« ZurückWeiter »
(1 Cor. vi. 19, 20.) We must be no longer “the servants of men; we are the servants of Christ, who are bought with a price.” (1 Cor. vii. 22, 23.)
Fifthly, It is necessary to believe remission of sins as wrought by the blood of Christ, by which the covenant was ratified and confirmed, which mindeth us of a condition required. It is the nature of a covenant to expect performances on both parts; and therefore if we look for forgiveness promised, we must perform repentance commanded. These two were always preached together, and those which God hath joined ought no man to put asunder. Christ did truly appear a Prince and a Saviour,” and it was “to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins;" (Acts v. 31.) he joined these two in the apostles' cominission, saying, that “repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name throughout all nations." (Lake xxiv. 47.)
From hence every one may learn what he is explicitly to believe and confess in this Article of forgiveness of sins; for thereby he is conceived to intend thus much: I do freely and fully acknowledge, and with unspeakable comfort embrace this as a most necessary and infallible truth, that whereas every sin is a transgression of the Law of God, upon every transgression there remaineth a guilt upon the person of the transgressor, and that guilt is an obligation to endure eternal punishment; so that all men being concluded under sin, they were all obliged to suffer the miseries of eternal death; it pleased God to give his Son, and his Son to give himself to be a surety for this debt, and to release us from these bonds, and because without shedding of blood there is no remission, he gave his life a sacrifice for sin, he laid it down as a ransom, even his precious blood as a price by way of compensation and satisfaction to the will and justice of God; by which propitiation, God, who was by our sins offended, became reconciled, and being so, took off our obligation to eternal punishment, which is the guilt of our sins, and appointed in the Church of Christ the sacrament of baptism for the first remission, and repentance for the constant forgiveness of all following trespasses. And thus I believe THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS.
The Resurrection of the Body. THIS Article was anciently delivered and acknowledged by all Churches,t only with this difference, that whereas in
**Cum omnes ecclesiæ ita sacra- quam dixerint peccatorum remissio. mentum Symboli tradant, ut post- nem, addant carnis resurrectionem ;
other places it was expressed in general terms, the resurrection of the flesh, they of the Church of Aquileia, by the addition of a pronoun propounded it to every single believer in a more particular way of expression, the resurrection of this flesh. And though we have translated it in our English CREED, the resurrection of the body; yet neither the Greek nor Latin ever delivered this Article in those terms, but in these, the resurrection of the flesh;* because there may be ambiguity in the one, in relation to the celestial and spiritual bodies, but there can be no collusion in the other. Only it will be necessary, for shewing our agreement with the ancient Creeds, to declare that as by flesh they understood the body of man, and not any other flesh; so we, when we translate it body, understand no other body but such a body of flesh, of the same nature which it had before it was by death separated from the soul. And this we may very well and properly do, because our Church hath already taken care therein, and given us a fit occasion so to declare ourselves. For though in the Cregd itself, used at Morning and Evening Prayer, the Article be thus delivered, the resurrection of the body, yet in the form of public baptism, where it is propounded by way of question to the godfathers in the name of the child to be baptized, it runneth thas, 'Dost thou believe--the resurrection of the flesh?' We see by daily experience that all men are mortal; that the body, left by the soul, the salt and life thereof, putrefieth and consumeth, and according to the sentence of old, returneth unto dust: but these bodies, as frail and mortal as they are, consisting of this corruptible flesh, are the subject of this Article, in which we profess to believe the resurrection of the body. sanota Aquileiensis ecclesia, ubi tradit resurrection of the body, who would carnis resurrectionem, addit unius deny the resurrection of the flesh. Of pronominis syllabam; et pro co quod this St. Jerome gives an account, and cæteri dicunt, carnis resurrectionem, withal of the words of the Creed: nos dicimus hujus carnis resurrectio- Exempli causa pauca subjiciam, nem.' Ruffin. Apol. 1. i. adv. Hier. in- Credimus, inquiunt, resurrectionem ter Op. Hieron. t. iv. par. 2. col. 354. futuram corporum. Hoc si bene di• Satis cauta et provida adjectione catur, pura confessio est; sed quia fidem Symboli ecclesia nostra docet, corpora sunt coelestia, et terrestria, quæ in eo quod a cæteris traditur, et aer iste et aura tenuis juxta natucarnis resurrectionem, uno addito pro- ram suam corpora nominantur, corpus nomine tradit, hujus carnis resurre- ponunt, non carnem, ut Orthodoxus ctionem.' Id. in Symb. §. 42. “Sive ergo corpus audiens carnem patet, Hærecorpus resurrecturum dicimus, secun- ticus spiritum recognoscat. Hæc dum Apostolum dicimus (hoc enim enim eorum est prima decipula ; quæ nomine usus est ille) sive carnem dici- si deprehensa fuerit, instruunt alios mus, secundum traditionem Symboli dolos, et innocentiam simulant, et confitemur.' Idem, Prol, in Apolog, malitiosos nos vocant, et quasi simPamphili.
