pray to God on his knee or prostrate on his face as the ancient people of God used to doe and the custome of the country obliged him to kneele to the Prince or to fall flat before him upon his face as the custome of the Persians required shall any man be so mad as to say that it is Idolatry to give a petition to a Prince upon his knee Surely if there were no other meanes for other men to discern whether his intent be to honor him as a Prince or as God I should not onely grant but challenge that other men are to rest in doubt of it nay perhaps to take it indeed for Idolatry in case he expresseth not his intent to have been otherwise But where the custome of the place makes that distinction that is requisite between God the Prince and the mans profession conformeth to the opinion and practice of the place to suspect a man of Idolatry in such a case were that degree of madnesse to which the jealous seldome attaine For suppose it were possible that he should indeed and in heart attribute to the Prince the honor due to God alone nay suppose that indeed he intended inwardly in heart to do it as all those did who under the Assyrians Persians Macedonians and Romans did commit true proper Idolatry to their Princes I demand what obligation any man can have to quest on that wherof God onely can be judge remaining secret in the heart but no man can take any harme by so long as it is not professed but kept secret Seeing then that there is no outward Idolatry without professing to give the honour due to God alone to his Creature as no inward Idolatry without secretly giving it and no giving it secretly without an apprehension adjudging the excellence proper to God to his Creature I am of necessity to infer that there is no Idolatry to be committed without an opinion that the Creature is God communicating the Name and Title the Attributes and Perfections and so by consequence the Honour and Reverence due to the Incomparable Excellency of God to his Creature And this is the opinion of all Pagans Hethens or Gentiles whose Idolatry the Scripture as well of the Old as of the New Testament taxeth and the Law maketh a capitall Crime for all Israelites but the Gospel hath converted all Nations besides Gods people from practising For had not the inward sense of all Nations besides Gods ancient people been corrupted by the deceitfulness of sin to the imagining of other Gods besides the true one from that light which convicteth all men of the true God it had not been possible they should have fallen away from the Worship of God to Idols This is that which S. Paul calleth the holding of the truth prisoner in unrighteousnes Rom. I. 18. when those who stood or might stand convict by the light of reason remaining in them that there is but one God Fountain and Ruler of all Creatures to whom all men must give account of their doings were led along by custome to worship the Creature instead of God attributing unto it the excellence of God And how in unrighteousnesse is plain enough to any man that shall consider that the true God searching the inward thoughts of all hearts demandeth account of the most secret intentions of the heart for his own Service whereas those imaginations which men set up to themselves to be honoured for God they are well assured can demand no such account at their hand Or rather whereas the Devill striving to derive upon himself the honour of God by suggesting unto man the Worship of the Creatures which they are known to be incapable of and therfore redoundeth upon him that seduceth them to it is willing to allow those whom he seduceth the liberty to wallow themselves in uncleannesse and unrighteousnesse yea and to accept it at their hands for the Service of their false Gods because being enmity unto God it is indeed his service For it is to be acknowledged that the Gentiles though corrupted with the worship of Idols had in them light enough to discern the true God and his Providence over all thâ—ngs and the account which he will take in another World of all things as S. Paul Rom. I. 18. 13. at large chargeth And Tertullian in his Book de Testimonio animae evidently maintaineth by the Sayings which he produceth frequented in the mouthes of the Gentiles But it is withall to be maintained that being thus bribed by the Devill with license to sin and willing to perswade themselves that they were in the right they whelmed it under the bushell of their Concupiscences perswading themselves that they were righteous enough whilst they served their imaginary Deities Be it therefore resolved that all Idolatry when it is formed for I speak not of the degrees by which mankind might be seduced to it necessarily includeth and presupposeth a conceit of more Gods then one which being once admitted there can no reason be given why not numberlesse as well as more then one To all this I see but one Objection made though from many Texts of Scripture for all comes to this inference That it is Idolatry to worship the only true God in or under an Image representing him to mans remembrance and therefore that the nature of Idolatry requireth not the imagination of more Gods then one This is first argued from the first Idolatry of the Israelites after the Law in making the golden Calf and worshiping it For the people having said when they saw it These are thy Gods or this is thy God O Israel that brought thee out of the Land of Aegypt Aaron addeth To morrow is a Feast to the Lord Exod. XXXII 4. 