full dissolution and proper death: secondly, To prove that our Jesus, whom we believe to be the true Messias, did not only suffer torments intolerable and inexpressible in this life, but upon and by the same did finish this life by a true and proper death thirdly, To declare in what the nature and condition of the death of a person so totally singular did properly and peculiarly consist. And more than this cannot be necessary

:

to shew we believe that Christ was dead.

First, then, we must consider what St. Paul "delivered" to the Corinthians "first of all," and what "also he received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures;" (1 Cor. xv. 3.) that the Messias was "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world," (Rev. xiii. 8.) and that his death was severally represented and foretold. For though the sacrificing Isaac hath been acknowledged an express and lively type of the promised Messias; though, after he was bound and laid upon the wood, he was preserved from the fire, and rescued from the religious cruelty of his father's knife; though Abraham be said to have " offered up his only-begotten son," (Heb. xi. 17.) when Isaac died not; though by all this it might seem foretold that the true and great promised Seed, the Christ, should be made a sacrifice for sin, should be fastened to the cross, and offered up to the Father, but not suffer death: yet being "without effusion of blood there is no remission," (Heb. ix. 22.) without death no sacrifice for sin; being the saving of

Isaac alive doth not deny the death of the antitype, but rather suppose and assert it as presignifying his resurrection from the dead, "from whence Abraham received him in a figure:" (Heb. xi. 19.) we may safely affirm the ancient and legal types did represent a Christ who was to die. It was an essential part of the paschal law, that the lamb should be slain and in the sacrifices for sin, which presignified a Saviour to "sanctify the people with his own blood, the bodies of the beasts were burnt without the camp, and their blood brought into the sanctuary." (Heb. xiii. 11, 12.)

Nor did the types only require, but the prophecies also foretell, his death. For "he was brought (saith Isaiah) as a lamb to the slaughter:" "he was cut off out of the land of the living" (saith the same prophet); and "made his soul an offering for sin." (liii. 7, 8. 10.) Which are so plain and evident predictions, that the Jews shew not the least appearance of probability in their evasions.*

Being then the obstinate Jews themselves acknowledge one Messias was to die, and that a violent death; being we have already proved there is but one Messias foretold by the prophets, and shewed by those places, which they will not acknowledge, that he was to be slain: it followeth by their unwilling confessions and our plain approbations, that the promised Messias was ordained to die; which is our first as

sertion.

Secondly, We affirm, correspondently to these types and promises, that "Christ our passover is slain;” (1 Cor. v. 7.) that he whom we believe to be the true and only Messias did really and truly die. Which affirmation we may with confidence maintain, as being secure of any even the least denial. Jesus of Nazareth upon his crucifixion was so surely, so certainly dead, that they who wished, they who thirsted for his blood, they who obtained, who effected, who extorted his death, even they believed it, even they were satisfied with it: the chief priests, the Scribes and the Pharisees, the publicans and sinners, all were satisfied: the Sadducees most of all, who

That this place of Isaiah must be understood of the Messias, I have already proved against the Jews out of the text, and their own traditions. Their objection particularly to these words, that the land of the living is the land of Ca

naan.

מחארץ חיים ,So Solomon Jarchi ,From the land of the living היא ארץ ישראל

that is, the land of Israel. And D. Kimchi endeavours to prove that exposition

כי נגזר מארץ חיים כאשר גלה,out of David מארץ שנקראת ארץ חיים כמו אתהלך לפני as if the land of the living ה'בארצו החיים

must be the land of Canaan, because David professeth he will walk before the Lord in the land of the living: whereas there is no more in that phrase than that

he will serve God while he liveth. As Psal. xxvii. 13. "I had fainted unless I had believed to see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living;" and Isa. Xxxviii. 11. "I said, I shall not see the Lord, even the Lord in the land of the living;" which is sufficiently interpreted by the words which follow: "I shall behoid man no more with the inhabitants of the world." The land of the living then was not particularly the land of Canaan : nor can they persuade us that it could not refer to Christ, because he was never removed out of that land: but to be cut off out of the land of the living is, certainly, to be taken away from them which live upon the earth, that is, to die.

hugged their old opinion, and loved their error the better, because they thought him sure from ever rising up. But if they had denied or doubted it, the very stones would cry out and confirm it. Why did the sun put on mourning? Why were the graves opened, but for a funeral? Why did the earth quake? Why were the rocks rent? Why did the frame of nature shake, but because the God of nature died? Why did all the people, who came to see him crucified, and love to feed their eyes with such tragic spectacles, why did they beat upon their breasts and return, but that they were assured it was finished, (John xix. 30.) there was no more to be seen, all was done? It was not out of compassion that the merciless soldiers brake not his legs, but because they found him dead whom they came to dispatch; and being enraged that their cruelty should be thus prevented, with an impertinent villany they pierce his side, and with a foolish revenge endeavour to kill a dead man; thereby becoming stronger witnesses than they would, by being less the authors than they desired, of his death. For out of his sacred but wounded side, came blood and water, both as evident signs of his present death, as certain seals of our future and eternal life. These are the two blessed sacraments of the spouse of Christ, each assuring her of the death of her beloved. The sacrament of baptism, the water through which we pass into the Church of Christ, teacheth us that he died to whom we come. "For know you not (saith St. Paul) that so many of us as are baptized into Jesus Christ, are baptized into his death?" (Rom. vi. 3.) The sacrament of the Lord's supper, the bread broken, and the wine poured forth, signify that he died who instituted it; and "as often as we eat this bread, and drink this cup, we shew forth the Lord's death till he come." (1 Cor. xi. 26.)

