will, as it were, not be able to live but amidst such a Father of spirits, as the Father of glory; and that glory glory. Place is conservative of the body placed in it, by which is purely spiritual, hath most in it of his nature and its suitableness there. Indeed every created being (inas-image: as beams but in the next descent from the body of much as it is not self-sufficient, and is obliged to fetch in the sun. This is his unvailed face, and emphatically, the continual refreshings from without) must always have divine likeness. Again, things are as the faculties which somewhat suitable to itself to converse with, or it presently they are to exercise and satisfy; this glory must exercise languishes. By such a harmony of actives and passives, and satisfy the noblest faculty, of the most noble and exthe world consists and holds together. The least defect cellent creature. Intellectual nature, in the highest imthereof then, is least of all supposable in the state of bless-provement 'tis capable of in a creature, must here be graedness. The rays of such a glory have often shone down-tified to the uttermost; the most enlarged contemplative into this lower world. Such a glory we know showed itself power of an immortal spirit finds that wherein termiupon the Mount Sinai; afterwards often about the taber-nates here, with a most contentful acquiescence. 'Tis true nacle, and in the temple; such a glory appeared at our it must be understood not totally to exceed the capacity Saviour's birth, baptism, and transfiguration; and will do of a creature, but it must fully come up to it. Should it at his expected appearance; which leaves it no unimagin- quite transcend the sphere of created nature, and surpass able thing to us, and shows how facile it is to God to (do the model of a human understanding, (as the Divine glory that which will then be, in some sort, necessary) create a undoubtedly would, did not God consider us in the manner glory meet for the entertainment and gratification of any of exhibiting i to our view,) it would confound, not satsuch faculty, as he shall then continue in being. But, isfy. A creature even in glory is still a creature, and must 2. The intellectual glory, that which perfected spirits be treated as such. After the blessed God hath elevated shall eternally please themselves to behold, calls for our it to the highest pitch, he must infinitely condescend; it more especial consideration. This is the glory that ex- cannot otherwise know or converse with him. He must celleth, hyperbolical glory, as that expression imports; such, accommodate his glory to the weaker eye, the fainter and as in comparison whereof, the other is said to be no glory: more languid apprehensions, of a poor finite thing. I had as the apostle speaks, comparing the glory of the legal with almost said, nothing; for what is any creature, yea, the that of the evangelical dispensation; where the former was, whole creation in its best state, compared with the I AM, we must remember, chiefly a sensible glory, the glory that the being (as he justly appropriates to himself that name) shone upon Mount Sinai; the latter a purely spiritual the All in All? We must be careful then to settle in our glory; and surely, if the mere preludes of this glory, the own thought such a state of this glory, (in forming that primordia, the beginnings of it, the glory-yet shining but indeterminate notion we have now of it,) as may render it through a glass, (as he there also speaks of this glory,) were (though confessedly above the measure of our present unso hyperbolically glorious, what will it be in its highest derstandings as to a distinct knowledge of it) not maniexallation, in its perfected state ?k The apostle cannot festly incompetent to any created understanding whatsospeak of that, but with hyperbole upon hyperbole in the ever, and as may speak us duly shy of ascribing a deity to next chapter. As though he would heap up words as a worm, of affixing any thing to the creature which shall high as heaven to reach it, and give a just account of it. be found agreeing to the b essed God himself alone. Their Things are as their next originals. This glory more im- expressions therefore who over-magnify (even deify) the mediately rays forth from God, and more nearly represents creature assumed into glory, must be heard and read with him. 'Tis his more genuine production. He is styled the caution and abhorrency, as the high-swelling words of Father of glory: every thing that is glorious is some way blasphemous vanity." Is it not enough that perishing like him, and bears his image. But he is as well them wretches, that were within one hand's breadth of hell, are

n Not being willing to trouble a discourse wholly of another nature and design with any thing of controversy, I have chosen only to annex a marginal digression, wherein somewhat to animadvert upon the over-bold disputes and definitions of the scholastic generation, touching what we have now under consideration Some of whose writings seem the very springs of the putid conceits (there not wanting those, that are officions enough to serve the illiterate, in accommodating things of that kind to their genius and language) so greedily imbibed by modern enthusiasts.