pliciter credentes aiunt, Credimus re• The Greeks always use sapròs surrectionem carnis. Hoc vero cum áváoraoiv, the Latins carnis resurre- dixerint, vulgus indoctum putat sibi ctionem. And this was to be observed, sufficere, maxime quia idipsum et in because, being we read of spiritual Symbolo creditur.'' Ep. 65. al. 41. ad bodies some would aoknowledge the Pammach, et Ocean. col. 344.
When we treated concerning the resurrection of Christ,* we delivered the proper notion and nature of the resurrection in general, that from thence we might conclude that our Saviour did truly rise from the dead. Being now to explain the resurrection to come, we shall not need to repeat what we then delivered, or make an addition as to that particular, but referring the reader to that which is there explained, it will be necessary for us only to consider what is the resurrection to come, who are they which shall be raised, how we are assured they shall rise, and in what manner all shall be performed. And this resurrection hath some peculiar difficulties different from those which might seem to obstruct the belief of Christ's resurrection. For the body of the Son of God did never see corruption; all the parts thereof continued in the same condition in which they were after his most precious soul had left them, they were only deposited in the sepulchre, otherwise the grave had no power over them. But other mortal bodies, after the soul hath deserted them, are left to all the sad effects of their mortality: we may say “ to corruption, Thou art my father; to the worm, Thou art my mother and my sister;" our corpses "go down to the bars of the pit, and rest together in the dust.” (Job xvii. 14. 16.). Our death is not a simple dissolution, nor a bare separation of soul and body, as Christ's was, but our whole tabernacle is fully dissolved, and every part thereof crumbled into dust and ashes, scattered, mingled, and confounded with the dust of the earth. There is a description of a kind of resurrection in the prophet Ezekiel, in which there is supposed a “valley full of bones, and there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone, the sinews and the flesh came upon them, and the skin covered them above, and their breath came into them, and they lived and stood upon their feet.” (Ezek. xxxvii, 1. 7, 8. 10.). But in the resurrection to come we cannot suppose the bones in the valley, for they are dissolved into dust as well as the other parts.
We must therefore undertake to shew that the bodies of men, howsoever corrupted, wheresoever in their parts dispersed, how long soever dead, shall hereafter be recollected in themselves, and united to their own souls. And for the more facile and familiar proceeding in this so highly concerning truth, I shall make use of this method : First, To prove that such a resurrection is not in itself impossible.: Secondly, To shew that it is upon general considerations highly probable: Thirdly, To demonstrate that it is upon Christian principles infallibly certain. It is not in itself impossible, therefore no man can absolutely deny it; it is upon natural and moral grounds highly probable, therefore all men may ration
ally expect it; it is upon evangelical principles infallibly certain, therefore all Christians must firmly believe it.
First, I confess philosophers of old did look upon the resurrection of the body as impossible,* and though some of them thought the souls of the dead did live again, yet they never conceived that they were united to the same bodies, and that their flesh should rise out of the dust that it might be conjoined to the spirit of a man. We read of “ certain philosophers of the Epicureans and of the Stoics, who encountered St. Paul; and when they heard of the resurrection they mocked him, some saying, that he seemed to be a setterforth of strange gods, because he preached unto them Jesus and the resurrection.” (Acts xvii. 18.) But as the ancient philosophers thought a creation impossible, because they looked only upon the constant works of nature, among which they never find any thing produced out of nothing, and yet we have already proved a creation not only possible, but performed; so did they think a resurrection of corrupted, dissolved, and dissipated bodies to be as impossible, because they could never observe any action or operation in nature, which did or could produce any such effect; and yet we being not tied to the consideration of nature only, but estimating things possible and impossible by the power of God, will easily demonstrate that there is no impossibility that the dead should rise.