Dead then our blessed Saviour was upon the cross; and that not by a feigned or metaphorical, but by a true and proper, death. As he was truly and properly man, in the same mortal nature which the sons of Adam have; so did he undergo a true and proper death, in the same manner as we die. Our life appeareth principally in two particulars, motion and sensation; and while both or either of these are perceived in a body, we pronounce it lives. Not that the life itself consisteth in either or both of these, but in that which is the original principle of them both, which we call the soul; and the intimate presence or union of that soul unto the body is the life thereof, The real distinction of which soul from the body in man, our blessed Saviour taught most clearly in that admonition, "Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to

Τὸ ἔμψυχον τοῦ ἀψύχου δυοῖν μάλιστα διαφέρειν δοκεῖ, κινήσει τε καὶ τῷ αἰσθάνεσθαι· παρειλήφαμεν δὲ καὶ παρὰ τῶν προγενεστέρων σχεδόν δύο ταῦτα περὶ ψυχῆς. Arist. de

Anim. 1. i. c. 2. ο διαφέρει τὰ ἄψυχα (leg. ἔμψυχα) τῶν ἀψύχων, τοῦτο ἔστι ψυχή δια φέρει δὲ κινήσει, αἰσθήσει, φαντασίᾳ, νοήσει. Sallust. de Diis et Mundo, c. 8.

kill the soul; but rather fear him which is able to destroy both body and soul in hell." (Matt. x. 28.) Now being death is nothing else but the privation or recession of life, and we are then properly said to die when we cease to live; being life consisteth in the union of the soul unto the body, from whence, as from the fountain, flow motion, sensation, and whatsoever vital perfection: death can be nothing else but the solution of that vital union, or the actual separation of the soul, before united to the body. As therefore when the soul of man doth leave the habitation of its body, and being the sole fountain of vitality bereaves it of all vital activity, we say that body or that man is dead so when we read that Christ our Saviour died, we must conceive that was a true and proper death, and consequently that his body was bereft of his soul, and of all vital influence from the same.

Nor is this only our conception, or a doubtful truth; but we are as much assured of the propriety of his death, as of the death itself. For that the unspotted soul of our Jesus was really and actually separated from his body, that his flesh was bereft of natural life by the secession of that soul, appeareth by his own resignation, "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit ;" and by the evangelist's expression, "and having said thus, he gave up the ghost." (Luke xxiii. 46.) When he was to die, he resigned his soul; when he gave it up, he died; when it was delivered out of the body, then was the body

* As Secundus: φυγὴ καὶ ἀπόκτησις βίου. Sentent. τί ἐστι θάνατος ; p. 639. ed. Gale. 1688.

+ As the philosophers have anciently expressed it, especially Plato, who by the advantage of an error in the original of souls, best understood the end of life: Τοῦτό γε θάνατος ὀνομάζεται, λύσις καὶ χωρι σμὸς ψυχῆς ἀπὸ σώματος. in Phadone, vol. i. p. 153. Again: Ο θάνατος τυγχάνει ὢν, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ, οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἡ δυοῖν πραγμάτων διάλυσις, τῆς ψυχῆς καὶ τοῦ σώματος, ἀπ ̓ dow. in Gorgia, vol. iv. p. 166. And more plainly and fully yet: yoúμeðá Ti τὸν θάνατον εἶναι; Πάνυ γ ̓, ἔφη ὑπολαβὼν ὁ

Σιμμίας, Αρα μὴ ἄλλο τι ἢ τὴν τῆς ψυχῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ σώματος ἀπαλλαγήν; καὶ εἶναι τοῦτο τεθνᾶναι, χωρὶς μὲν ἀπὸ τῆς ψυχῆς ἀπαλλαγὲν αὐτὸ καθ ̓ ἑαυτὸ τὸ σῶμα γεγονέναι, χωρὶς δὲ τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ σώματος ἀπαλλαγεῖσαν αὐτὴν καθ ̓ αὑτὴν εἶναι ἡ ἄρα μὴ ἄλλο τι ᾗ ὁ θάνατος ἢ τοῦτο; Οὐκ, ἀλλὰ τοῦτο, ἔφη. in Phadone, vol. i. p. 145. Thus with four several words, λύσις, διάλυσις, χωρισμός, and ἀπαλMay, doth Plato express the separation of the soul from the body, and maketh death formally to consist of that separation. This solution is excellently expressed by Phocylides, Carm. admon. v. 97.100.

Οὐ καλὸν ἁρμονίην ἀναλυέμεν ἀνθρώποιο, Ψυχαὶ γὰρ μίμνουσιν ἀκήριοι ἐν φθιμένοισι. Πνεῦμα γάρ ἐστι Θεοῦ χρῆσις θνητοῖσι καὶ εἰκών. Σῶμα γὰρ ἐκ γαίης ἔχομεν, καὶ πάντες ἐς αὐτὴν Λυόμενοι κόνις ἐσμέν· ἀὴς δ ̓ ἀνὰ πνεῦμα δέδεκται. So Tertullian Opus autem mortis in medio est, discretio corporis animæque.' De Anim. c. 51. 'Si mors non aliud determinatur quam disjunctio corporis animæque, contrarium morti vita non aliud definietur, quam conjunctio corporis animæque. Ibid. c. 27. This description of death is far more philosophical than the notion of Aristotle, who makes it to consist in the corruption of natural heat :

Y

Ανάγκη τοίνυν ἅμα τῷ τε ζῆν ὑπάρχειν καὶ τὴν τοῦ θερμοῦ φυσικοῦ σωτηρίαν, καὶ τὸν και λούμενον θάνατον εἶναι τὴν τούτου φθοράν. de Juventut. &c. c. 4. Inasmuch as the soul is not that natural beat, and the corruption of that heat followeth upon the separation of the soul.

This is expressed three ways, all signifying the separation of his soul from his body. St Mark and St. Luke iživurs,