"Tis a question much agitated among the school-men, Whether the Divine essence be exhibited to the view of the blessed in heaven, in itself immedi ately, or by the intervention of any created likeness or similitude? Had it been agreed to forbear looking within this vail, (the rude attempt whereof, rather rends than draws it aside, and to shut up all discourse of this kind) in a modest awful silence; or had the adventures some have made been foolish only, not pernicious, this present labour had been spared. But when men speak of things above their reach, not to no purpose barely, but to very bad, what they say ought to be considered. The Divine essence, say the Thomists, (and the Scotists here disagree not,) is itself immediately united to the intellect of the blessed in ratione Speciei intelligibilis, so as there is no place for any intervening likeness, or representation. Ipsa Divina essentia est, quæ videtur et quo videtur. Thom. Sum prima parte, q. 12. Art. 2. 3. contr. Gentes, c. 15. Now they assert concerning the species intelligibiles, in general, that they have not Locum objecti, intellectionem terminantes; (which they make the place and office of the verbum mentis per intellectionem productum;) but forma tantum et actus primi; and that the understanding so acts by then, as fire by its proper form. Thom. Sum. prima parte, q. 85. Art. 2. (the contrary whereto is asserted by Scotus in 1. Sentent. distinct. 3. q. 6.) Yea, and Ca Jet, affirms 1. p. q. 76. Art. 2. That the intellect and the intelligible species are more one than the matter and form in the compositum, For, saith he, (or to that purpose, not having him now at hand.) the matter is not turned into the form, nor e contra, but the intellect, which is in itself mere power, doth, in genere intelligibili, turn into its very intelligible object; and the intelligible object itself is after a certain manner imbibed in the intellect. So Le desma de Divin perfect. q. 3. Art. 5. unum transit in aliud, ex quo sequitur, quod unum sit aliud. And hence, say they, applying this doctrine to the present purpose, et secundum istum modum, in conjunctione illa ineffabili dirina essentiæ cum intellectu creato, fit unum agens integrum, scil intellectus creatus factus Deus mirabili modo. Intellectus in visione beatifica. est potentia jam deificata, per lumen gloriæ. Cajet. prima parte. q. 12. Art. 2. ex Ledes. q. 8. Art. 8. For besides this immedi ate union of the Divine essence itself with the intellect, they assert a lumen glorie, an accident superadded, without which the vision cannot be performed which additional the Scotists reject. Some, though they admit it, think the vision may be without it, and that it doth not implicare contradictionem, visionem beatificam fieri sine lumine gloriæ, cum solo speciali De auxilio, quod item asserunt multi ex scholasticis, Palud. in 4. dist. 49. 9. 1. Art. 3. Concl. 2. Thom. de Argent. q. 2. Art. 1. Major. q. 4. Henr. quolibet. 7. Zumel. 1. p. q. 12. Art. 5. disp. 2. concl. 3. Ita Onuphr. de vir tute pænitentia. Whether there be any verbum creatum, the product of intellection, the Thomists are themselves divided. Their more common opinion is, that there is none. as Ledesma assures us; telling us also his reason, why he conceives there can be none. Beati non formant verbum in videndo

Deo, sed plus vident quam verbo creato dicere possunt- nam beatus per visionem beatam quamvis non videat infinite videt tamen infinitum -(which is their great_argument against any intelligible specics :) and he further adds. sicut visio Dei, que est in ipso Deo, habet pro principio et specie intelligibili ipsam divinam Essentiam, et pro termino ipsam Divinam Essentiam; sic visio beatorum est ita supernaturalis, et dirini ordinis, et participatio divine visionis ita perfecta, ut ipsa etiam habeat pro principio et specic intelligibili, dirinam Essentiam, et pro termino sive verbo producto, ipsamet divinam Essentiam. So that the principal and term of this vision are owned to be nothing else but the simple Divine essence. Concerning the formal act itself, it is much disputed, whether the creature's intellect do at all effectually concur to it, or whether God himself be not the only efficient or agent in this vision. Some stick not to affirm the latter, Marsil. in 3. q. 1. Palud in 4. dist. 49. 9. 1. Art. 2. (referente Lederma.) and say plainly, that the action of the inferior agent wholly ceases, and the superior only acts; the same thing that D. M. Causabon in his Enthusiasm charges one Maximus with, who in a book entitled ɛpaλata od tka writes this: την άμεσον λαβων ενωσιν προς τον θεόν ο νυς την του νόειν και νοείσθαι TaTeXos dovaμiv exei xolatovai, That the soul taken into immediate union with God, loses all its knowing power: (though this be not distinct ively spoken of the state of glory:) and what doth this amount to? but that while they are eagerly contending about the saints' blessedness, and too curiously labouring to explicate the manner of their seeing God, they unawares destroy the subject of the question, and deny that they see him at all; and so upon the whole, dispute themselves into a worse than paganish infidelity. And even the rest, that agree in the sense of the passages above recited will not be easily able to avoid the charge of as intolerable consequences which it is my business here only to discover, and not to determine any thing in this controversy, whiles I tax the too much boldness of others, who adventure it. And here not to insist on the absurdity of what they say concerning the intelligible species in general, let it be considered. 1. That the Diire essence is said to be united to the intellect of the blessed, as an intelligible srecies. 2. That the intelligible species, in the business of intellection, and the intellect, become one another; do not remain distinct things united but are identified 3. That bence in understanding God, the intellect is deified and becomes God, which naturally follows from the two former, and is moreover expressly asserted in plain words. What need is there to press this doctrine with hard consequences? or how can it look worse than it doth already, with its own natural face? Nor can I apprehend which way it should be made look better. For should it lay claim to that favour. to be understood according to the usual sense of the peripatetic maxim, intellectus, intelligendo, sit omnia; it will be found manifestly to have precluded itself. That maxim is went to be understood thus: That the intellect becomes that which it understanda representative, by putting on the species or likeness of its object, the representation of it. For instance, when I form in my mind the notion of a mountain, my understanding becomes an ideal or spiritual mountain: it becomes that species (which is liable to more exception too than I shall now insist on, and looks more like the language of a poet than a philosopher) that is now formed there and not the material mountain itself But how shall this assertion, The understanding, by its act of understanding God. becomes God, be capable of that interpretation, i. e. It becomes his likeness, his idea, his representation now formed in it, when any such intervening likeness or representation is utterly denied and that supposed species is said to be the simple Divine essenco itself; and if the Divine essence itself be that species by which 'tis understood, will it not follow from that other Aristotelian ariom, (which with them must signify as much as a text from Saint Paul,) scibile et scientia sunt idem:

200

THE BLESSEDNESS OF THE RIGHTEOUS.

saved, except they be also deified too? that they become happy, unless they also become gods? The distance even of a glorified creature from the glorious God, is still infinitely greater, than between it and the silliest worm, the minutest atom of dust.

And by how much more we shall then know of his glory, so much more shall we understand that distance. Yet as he shall then enlarge the capacity of the soul he glorifies to a very vast comprehension, so shall the exhibition of his glory to it be fully adequate to its most enlarged capacity. They are as yet but obscure glimmerings we can have of this glory; but so far as, without too bold curiosity, we may, and wherein Scripture light will give us any pre-apprehension of it, let us consider awhile the naWe cannot indeed consider ture and the excellency of it. these separately; for we can no sooner understand it to be glory, than we conceive it excellent: glory, in the proper notion of it, being nothing else but resplendent excellency, the lustre of excellency, or real worth made conspicuous. Yet as there is an excellency conceivable in the nature of it, that excellency whereof it is the splendour and brightness; so we must conceive a peculiar excellency of that very radiation, that splendour itself, wherewith it shines unto blessed souls. In its very nature it is the brightness of divine excellencies; in its present appearance, it shines in the highest excellency of that brightness; in its nature it excelleth all things else; in its present exhibition, compared with all its former radiations, it excelleth itself.

As to the nature of this glory, 'tis nothing else but the
conspicuous lustre of divine perfections. We can only
guide our present conceptions of it, by the discovery God
hath already given us of himself, in those several excel-
lencies of his being, the great attributes that are convertible
and one with him. When Moses besought him for a sight
of his glory, he answers him with this, "I will proclaim
my name before thee." His name, we know, is the col-
The notion therefore we can
lection of his attributes.
hence form of this glory, is only such as we may have of
a large volume by a brief synopsis or table; of a magni-
ficent fabric, by a small model or platform; a spacious
country, by a little landscape. He hath here given us a
true representation of himself, not a full; such as will se-
eure our apprehensions, being guided thereby, from error,
not from ignorance. So as they swerve not in apprehending
this glory, though they still fall short. We can now apply
our minds to contemplate the several perfections which the
blessed God assumes to himself, and whereby he describes
to us his own being; and can in our thoughts attribute
them all to him, though we have still but low defective
conceptions of each one. As if we could at a distance
distinguish the streets and houses of a great city; but
every one appears to us much less than it is. We can ap-

