as it is in God; but of imperfections we have the daily experience in ourselves, and therefore know the better how to abstract them all from our apprehensions of the Deity: and therefore the clearest apprehension, that, as yet, we can have of him, is by the removal of all imperfections from him. I cannot conceive, though I verily believe it, how he is of himself infinitely holy, just, and powerful; yet I can easily conceive, how he is without body, parts, or passions; that he is not such a one as I am, who have a body, and compounded of several parts, and subject to all passions but whatsoever he is in himself, be sure he is infinitely above such imperfections as these are.

I. FIRST, therefore, here it is said, he is without body',' that is, he is not made up of any material substance, but is a spirit, incorruptible, intangible, invisible, and indivisible, that cannot be seen, felt, or heard by bodily senses, nor corrupted or divided by any means whatsoever. Of whom, therefore, we are not to frame any picture or image in our minds, but are still to apprehend him only as a God incomprehensible; and if whilst we are meditating upon him, any bodily shape presents itself to our thoughts, we are to remove it from him we are thinking of, and conceive of him as without body; and

II. SECONDLY,' without parts;' that is, without all mixture or composition whatsoever; whether of matter and form, as a man is compounded of soul and body; or of subject and accident, as a wise man of wisdom and a man;

f How God is said to be incorporeal or without body, Justin Martyr tells us; Καὶ τὸ θεῖόν φαμεν εἶναι ἀσώματον, οὐχ ὅτι ἐστιν ἀσώματον· (ἐπέκεινα γὰρ ἐστὶν ὁ Θεὸς τῇ αὐτοῦ οὐσίᾳ, ὥσπερ τοῦ σώματος, ἕντως καὶ τοῦ ἀσωμάτου, ὡς ἑκατέρου τοῦ των υπάρχων δημιούργος· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐποίησεν ὁ Θεὸς ἃ αὐτὸς ὑπάρχει) ἀλλ ̓ ὥσπερ εἰώθαμεν, ἐν τοῖς παρ ̓ ἡμῖν τιμιωτέροις ὑλικοῖς ἀεὶ γεραίρειν τὸ θεῖον, οὕτως καὶ ἐν τοῖς ὀνόμασιν ουχ' ὣς τοῦ Θεοῦ τούτων δεομενου, ἀλλ ̓ ἡμῶν τὴν περὶ αὐτοῦ ἔννοιαν αὐτοῖς ἐνδεικνυμένων. Τούτῳ ουν τῷ τρόπῳ ὀνομάζομεν αὐτὸν ἀσώματον, καὶ τοὶ εἰδότες αὐτὸν ἐπέκεινα ὑπάρχοντα τοῦ ἀσωμάτου, ὣς τόυτου δημιουργόν.—Justin. Paris. 1636. In Resp. ad Quest. 2. ad Grac. p. 203. C. And presently after, ὡσαύτως δὲ ἐπειδὴ τὸ μὴ κρατεῖσθαι ὑπὸ τινὸς τοῦ κρατεῖσθαι τιμιώτερόν ἐστιν, διὰ τοῦτο καλοῦμεν αὐτὸν ασώματον. Ibid. p. 204. And Basil. Οὐ τοίνυν δυνατὸν πνεῦμα ἀκουσαντα περιγεγραμμενην φύσιν ἐντυπῶσαι διανοιᾳ, ἣ τροπαῖς καὶ ἀλλοιώσεσιν ὑποκειμενην, ἢ ὅλως ὁμοίαν τῇ κτίσει· αλλὰ πρὸς τὸ ἀνωτάτω ταῖς ἐννοίαις χωροῦντα, νοερὰν οὐσία ἐπάναγκες ἐννοεῖν, ἄπειρον κατα δυναμιν, μεγέθει απεριόριστον, χρόνοις ἢ αἰῶσιν ἀμέτρητον, ἄφθονον ὧν ἔχει καλῶν.— Basil. de Spir. S. tom. ii. cap. 9. p. 311. C. Par. 1637.

or of act and power, as every thing, that is not, but may be, or is, but may not be; or of.' genus' and 'differentia,' as when a specifical difference restrains a general nature to a certain species contained under it: or lastly, of' esse' and 'esssentia,' as when a thing is said to be by its essence. When God is said to be without parts, all these compositions are removed from him, or denied to him, yea, the last and subtlest of them all: so that God cannot be said to be by his essence, for then his essence would be but one thing, and his being another: so that he cannot be said to be by his essence, but to be essence itself. And therefore when we conceive of God, we are not to apprehend him as made up of several parts, but as one pure, simple, divine essence, without body, parts: yea, and

