tinct and different in the formal reason of them. [1]. Assumption is the immediate act of the divine nature in the person of the Son on the human; union is mediate by virtue of that assumption. [2.] Assumption is unto personality; it is that act whereby the Son of God and our nature became one person. Union is an act or relation of the natures subsisting in that one person. [3.] Assumption respects the acting of the divine, and the passion of the human nature, the one assumeth, the other is assumed. Union respects the mutual relation of the natures unto each other. Hence the divine nature may be said to be united unto the human, as well as the human unto the divine; but the divine nature cannot be said to be assumed as the human is. Wherefore, assumption denotes the acting of the one nature, and the passion of the other, union the mutual relation that is between them both.

These things may be safely affirmed, and ought to be firmly believed, as the sense of the Holy Ghost in those expressions, He took on him the seed of Abraham; he took on him the form of a servant;' and the like. And who can conceive the condescension of divine goodness, or the actings of divine wisdom and power therein!

2. That which followeth hereon, is the union of the two natures in the same person, or the hypostatical union. This is included and asserted in a multitude of divine testimonies; Isa. vii. 14. Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel,' as Matt. i. 23. He who was conceived and born of the virgin was Immanuel, or God with us; that is, God manifest in the flesh, by the union of his natures in the same person. Isa. ix. 6. To us a child is born, to us a son is given: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace.' That the same person should be the 'mighty God,' and a child born,' is neither conceivable nor possible, nor can be true, but by the union of the divine and human natures in the same person. So he said of himself, Before Abraham was, I am;' John viii. 58. That he, the same person who then spake unto the Jews, and as a man was little more than thirty years of age, should also be before Abraham, undeniably confirms the union of another nature in the same person with that wherein he spoke those

words, and without which they could not be true. He had not only another nature which did exist before Abraham, but the same individual person who then spoke in the human nature, did then exist. See to the same purpose, John i. 14. Acts xx. 28. Rom. ix. 5. Col. ii. 9. 1 John iii. 16.

This union the ancient church affirmed to be made aTpETTS, 'without any change' in the person of the Son of God, which the divine nature is not subject unto; àdiapéTws, with a distinction of natures, but without any division' of them by separate subsistences; άovyxúτws, 'without mixture' or confusion; axopíorws, without separation' or distance. And ovowwows, substantially,' because it was of two substances or essences, in the same person, in opposition unto all accidental union, as the fulness of the Godhead dwelt in him bodily,'

These expressions were found out and used by the ancient church, to prevent the fraud of those who corrupted the doctrine of the person of Christ, and (as all of that sort ever did, and yet continue so to do) obscured their pernicious sentiments under ambiguous expressions. And they also made use of sundry terms which they judged significant of this great mystery, or the incarnation of the Son of God. Such are ἐνσάρκωσις, ‘incarnation ;' ἐνσωμάτωσις, ' embodying ; ἐνάνθρωπησις, ‘inhumanation; ἡ δεσποτικὴ ἐπιδημία, καὶ παρουσία, ἡ οἰκονομία, to the same purpose ; ἡ διὰ σαρκὸς ὁμιλία, “ his conversation, in or by the flesh ;' ἡ διὰ ἀνθρωπότητος φανέρωσις, ' his manifestation by humanity; ̓ ἡ ἔλευσις, 'the advent;' Kévwσis, the exinanition,' or humiliation; ǹ roũ Xpioroữ ¿mipávɛia, ' the appearance' or manifestation of Christ; ovvaráßaois, the condescension.' Most of ἡ συνπατάβασις, these expressions are taken from the Scripture, and are used therein with respect unto this mystery, or some concernments of it. Wherefore, as our faith is not confined unto any one of these words or terms, so as that we should be obliged to believe not only the things intended, but also the manner of its expression in them, so, so far as they explain the thing intended according unto the mind of the Holy Ghost in the Scripture, and obviate the senses of men of corrupt minds, they are to be embraced and defended as useful helps in teaching the truth.

That whereby it is most usually declared in the writings

the ancients, is yapıç ivwσews,' gratia unionis,' the 'grace of union; which form of words some manifesting themseives strangers unto, do declare how little conversant they are in their writings. Now, it is not any habitual inherent grace residing subjectively in the person, or human nature of Christ, that is intended, but things of another nature.

(1.) The cause of this union is expressed in it. This is the free grace and favour of God towards the man Christ Jesus, predestinating, designing, and taking him into actual union with the person of the Son,without respect unto, or foresight of any precedent dignity or merit in him; 1 Pet. i. 20.