That our very knowledge of God must be God too? or would they disown that
maxim, sure when once the faculty is supposed deified, the act immanent in it
cannot be a created accident: nor can that maxim (understood of the scibile
representativum, or the species scibilis) be denied by them. And sure if the
saints' knowledge of God, the likeness of him in their minds, be God; their
holiness, the likeness of him in their hearts, must be so too. How absurd then
would it be to use that scripture language, and speak of these under the
names of God's image or likeness, when similitude and identity are notions
80 vastly disagreeing: and since a saints' knowledge and holiness here and in
heaven differ but in degree: they can be here on earth, nothing but God dwell-
ing in them. And supposing that Scotus have better defended than his ad-
versaries impunged the real identity of the soul and its faculties, that must be
deified too. However, what could be imagined more absurd, than that the
substance of the soul should be a creature and its faculty God? Whence, then,
do we think that modern Familists have fetched their admired nonsense?
Whom bave they had their original instructors? or who have taught them
that brave, magnificent language of being Godded with God, and Christed
with Christ, but these? Nor, sure, need they blush to be found guilty of so pro-
foundly learned inconsistencies, or to speak absurdly after such patrons. And
what should occasion these men so to involve themselves I cannot find or di-
vine more than this, that they were not able to fasten upon any more tolerable
sense of the word K 05, 1 Cor. xiii. 12. 1 John iii. 2. but taking that in its
highest pitch of significancy, all their arguments are generally levelled at this
mark, to prove that no created species can possibly represent God sicuti est,
and thence infer, that he cannot be seen by any created species in the glorified
state, where he is to be seen sicuti est. But could we content ourselves with
a modest interpretation of these words, and understand them to speak not of a
parity but of a similitude only, between God's knowledge and ours, nor of an
absolute omnimodous similitude, but comparative only; that is, that comparing
our future with our present state, the former shall so far excel this, that in
comparison thereof it may be said to be a knowing of God as we are known,
and as he is; insomuch as our future knowledge of him shall approach so un-
speakably nearer to his most perfect knowledge of us, and the truth of the
thing, than our present knowledge doth or can: by such an interpreta-
For admit that no species
tion we are cast upon no such difficulties.
can represent God as he is in the highest sense of these words; yet sure in
the same sense wherein he can be seen by us as he is, be may be repre
sented to us as he is. And what can be more frivolous than that fore-recited

| prehend somewhat of whatsoever he reveals to be in him-
self; yet when all is done, how little a portion do we take
up of him! Our thoughts are empty and languid, strait
Yet so far as our apprehensions can correspond to the
and narrow, such as diminish and limit the Holy One.
discovery he affords us of his several excellencies, we have
a present view of the Divine glory. Do but strictly and
distinctly survey the many perfections comprehended in
his name, then gather them up, and consider how glorious
he is! Conceive one glory resulting from substantial
wisdom, goodness, power, truth, justice, holiness, that is,
This is the glory
beaming forth from him who is all these by his very es-
sence, necessarily, originally, infinitely, eternally, with
whatsoever else is truly a perfection.
blessed souls shall behold for ever.
For the excellency of it, 'tis called by way of discrimi-
nation, "The excellent glory." There was glory put
upon Christ in the transfiguration; of which, when the
apostle speaks, having occasion to mention withal the glory
of heaven itself, from whence the voice came; he adds to
this latter, the distinguishing note of the excellent. He
himself was eye-witness of the honour, and majesty, and
glory, which the Lord Jesus then received; but beyond
all this, the glory from whence the voice came, was the
Pexcellent or stately glory, as the word imports. 'Tis a
great intimation how excellent a glory this is, that 'tis said
to be a glory yet to be revealed; as if it had been said,
to your view, there is still somewhat undiscovered, some-
whatever appearances of the Divine glories are now offered
what behind the curtain, that will outshine all. You have
not seen so much, but you are still to expect unspeakably
more. Glory is then to shine in its noon-day strength and
vigour: 'tis then in its meridian. Here, the riches of
glory are to be displayed, certain treasures of glory, the
plenitude and magnificence of glory. We are here to see
him as he is; to know him as we are known of him.
Certainly, the display of himself, the rays of his discovered
excellency, must hold proportion with that vision, and be
therefore exceeding glorious. 'Tis the glory Christ had
with the Father before the foundations of the world were
laid; into the vision and communion whereof holy souls
shall now be taken, according as their capacities can ad-
mit: that wherewithal his great achievements and high
merits shall be rewarded eternally; that wherewith he is
to be glorified in heaven, in compensation of having glo-
rified his Father on earth, and finished the work whereto
"Tis in sum, and in the language of the text, the
he was appointed. This cannot but be a most transcendent
glory.
glory of God's own face, his most aspectable, conspicuous
glory. Whose transforming beams are productive of the
glory impressed, the next ingredient into this blessedness,
which will presently come to be spoken of, after we have
given you some short account of,

reasoning to the contrary? "There can be no created representation of God
(sicuti est) adequate to the vision the blessed have of him; but they see more
than any created representation can contain, for they see infinitum, though
not infinite. For how must we understand the infinitum they are said to
see? Materially or formally? Must we understand by it him that is infinite
nite too If the former only, do not saints on earth see (viz. mentally, which
only, or as he is infinite? If it be said the latter, that is to say they see int
is the vision we are speaking of) him who is infinite, in their present state,
where it is acknowledged the knowledge is by species.