5. using that name of God which the Scripture never attributeth to any but the true God Whereby it seemeth that Aaron and the people intended to represent the true God that had brought them out of the Land of Aegypt by this Image and to worship him under the same And Jeroboam when he set up his calves proclaimed in the same termes Behold thy Gods or behold thy God understanding the words to be said severally at Bethel and at Dan O Israell which brought thee out of the Land of Egypt And indeed there are so many circumstances seeming to argue that Jeroboam intended not to call a way the people from the worship of the true God that Abenezra the Jewe upon Exodus XXXII and Moncaus a Wallon Gentleman of late years in a book on purpose called Aaron purgatus seconded very lately by Gaffarell in his Curiosities translated since into English alleging a Persian author whom Grotins also seemeth to follow in his Anno-Annotations upon Exod. XXXII have made it their businesse to prove that neither he nor Aaron before him intended any other then to worship God before the representation of one of the Cherubims which he had commanded to be made to overshadow the ark of the Covenant For
though first penned in Ebrew yet was translated into Greek in Aegypt as the Prefice witnesses Supposing then the interest of Christianity against Judaism to consist in that which the Fathers of the Church do plead That the same Word and Wisedom of God which first dealt with the Patriarchs which gave the Law to Moses and afterwards spoke by the Prophets in after time dwelt in our Lord Christ Jesus and delivered the Gospel I demand what could have been said more to the purpose of Christianity against Judaism by those that lived under Moses Law There is a question whether the Apostles S. Paul and whosoever it was that writ the Epistle to the Ebrews do allege these Books and allow them for their Authors when they call our Lord Christ the Image of God 2 Cor. II. 4. the Image of the invisible God Col. I. 15. the resplendence of the glory of God and the express image of his substance Ebr. I. 3. the Power of God and the Wisedom of God 1 Cor. I. 24. When they say that all things in heaven and earth were created by him and to him and subsist through him as the first-born of the whole creature Col. I. 16 17. that the world was made by him and that hee sustaineth and moveth all things by his powerfull word Ebr. I. 2 3. For how like are these things to those which wee reade in Ecclesiasticus I. 1 4. All wisedom cometh from the Lord and is with him for everlasting Wisedom was made before all things and the understanding of prudence from everlasting And XXIV 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Before the world from the beginning hee made mee and for ever I fail not Having said in the beginning of the Chapter according to the Latine Copy Ego ex ore Altissimi prodivi primogenita ante omnem creaturam I came forth of the mouth of the most High the first born before every creature And again Ecclesiasticus I. 9 10. The Lord himself made her and saw and numbred her and poured her upon all his works With all flesh shee is according to his gift and hee furnisheth her to them that love him And XXIV 5-9 I came out of the most High and covered the earth like a mist I dwell in the highest and my throne is in the pilar of cloud I alone compass the circumference of heaven and walk in the bottom of the deep In the waves of the sea and in all the earth in every people and nation is my inheritance Adding that seeking rest among men shee found it no where but in Israel And in the book of Wisedom VII 22 -27 For there is in Wisedom an understanding spirit holy onely begotten manifold subtile thinn nimble perspicuous undefiled plain to be understood inviolable loving goodness quick not to be hindred beneficent loving to men firm sure not solicitous that can do any thing that survayeth all things and passeth through the purest and finest understanding spirits For Wisedom is nimbler than all motions and attaineth and passith through all things because of her pureness For it is a vapor of the power of God and a sincere effluence of the glory of the Almighty therefore no pollution can happen to it For it is the resplendence of the everlasting light the unspotted mirror of Gods working and the image of his goodness Which being one can do all things and remaining in her self reneweth all things and passing into pious souls in all ages makes them friends of God and Prophets And IX 9 10 11. And with thee is Wisedom that knoweth thy works and was present when thou madest the world and knoweth what is pleasing in thine eyes and right in thy commands Send her from thy holy heavens and from the throne of thy glory that shee may assist and labor with mee and I may know what is pleasing before thee For shee knoweth and understandeth all things and will guide mee wisely in my doings and keep mee in her glory Can any man reade these things and not remember the beginning of S. Johns Gospel In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God The same was in the beginning with God All things were made by it and without it was nothing made that was made Can any man conceive that the Apostles should call our Lord Christ the Word the Power and the Wisedom of God that made all things in heaven and in earth it self being brought forth before all creatures supporting and moving all things which was with God from everlasting that hee is the image of God the shine of his glory the character of his substance That the successors of the Prophets should describe the Wisedom of God to be the Word of God that dwelt in the Prophets and the Power of God that made all things being it self brought forth before all things that sustaineth and governeth all things to dwell by the throne of God as the shine of his light the miror of his works the breath and vapor of his power and glory and from thence to come and take possession of the souls of Prophets and not acknowledg all this to come from the same fountain Especially being perswaded afore as all that are not Jews must be perswaded that the same Spirit and Word of God qualified as Wisedom describeth it which possessing the souls of righteous men in that measure whereof each of them was capable made them Gods Prophets dwelt in Christ without measure according to the fulnesse of the Godhead as the Apostles have told and said John I. 14 16. III. 34. Col. II. 9 10. Truly if any man say as I know it is said that the same sense may be derived by the Apostles from the glory of God in Ezek. I. 28. from the attributes of the Messias Psal II. 7. 