Hence is that of Austin, Ea gratia fit ab initio fidei sue home quicunque Christianus, qua gratia homo ille ab aro factus est Christus.' De Prædest. Sanct. cap. 15. For whereas all the inherent grace of the human nature of Christ, and all the holy obedience which proceeded from it, was ent in order of nature unto this union, and an effect they could in no sense be the meritorious or procuring uses it; it was of grace.

t is used also by many and designed to express the guity of the human nature of Christ. This is that shoreca 20 creature is participant, nor ever shall be unto this is the fundamental privilege of the human to Chist, which all others, even unto his eternal *****w* from, and are resolved into.

the glorious meetness and ability of the person of

id unto all the acts and duties of his mediatory

ey are all resolved into the union of his na4 de xane person, without which not one of them unto the benefit of the church. And ce of our Lord Jesus Christ,' which renders de se porossa dini amiable unto believers. Unto them V. A aweeIOUS,'

lent expression of it at present in the cal union; that is, the union of the que in the person of the Son of God, og no personality nor subsistence of

this union, the name of Christ is that which hath the pre-eminence in 2. wisdom. And it is a singular effect

thereof. There is no other union in things divine or human, in things spiritual or natural, whether substantial or accidental, that is of the same kind with it, it differs specifically from them all.

[1] The most glorious union is that of the divine persons in the same being or nature; the Father in the Son, the Son in the Father, the Holy Spirit in them both, and both in him. But this is a union of distinct persons in the unity of the same single nature. And this, I confess, is more glorious than that whereof we treat; for it is in God absolutely, it is eternal, of his nature and being. But this union we speak of, is not God, it is a creature, an effect of divine wisdom and power. And it is different from it herein, inasmuch as that is of many distinct persons in the same nature, this is, of distinct natures in the same person. That union is natural, substantial, essential, in the same nature; this, as it is not accidental, as we shall shew, so it is not properly substantial, because it is not of the same nature, but of divers in the same person, remaining distinct in their essence and substance, and is therefore peculiarly hypostatical or personal. Hence Austin feared not to say, that 'Homo potius est in filio Dei, quam filius in Patre;' De Trin. lib. i. cap. 10. But that is true only in this one respect, that the Son is not so in the Father as to become one person with him. In all other respects it must be granted, that the in-being of the Son in the Father, the union between them, which is natural, essential, and eternal, doth exceed this in glory, which was a temporary, external act of divine wisdom and grace.

[2.] The most eminent substantial union in things natural, is that of the soul and body constituting an individual person. There is, I confess, some kind of similitude between this union and that of the different natures in the person of Christ; but it is not of the same kind or nature. And the dissimilitudes that are between them, are more and of greater importance than those things are wherein there seems to be an agreement between them. For,

1st, The soul and body are so united, as to constitute one entire nature. The soul is not human nature, nor is the body, but it is the consequent of their union. Soul and body are essential parts of human nature, but complete hu

of the ancients, is xápis ivwoews, 'gratia unionis,' the 'grace of union;' which form of words some manifesting themselves strangers unto, do declare how little conversant they are in their writings. Now, it is not any habitual inherent grace residing subjectively in the person, or human nature of Christ, that is intended, but things of another nature.

(1.) The cause of this union is expressed in it. This is the free grace and favour of God towards the man Christ Jesus, predestinating, designing, and taking him into actual union with the person of the Son,without respect unto, or foresight of, any precedent dignity or merit in him; 1 Pet. i. 20.

Hence is that of Austin, Ea gratia fit ab initio fidei sua homo quicunque Christianus, qua gratia homo ille ab initio factus est Christus.' De Prædest. Sanct. cap. 15. For whereas all the inherent grace of the human nature of Christ, and all the holy obedience which proceeded from it, was consequent in order of nature unto this union, and an effect of it, they could in no sense be the meritorious or procuring causes of it; it was of grace.

(2.) It is used also by many and designed to express the peculiar dignity of the human nature of Christ. This is that wherein no creature is participant, nor ever shall be unto eternity. This is the fundamental privilege of the human nature of Christ, which all others, even unto his eternal glory, proceed from, and are resolved into.

(3.) The glorious meetness and ability of the person of Christ, for and unto all the acts and duties of his mediatory office. For they are all resolved into the union of his natures in the same person, without which not one of them could be performed unto the benefit of the church. And this is that grace of our Lord Jesus Christ,' which renders him so glorious and amiable unto believers. Unto them that believe he is precious.'

The common prevalent expression of it at present in the church is the hypostatical union; that is, the union of the divine and human nature in the person of the Son of God, the human nature having no personality nor subsistence of its own.

With respect unto this union, the name of Christ is called Wonderful,' as that which hath the pre-eminence in all the effects of divine wisdom. And it is a singular effect