Yet would I not hence conclude that the knowledge saints shall have of God hereafter shall be by species; for my design in all this is but to discover the measure of God's revelation, and the ducture of clear and unentangled reason. vanity of too positive and definitive conceptions concerning it, beyond the species or images of the things known. So the intellect is not really turned All knowledge hath been thought to be by assimilation, i. e. by receiving the into the things which it understands, but only receives their species, wherewith it is united so closely, that it is therefore said to be like to them. Virtuosi of France, confer. 65.

One way or other it hath been judged necessary the mind should be furnished with such images of the thing it is said to understand; which therefore some common intelligence; others a particular genius. So indispensably necessary have thought connate; others supplied by sense totally; others by a separate it hath been reckoned unto intellection, that the office of furnishing the mind intellectus agens; which some have thought to be God himself; others one with the images of the things to be understood, should be performed by one or other. If any clearer explication can be given, or better way assigned, of the soul's knowing things, it cannot but be welcome to rational men. But I see no necessity or reason it should have a specifically distinct way of selves such a one as to that other state, as is altogether unaccountable and knowing here and in heaven. Much less that we should imagine to our silent, than on pretence of any mysteriousness in the things we discourse of, capable of no rational explication; and reckon it much more becoming to be to talk absurdly and unintelligibly about them. A confessed ignorance in this case is becoming, to say with that great apostle, It doth not appear what we shall be; but to conclude and define such matters, is surely povely wap o dei Η Μεγαλόπρεπης. John avi povεLV.

o 2 Pet. i. 17.
q 1 Pet. iv. 13.

CHAPTER IV.

The second ingredient into this blessedness considered, Assimilation to God, or his glory imprest. Wherein it cousists, discovered in sundry propositions. The third ingredient. The satisfaction and pleasure which results, stated and opened.

AND now, upon this vision of the blessed face of God, next follows, in the order of discourse,

2. The act of beholding: the vision or intuition itself, by which intervening the impression is made. Glory seems to carry in it a peculiar respect to the visive power; (whether corporeal or mental, as it is itself of the one kind or the other;) 'tis something to be contemplated, to be looked upon. And being to transmit an impression and consequent pleasure to another subject, it must necessarily be so, it can neither transform nor satisfy but as it is beheld. And here the sensitive intuition I shall not insist on, as being less intended in the text, and the discourse of it less suitable to such as with a spiritual mind and design set themselves to inquire into the nature of the saints' blessedness. Yet, as this is the most noble, comprehensive, quick, and sprightly sense, so is the act of it more considerable, in the matter of blessedness, than any other of the outward man, and the most perfect imitation of the act of the mind; whence also this so often borrows the name of the other, and is called seeing. 'Tis an act indeed very proper and pertinent to a state of glory. By how much more any sensible object is glorious, (supposing the sensorium to be duly disposed and fortified, as must be here supposed,) so much is it the fitter object of sight; hence when we would express a glorious object, we call it conspicuous; and the less glorious or more obscure any thing is, the less visible it is, and the nearer it approaches to invisibility; whence that saying in the common phi-God, as to behold it; as well as to have the Divine likeness losophy, "To see blackness is to see nothing." Whatsoever a glorified eye, replenished with a heavenly vitality and vigour, can fetch in from the many glorified objects that encompass it, we must suppose to concur to this blessedness. Now is the eye satisfied with seeing, which be

fore never could.

The soul's perfect assimilation unto that revealed glory, or its participation thereof; (touching the order the things themselves have to one another, there will be consideration had in its proper place ;) and this also must be considered as a distinct and necessary ingredient into the state of Distinct it is, for though blessedness we are treating of. the vision now spoken of doth include a certain kind of assimilation in it, as all vision doth, being only a reception of the species or likeness of the object seen; this assimilation we are to speak of, is of a very different kind. That, is such as affects only the visive and cognitive power, and that not with a real change, but intentional only, nor for longer continuance than the act of seeing lasts; but this, is total, real, and permanent. And surely it is of equal necessity to the soul's blessedness, to partake the glory of imprest upon it, as represented to it. After so contagious and overspreading a depravation as sin hath diffused through all its powers, it can never be happy without a change of its very crasis and temper throughout. A diseased, ulcerous body would take little felicity in gay and glorious sights: no more would all the glory of heaven signify to a sick, deformed, self-loathing soul.