2 Sam. VII 14. Esa IX 6. from the making of the world by Gods wisedom recorded Psal XXXIII 5. CXXXVI 5. Jeremy LI. 15. X. 12. especially from that which Solomon hath written of Wisedom being present with God from everlasting and doing all his works Prov. VIII 11-31 I will not contend with him about it Though in my own judgment seeing it cannot reasonably be denied that these writings being extant long afore went then with the rest of the Greek Bible And seeing the texts that are alleged do not direct us to understand how the Word and Spirit and Wisedom of God by which the Law and the Prophets spoke dwelleth for ever in our Lord Christ as these passages of their Successors do I do firmly believe that they signifie their allowance of them whose doctrine they use But it is enough that it may hereby appear as it must needs appear that they give us good and sound commentaries upon so high a point of the Prophets doctrine their predecessors when the Apostles that follow them hold such correspondence with them in it Onely hereupon I will from hence draw the reason why the inward obedience to
to study the reconciling of carnality vvith Christianity Supposing the consent of a body vvhereof they thought themselves to be members it is no marvail that there would not Not supposing that it must needs appear utterly unreasonable As for the insolubility of mariage by divorce I vvill not say there hath been so absolute a consent in it by the practice of Christians as in the mariage of one to one It is argued indeed in the late Book called Vxor Ebraica pretending onely to relate the opinions and practice of Christians in mater of divorce but intending as it should seem by the Authors opinion declared elsewhere that there is no such thing as Ecclesiasticall Power or any society of the Church by Gods Law to inferre that the Church hath nothing to do vvith Matrimoniall causes vvhich it hath nothing to do with if any thing but the lavv of the Church can secure the conscience in point of divorce p. 543. 544. that so long as the Christians vvere mingled with the Jews they observed the judiciall laws of the Synagogue and therefore corrected all divorces good beâ—or God which were according to Moses Lavv. And therefore that vvhatso ever was in force among Christians before Constantine was in force meerly by the voluntary consent of Christians vvhich vvas to give vvay vvhen the secular Power should otherwise provide as in mater of divorce so in other Matrimoniall causes This is thâ—â—â—â—ich seems to be intended p. 559. But this pretence is rooted up by proving the Church to be a society and Body founded by God to communicate in the service of God for the attaining of everlasting life For thereupon it remâ—â—ns evident that the Lavvs thereof came not originally from the voluntary consent of Christians unlesse you understand that consent whereby they submit to the Christian faith that they may be saved and thereupon find themselves tieâ— to submit to them from whom they receive that faith whereby they hope to be saved but from those who first delivered Christianity to the Church that is from our Lord his Apostles And had Christians been left to their own choice it is not possible they should have imposed upon themselves that is that the whole Church should have received that charge of not divorcing which the Rules and Customes of the Church evidence to have been in force through the whole Church as by and by it will appear As for the time when the Christians observed Moses Law that excellent saying of Justine the Martyâ— takes place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They obey the Lawes and by their own lives go beyond the Laws For the Jews Law was then their Civill Law because authorized by the Romanes in as much as they restrained it not So by complying with the Jews they gained the free exercise of their Christianity as well as invited them to admit and receive it But did they therefore renounce the Law of Christ where it restrained them more then the Law of Moses Did they allow themselves more wives then one when Moses allowed it the Jews and they complyed with Moses Certainly the Law that allows a man more wives then one never constrained any man to make use of that allowance So well might the Christians acknowledging Moses Law acknowledge themselves bound not to use the power of putting away their wives when Moses Law allowed it But it is further argued there lib. III. cap. XXVIII XXIX XXX at least it seems upon the same ground to be argued that the Roman Laws from Constantine to the fall of the Eastern Empire in a maner do allow divorce upon such causes as the Soveraign thought fit Which Laws being made by Christian Princes intending to limit that infinite liberty which the former laws of the Empire allowed either party to dissolve mariage at pleasure with all that he brought must