For, if the resurrection of the dead be impossible, it must be so in one of these respects; either in reference to the agent, or in relation to the patient; either because it is a work of so much difficulty, that there neither is nor can be any agent of wisdom, power, and activity, sufficient to effect it; or else because the soul of man is so far separated by death from the body, and the parts of the body so much dissolved from themselves, and altered from their nature, that they are absolutely incapable by any power to be united as they were. Either both or one of these two must be the reason of the impossibility, if the resurrection be impossible; for if the body be capable of being raised, and there be any agent of sufficient ability to raise it, the resurrection of it must be possible.
Now, if the resurrection were impossible in respect of the
• Pliny, reckoning up those things 'Avopos 8" Teddy alp' avaoráoy xóvis which he thought not to be in the "Απαξ θανόντος, ούτις έστ' ανάστασις. power of God, mentions these two : Toutwv ényôds oŮk tronger tarNg
Mortales eternitate donare, aut re- “Ουμός, τα δ' άλλα πάντ’ άνω τε και κάτω vocarc defunctos.' I. ii. cap. 7. And Erpépwv Tisno, ovdèv å oQuaivwv, jével. Æschylus, though a Pythagorean, yet
Æschyl. Eumenid. 636. absolutely denies it to be in the power 'Uti anima interire dicatur, ab Epiof God, for so he makes Apollo speak cureis observatur. Et carnis restituto the Eumenides:
tio negetur, de una omnium Philoso1Ιέδας μέν αν λύσειεν, έστι τούδ άκος, phorum schola sumitur.' Tertull. de Και κάρτα πολλή μηχανή λυτήριος. . Præscr. adv. Hæret, c. 7.
agent which should effect it, the impossibility must arise either from an insufficiency of knowledge or of power;* for if either the agent know not what is to be done, or if he know it but hath no power to do it, either he will not attempt it, or if he do, must fail in the attempt; but that, of which he hath perfect knowledge, and full power to effect, cannot be impossible in relation to the agent endued with such knowledge, and with such power.
Now, when we say the resurrection is possible, we say not it is so to men or angels, or any creature of a limited knowledge or finite power, but we attribute it to God, with whom nothing is impossible; (Luke i. 37.) his understanding is infinite, he knoweth all the men which ever lived since the foundation, or shall live unto the dissolution of the world, he knoweth whereof all things were made, from what dust we came, into what dust shall return. “Our substance was not hid from thee, O Lord, when we were made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth; thine eyes did see our substance, yet being imperfect, and in thy book were all our members written, which in continuance were fashioned when as yet there was none of them.” (Psal. cxxxix. 15, 16.) Thus every particle in our bodies, every dust and atom which belongeth to us, is known to him that made us. The generation of our flesh is clearly seen by "the Father of spirits,” (Heb. xii. 9.) the augmentation of the same is known to him “ in whom we live, move, and have our being;” (Acts xvii. 28.) the dissolution of our tabernacles is perceived by that God by whom the “very hairs of our head are all numbered, and without whom one sparrow shall not fall to the ground.” (Matt. x. 29, 30.) He which numbereth the sands of the sea, knoweth all the scattered bones, seeth into all the graves and tombs, searcheth all the repositories and dormitories in the earth, knoweth what dust belongeth to each body, what body to each soul. Again, as his all-seeing eye observeth every particle of dissolved and corrupted man, so doth he also see and know all ways and means by which these scattered parts should be united, by which this ruined fabric should be recompacted; he knoweth how every bone should be brought to its old neighbour-bone, how every sinew may be re-embroidered on it; he understandeth what are the proper parts to be conjoined, what is the proper gluten by which they may become united. The resurrection therefore cannot be im
* Το αδύνατον τινι γιγνώσκεται κατ' σόμενον, και πόθεν γένοιτ' άν και πώς, αλήθειαν τοιούτον, ή εκ του μή γιγνώσκειν δύναμιν δε ή μηδ' όλως έχων προς το ποιτο γενησόμενον, ή εκ του δύναμιν αρκού- ήσαι το γιγνωσκόμενον ή μη αρκούσαν σαν μή έχειν προς το ποιήσαι καλώς το έχων, ουκ αν εγχειρήσειε την αρχήν, ει εγνωσμένον. Ο γάρ αγνοών τι των γε- σωφρονοίη και την ιδίαν επισκέψηται δύνέσθαι δεόντων ουκ άν ούτ' εγχειρήσαι, ναμιν, εγχειρήσας δε απερισκέπτως ουκ ούτε ποιήσαι το παράπαν δυνηθείη όπερ αν επιτελέσειε το δόξαν. Αthenagoras de αγνοεί ότε γιγνώσκων καλώς το ποιηθη- Resurrectione, p. 42.