It must therefore be all glorious within, have the Divine

transfused and wrought into it. This is the blessed work begun in regeneration; but how far it is from being perfected, we may soon find by considering, how far short we are of being satisfied in our present state, even in the contemplation of the highest and most excellent objects. How tasteless to our souls are the thoughts of God! How little pleasure do we take in viewing over his glorious attributes! the most acknowledged and adorable excellencies of his being! And whereunto can we impute it but to this, that our spirits are not yet sufficiently connaturalized to them? Their likeness is not enough deeply instamped on our souls. Nor will this be, till we awake. When we see better, we shall become better: when he appears, we shall But do we

But 'tis intellectual sight we are chiefly to consider here, that whereby we see him that is invisible, and ap-nature more perfectly communicated, the likeness of God proach the inaccessible light. The word here used, some critics tell us, more usually signifies the sight of the mind. And then, not a casual, superficial glancing at a thing, but contemplation, a studious, designed viewing of a thing when we solemnly compose and apply ourselves thereto; or the vision of prophets, or such as have things discovered to them by divine revelation, (thence called chozim, seers,) which imports (though not a previous design, yet) no less intention of mind in the act itself. And so it more fitly expresses that knowledge which we have, not by discourse and reasoning out of one thing from another, but by immediate intuition of what is nakedly, and at once, offered to our view, which is the more proper knowledge of the blessed in heaven. They shall have the glory of God so presented, and their minds so enlarged, as to comprehend much at one view; in which respect they may be said, in a great degree, to know as they are known, inasmuch as the blessed God comprehends all things at once, in one simple act of knowing. Yet that is not to be understood as if the state of glory should exclude all ratiocination, more than our present state doth all intuition; (for first and indemonstrable principles we see by their own light, without illation or argument;) nor can it be inconvenient to admit, that while the knowledge the blessed have of God, is not infinite, there may be use of their discursive faculty with great fruit and pleasure. "Pure intuition of God without any mixture of reasoning, is acknowledged (by such as are apt enough to be over-ascribing to the creature) peculiar to God alone. But as the blessed God shall continually afford (if we may speak of continuity in eternity, which yet we cannot otherwise apprehend) a clear dis covery of himself, so shall the principal exercise and felicity of the blessed soul consist in that less laborious and more pleasant way of knowing, a mere admitting or entertaining of those free beams of voluntary light, by a grateful intuition; which way of knowing, the expression of sight, or beholding, doth most incline to, and that is, we are sure, the ordinary language of Scriptures about this matter.

be like him, for we shall see him as he is.
indeed pretend to such an expectation? Can we think
what God is, and what we are in our present state, and
not confess these words to carry with them an amazing
sound "we shall be like him!" How great a hope is this!
How strange an errand hath the gospel into the world!
How admirable a design! to transform men and make
them like God! Were the dust of the earth turned into
stars in the firmament, were the most stupendous poeti-
cal transformations assured realities; what could equal
the greatness and the wonder of this mighty change? Yea,
and doth not the expectation of it seem as presumptuous,
as the issue itself would be strange ? Is it not an over-hold
desire; too daring a thought; a thing unlawful to be
affected, as it seems impossible to be attained? It must
be acknowledged there is an appearance of high arrogance
in aspiring to this, to be like God. And the very wish or
thought of being so, in all respects, were not to be enter-
tained without horror. 'Tis a matter therefore that requires
some disquisition and explication, wherein that impressed
likeness of God consists, which must concur to the saints'
blessedness. In order hereunto then take the following
propositions:

Prop. 1. There is a sense wherein to be like God altogether impossible, and the very desire of it the mo horrid wickedness. The prophet in the name of Ge charges the proud prince of Tyre with this, as an inexp able arrogance, that he did set his heart as the hearts God; and upon this score challenges and enters the lists w

est proprium igni calefacere et soli illuminare. Ledesm. de divin. perfect. 4 { x Matt. v. 8. Heb. xii. 14.

Art. 7.