III. THIRDLY,' without passions' too; that is, not subject to, nor capable of those passions of love, joy, hatred, grief, anger, and the like, as they daily arise in us imperfect creatures; but he is always the same unmoveable, unchangeable, impassible God: and therefore, in all our contemplations of his divine essence, we are not to conceive of him as one passionately rejoicing in, or grieving for any thing whatsoever, as we do, but as a pure and perfect essence, as without body and without parts, so without passions too; and such contemplations as these are, both Scripture and reason will give us warrant for.

1. Confirmation from SCRIPTURE. And here we have three things to search for the truth of, in the word of God. First, that God is without body; secondly, without parts; thirdly, without passions.

(1.) As for the first, that he is without body, the Scripture clearly asserteth it, when it saith," God is a Spirit," John, iv. 24. and a "Spirit hath not flesh and bones," as body hath, as our Saviour (who better knew the nature of a spirit than all our sceptical philosophers, that attribute matter to it, ever did, or can do,) expressly tells us, Luke, xxiv. 39. And to this purpose it is said, "To whom then will ye liken God, or what likeness will ye compare unto him?" Isaiah, xl. 18. Whereas if God had a body, we might easily answer the prophet; he is of such or such a likeness or shape, for every body must have some shape or other. And therefore also doth Moses counsel the

Israelites, that they do not make any graven image, any picture or similitude of Gods, Deut. iv. 12, 15-18. Which the apostle reproves the Romans for, Rom. i. 23.

(2.) Secondly, that he is without parts the same Scriptures, that tell us he is without a body, do clearly prove, if we understand quantitative or extensive parts. And that he is without all manner of parts whatsoever, the name Jehovah he gives unto himself, Gen. xv. 7. Amos, ix. 6. and which he will not suffer to be given to any creature, plainly imports, signifying essence in the most pure, simple, and abstracted notion that possibly can be, from an Hebrew root signifying' to be;' and so denotes such an essence, as is of itself pure and perfect essence, which God could not be, had he any parts whatsoever, for then he would have his essence from them, and so not be of himself, nor essence itself.

(3.) Lastly, that he is without passions, as well as without either body or parts, the same name Jehovah plainly imports: for if he be such a pure essence, yea, essence itself, it is impossible he should be subject to any passions. But it appears more clearly from those words, "God is not a man that he should lie, neither the son of man that he should repent," Num. xxiii. 19. But most clearly of all from Acts, xiv. 14, 15. where Paul and Barnabas, to convince the people at Lystra that they were not gods, but men, tell them, they were "men of like passions "," or men

h

Upon this place it is that the Jews build the third article of their

.i. e אני מאמין באמונה שלמה אינו גוף ולא ישיגוהו משיגי הגוף ואין לו שום רמו כלל,faith

'I perfectly believe that the Creator is not a body, neither can he be comprehended by any bodily comprehensions, neither is there any thing like unto him.' V. R. Joseph Albo in py, et Maim. in Sanh. cap. 10.

For so I find the Syriac translate the Greek words, xai iμeïs ôμoomaðsí¢

louer iμïv ävôgwwos, by Los feces

L, Et nos homines sumus passionibus obnoxii sicut et vos ;' clearly implying, that if they were gods, to whom such worship might justly be performed, they would not have been subject to such passions as men are. So where it is said, Ηλίας ἄνθρωπος ἦν ὁμοιοπαθὴς ἡμῖν; the same render it, Joa D),

erat homo passionibus obnoxius sicut nos.' James, v. 17. As if he should have said, Elias was a man as well as we, as we may see, in that he was subject to passions as well as we; which, if he had been God, or any thing more than a man, he would not have been: yet he prayed and prevailed with God, and why may not we?

subject to passions, as well as they. And St. James useth the same argument to prove that Elias was a man too, James, v. 17. Now had God been subject to passions, as well as men, the apostles would have been much overseen in their logic, using an argument that would make more against them than for them.