b

him: Come, you that would fain be taken for a god, | culiar cognizances of regality; ascend the throne, sway I'll make a sorry god of thee ere I have done; a Because the sceptre, wear the crown, enact laws, &c. There cannot thou hast set thy heart as the heart of God, I will set those be more of dutifulness and observance in the former imiupon thee, that shall draw their swords against the beauty tation than there is of disloyalty and treason in this. A of thy wisdom, and that shall defile thy brightness: And father is pleased to have his son imitate him, within such what! Wilt thou yet say in the hand of him that slayeth limits before mentioned; but, if he will govern the family, thee, I am a god? Thou shalt be a man and no god, in and fill up his room in all relations, this will never be the hand of him that slayeth thee;-I have spoken it, saith endured. the Lord God. He will endure no such imitation of him, as to be rivalled in the point of his Godhead. This is the matter of his jealousy; "They have moved me to jealousy with not-God," so 'tis shortly and more smartly spoken in the original text. And see how he displays his threats and terrors hereupon in the following verses. This was the design and inducement of the first transgression, to be as gods. And indeed all sin may be reduced hither. What else is sin (in the most comprehensive notion) but an undue imitation of God? an exalting of the creature's will into a supremacy, and opposing it as such to the Divine? To sin, is to take upon us, as if we were supreme, and that there were no Lord over us; 'tis to assume to ourselves a deity, as if we were under no law or rule; as he is not under any, but what he is to himself. Herein, to be like God, is the very core and malignity of sin.

2. There is a just and laudable imitation of God, a likeness to him, that is matter of command, praise, and promise, as wherein both the duty, excellency, and blessedness of the reasonable creature doth consist; and which is in some respect inseparable from the nature of man. We are required to be followers of God, as dear children, imitators the word is. David is commended as a man after God's own heart; though but now we saw in another, with what disdain and indignation it was resented, that he did set his heart as the heart of God. The new creature, the new man, the first-fruits, as he is called, the flower of creation, is made after God. Saints expect, upon the assurance of his word, to be more fully like him, as we see in the text, and parallel places. Yea, man was made at first with a concreate similitude to God, which we know was the counsel of heaven, and the result and issue of that counsel, Gen. i. 26, 27. This is evident enough in itself, and needs no more words. But to make a further step in this business, observe next,

3. There can be no allowable imitation of any one, but with an exception as to some peculiarities that may belong to his special station, relation, and other circumstances of the condition in which he is; or with limitation to such things as are of common concernment unto both. 'Tis commonly observed how naturally a people form their manners and fashions to the example of the prince; and there is no well-disposed ruler, but would take it well, to be imitated in things that are of common concernment to him and his subjects, that is, that concern him, not as he is a king, but as he is a man, or a Christian. To behold the transforming power of his own example, where it is such as begets a fair and unreproachful impress; how his virtues circulate, (his justice, temperance, love of religion,) and produce their likeness among his people; 'twill be a glory, and cannot but be resented with some delight. We cast an honour upon them whom we imitate; for we acknowledge an excellency in them, (which is all that honouring imports in the first notion of it,) and that naturally is received with pleasure. But now, should subjects aspire to a likeness to their prince, in the proper appendages and acts of sovereignty; and because he is a glorious king, they will be such too; and assume the pe

a Ezek. xxvili. 6-10.

b Deut. xxxii. 21. c Eph. i. 5. puntal.

e Regis ad exemplum totus componitur orbis.

d Jam. i. 18. Eph. iv. 24.

f Nam facere rect bonus princeps faciendo docet. Cumque sic imperio maximus, exemal major est. Velleius Paterculus, Rom. Hist. 1. 2.

g Inter Deum et creaturam nihil est commune.

h Moltis enim modis dici res possunt similes Deo; aliæ secundum virtutem. et sapientiam, facte; quia in ipso est virtus et apientia non facta; aliæ in quutun solum vivunt, qui ille summe et primo vivit; aliæ in quantum sunt, quia ille sunmè? et primitus est. Aug. 80; quest. p. (mihi) 211. in up

k P. Molinous de cognitione Dei.

Heathens have disdained and declaimed against so unworthy thoughts of GL. Γ' Α' θείον αυτή αόρατον οφθαλμες αρρητον φωνη, αναφες σαρκί, &c. Maximus Tyr. Dissert. 1. The same author warns us to take heed, that we ascribe to God, Μήτε μέγεσθος, μήτε χρώμα, μητε σχημα, μητε αλλο τι υλης πάθος. Ibid.

Unto which purpose is that decantate distich of Homer, 'O" yap σirov, &c. And that saving of Pliny, Qua propter effigiem Dei formamque quærere; Imbecillitatis humana reor, applied by Zanch de operibus Dei. And we

4. There are some things to be found in the blessed God, not so incommunicable and appropriate, but that his creatures may be said to have some participation thereof with him; and so far, to be truly like him. This participation cannot be univocal; as the nature of a living creature in general, is equal in men and brutes; so, it is a self-evident principle, that & nothing can be common to God and an inferior being. Nor is it only an equivocal, a participation of the same name, when the natures signified thereby are altogether diverse; but analogical, inasmuch as the things spoken, under the same names, of God and the creature, have a real likeness, and conveniency in nature with one another: and they are in God, primarily; in the creature, by dependence, and derivation: in him essentially, as being his very essence; in them but as accidents, (many of them,) adventitious to their beings; and so while they cannot be said to be the same things in them, as in him, are fitly said to be his likeness. 5. This likeness, as it is principally found in man, among all the terrestrial creatures; so hath it, in man, for its seat and subject, his soul or spiritual part. The effects of Divine wisdom, power, goodness, are every where visible throughout the whole creation; and as there is no effect, but hath something in it corresponding to its cause, (wherein it was its cause,) so every creature doth, some way or other, represent God. Some in virtues, some in life, some in being only. The material world represents him, as a house the builder; but spiritual beings, as a child the father.i Other creatures (as onek fitly expresses it) carry his footsteps; these, his image; and that, not as drawn with a pencil, which can only express figure and colour; but as represented in a glass, which imitates action and motion. To give the pre-eminence therefore, in this point, to the body of man, was a conceit so gross, that one would wonder how it should obtain, at least in the Christian world.

Yet we find it expressly charged bym St. Augustin upon the anthropomorphites of old, (or melitonians, as he calls them, from one Melito the father of them,) not only, that they imagined God in a human shape, (which was their known conceit,) but that they stated God's image in man, in his body, not his soul. Nor are Van Helmont's fancies, about corporeal likeness, capable of excuse by any thing, but that they were a dream, (as they are fitly styled,) and not likely to impose upon the waking reason of any man.

6. This image or likeness of God in the spirit of man, representing what is communicable in him, is either natural or moral. There is first a natural image of God, in the soul of man, which is inseparable from it; and which it can never n divest itself of. Its very spiritual, immortal nature itself, is a representation of his. Its intellective and elective powers are the image of what we are constrained to conceive under the notion of the same powers in him. Yea, the same understanding, with the memory and will, in one soul, are thought a lively resemblance of the triune Deity. But there is further a similitude of him in respect of moral virtues or perfections answering to may see much of the like import alleged by Natal. Com libi p. 13 Which (by the way) discovers how flatly opposite the idolatry forbidden in the second commandment, is to the light of nature itself Which hath been also the just apology of the ancient patrons of the Christian cause, for the simplicity of their worsiap in this respect; and their not imitating the pompous vanity of pagan image-worship. Ουδε θειας εικόνας υπολαμβάνομεν είναι τα αγαλματα, ατε μορφην αοράτου θεού και ασωμάτου μη διαγραφοντες. Origen contr, Cel sum lib 7 To which purpose see at large, Min. Felix, Quod simulacrum Deo fingam? And surely it is as improvable against the same piece of Christian paganism. The usually assigned differences would easily be shown to be trifling impertim Corpus hominis non animum esse imaginem Dei: Aug. (if it be Augus tine's) lib. de hæresibus. See Dr Charleton of his image of God in man. n Est Dei similitudo quædam, quarn nemo vivens, nisi cum vita exuit: quam habet homo et volens, et nolens, &c. Bernard. de vitâ Solitar.

&c.

nences.

o D. Aug. (fise) lib. 10. de Trinitat.

p Sed est alia, magis Deo propinqua, similitudo, quæ in virtutibus consistit. Bernard.

what we conceive in him, under that notion; his wisdom, | is the first being? the correspondent impression with us, (so far as it hath the nature of a moral virtue,) his mercy, truth, righteousness, holiness, &c. These two kinds or parts (as they may be called) of the Divine impress upon the spirits of men, are distinguished by some (I see not how properly) by the distinct names of image, denoting the former, and similitude the latter; answering, as is thought, to two Hebrew words of the like import; but the things themselves are evidently enough distinct, viz. what perfects the nature of man in genere physico, as he is such a particular being in the universe; and what perfects him, in genere morali, as he is considerable in reference to a law or rule guiding him to blessedness, as his end.

7. 'Tis a likeness to God in respect of those moral ex-form the signature. In that case there would be a likecellencies or perfections, that is especially considerable by ness, aliquatenus, that is, an exact correspondency; but us, in reference to our present purpose; as more immedi- what would then be convex or bulging out in the seal, ately relating to the soul's blessedness in God. By the would be, as we know, concave or hollow in the impres former it hath a potentiality, by the latter a habitude, in sion. Such is the proportion between sovereignty and subreference thereunto. Or (to use terms, more liable to com-jection, between self-fulness and self-emptiness. Whereas mon apprehension) by the former it hath a remoter capa- a similitude to God, in respect of his communicable percity, by the latter a present fitness; or, as the apostle fections, is as that between the face and its picture, where expresses it, is made meet to be partaker of the inheritance no such difference is wont to appear. of the saints in light, i. e. considering this likeness as begun in the soul.