I know the anthropomorphitæ,' that fancied God to have a body, parts, and passions like to us, pretend much to Scripture, to ground this their heresy upon; because in Scripture God is often said to have eyes, ears, a mouth, feet, bowels, back parts, and also to love, hate, mourn, rejoice, be angry, and the like. And it is true, such things as these were frequently attributed in Holy Scripture to the Great God, but improperly, by a figure the schoolmen call anthropopatheia :' and the reason is because should God speak always of himself, as he is in himself, we should not be able to understand him therefore doth God fit his expressions to our apprehensions; he speaks of things, not so much as they are in themselves, but as we are able to conceive of them. Therefore when he would make known himself to us, he speaks as a nurse to a child, who utters not her mind in complete sentences, but stammers it out in broken language, fitted to the shallow capacity of its tender years. Thus, I say, doth God speak in broken and imperfect language to us, making use of the names that we give to the several parts of our bodies, and passions of our minds, to signify the divine properties, which are in himself, yea, which are himself, or their effects. Thus he useth the

i Sed hæc rursum non secundùm errorem Judæorum, vel etiam ex nostris nonnullorum, qui cum illis errant: eatenus dicimus, ut quoniam bumana fragilitas aliter audire de Deo non potest, nisi ut sibi res ipsa et vocabula nota sunt, idcirco etiam membris hæc nostris similibus et habitu humano Deum agere sentiamus. Alienum hoc est ab ecclesiasticâ fide. Sed hoc ipsum, quod vel aspirat in corde uniuscujusque sanctorum, vel sonum vocis pervenire ad aures ejus facit, locutus homini Deus dicitur. Sic et cùm nota sibi esse indicat quæ unusquisque vel loquitur, vel agit, audîsse se dicit; et cùm aliquid injustum geri à nobis indicat, irasci se dicit: cùm beneficiis suis ingratos nos arguit, pœnitere se dicit: indicans quidem hæc his affectibus, qui hominibus in usu sunt. - Orig. Hom. 3. in Gen. p. 9. B. Par. 1619. Membra corporea, et humanæ passiones, seu affectus, Deo attributa, semper incorporaliter significant, et ut plurimum secundùm effectum sui generis intelligi debent.-Marlorat.

word. eye,' to signify his omniscience, because the eye is that part of our body, whereby we see any thing: the word hand' to express his power, because it is that whereby we do any thing; and thus doth he use the words, rejoicing, grieving, loving, hating, repenting,' and the like, to denote something in him, which we cannot apprehend, but by the dark resemblance that these passions have unto it, and also to stir up the same passions in us, when the same occasions are offered to us. His love denotes his eternal purpose and decree to reward virtue: his hatred and anger, his eternal purpose and decree to punish vice: and so his repentance doth not signify any change in his essence or decree, but only in his actions mutably decreed from eternity, that is, decreed to be changed upon such and such occasions and conditions'. And therefore, though these things be spoken after the manner of men, we are to understand them as becomes the majesty of God.

2. Confirmation from REASON. -I shall go on in the same method in producing reasons, as I did in producing Scriptures for the proof of this truth. First, therefore, that God is without body,' must needs be true, for otherwise he would be finite, and so not God; for every body hath dimensions, every one of which is finite, and therefore cannot amongst them make up an infinite body or suppose we should fancy him to have a body infinite like himself, this body must be either really the same with himself, and so he must be nothing but a body, (it being impossible that a body and spirit should be the same, or make one compounded essence) and so not the first, nor indeed any cause at all; a mere body or matter being of itself incapable of action or else it must be really distinct from him, and so supposing the body to be infinite, either he must not be infinite, or else there must be two infinites, both of which I

* Οὐκοῦν ἐπὶ Θεοῦ μεταμέλεια οικονομίας ἐστὶ μεταβολή. Penitentia Dei est οἰκονομίας, i. e. dispensationis mutatio. — Theodoret. Quæst. 50. in Gen. Par 1642. Pœnitentia Dei non est post errorem, sed pœnitentia Dei dicitur rerum sub ejus potestate constitutarum inopinata mutatio. Alioqui certè Deum pœnitere posse negatur. 1 Sam. xv. 29.-August.

This was Athanasius's golden rule, always to be used when parts or passions are attributed unto God, Ταῦτα ἀνθρωποπαθῶς μὲν λέγονται, θεοπροπῶς

δὲ νοοῦνται.