needs pretend to secure Christians in point of conscience divorcing upon no other causes then those laws allow Constantine therefore restrains the liberty of divorce to three causes on either side On the wives side if the â—usband should Murther Poyson or Rob graves On the husbands if the wife should be an Adulteress an Impoisoner or a Bawd And this at such time as he advised with Bishops in all that he did granting then an appeal to their Courts by an act dated the same year as it is probable and lately published in Sirmondus his Appendix to Theodosius his Code without date for the year but directed to the same Ablavius P. P. to whom the form is directed Cod. Theod. lib. III. Tit. XVI which Theodosius the younger a very Christian Prince extends to many more Justinian the legislative humour being then predominant limits the mater otherwise as he thought fit His successor Justine goes beyond him in allowing divorce upon consent of parties though at neither parties choice Which Law is not found to have been repealed till it was left out of that collection of Laws called the Basilicae into which Leo the wife about the year DCCCC compiled all the Laws which he meant should stand unrepealed The particulars you may see curiously collected there Which I should make no account of did it not appear also by sundry testimonies of later times there alledged that the Greek Church did proceed according to the said Laws in blessing Mariages made upon such divorces and consequently allowing the communion of the Church to those that made them Balsamon upon Syn. VI. Can. LXXXVIII defines an unreasonable cause of divorce to be that which the Judge to wit according to the Law allows not Noâ— makes he any exception to them from any Canon of the Church writing upon Photius his Nâ—mocanon Tit. XIII 4. 30. And upon Can. Carthag CV alledging Justinian Novel CXVII he saith That the Canon is not in force to wit the Law having provided otherwise referring himselfe to that which he had written upon the VI Synode quoted afore Harmenopulus also in Prochicro sayes plainly that divorces were judged amongst them by the Imperiall Laws And Matthaus Monachus Quaest Matrim Juris Grâ—co-Rom Tomo I. p. 507. So also the Canons of Alexuis Patr. CP about MXXX alledged by our Author out of a written Copy p. 613. And Michael Chrysocephalus upon Can. Apost XLVIII p. 600. Besides Matthâ—us Blastares in Nomocan alledged by Arcudius p. 517. where he being a Greek confesseth that the Greek Church had sometimes practiced according to the Civill Laws Which had they not secured the conscience it could not it ought not to have done And what case can there be in point of mariage wherein the Law of the Land secures not the conscience if in point of divorce it do Or where is the indissolubility of mariage and the Interest of the Church in mariage grounded upon it But because it would be two gross for a Christian to say that mans Law allowing divorce can secure a Christian in conscience against Gods Law forbidding it our Lord having said Whoso puts away his wife
of fact to be the same For the Unity of so great a Body will not allow that the terms should be strict or nice upon which the communion thereof standeth But obligeth all tâ—at love the general good of it to pass by even those imperfections in the Laws of it which are visible if not pernicious But where this Unity is once broken in pieces and destroyeâ— and palliating cures are out of date the offense which is taken at showing the true cure is imputable to them that cause the fraction not to him that would â—ee it restored For what disease was ever cured without offending the body that had it The cause of Episcopacy and of the Service is the cause of the whole Church and the maintenance thereof inferreth the maintenance of whatsoever is Catholick Owning therefore my obligation to the Whole Church notwithstanding my obligation to the Church of England I have prescribed the consent thereof for a boundary to all interpretation of Scripture all Reformation in the Church Referring my â—pinion â—n point of Fact what is Catholick to them who by their Title are bound to acknowledg that whatsoever is Catholick ought to take place While all English people by the Laws of the Church of England had suffiâ—iâ—nâ— and probable means of salvation ministred to them it had been a fault to acknowledg a fault which it was more mischief to mâ—nd than to bear with But when the Unity that is lost may as well be obtained by the primitive Truth and Order of the Catholick Church as by that which served the turn in the Church of England because it served to the salvation of more I should offend good Christians to think that they will stand offended at it In fine all variety of Religion in England seems to be comprised in three parties Papists Prelatical and Puritanes comprehending under that all parties into which the once common name stands divided All of them are originally as I conceive terms of disgrace which therefore I have not been delighted with using This last I have found some cause to frequent when I would signifie some thing common to all parties of it If with eagerness at any time the English Proverb says Loosers may have leave to speak I finde my self disobliged by the Papists in that desiring to serve God with all Christians they barr mee their CoÌ„munion by clogging it with conditions inconsistent with our common Christianity I finde my self disobliged by the Puritanes in that desiring to serve God with all Christians but acknowledging the Catholick Church I stand obliged by the Rule of it not to communicate with Hereticks or Schismaticks I complain for no Benefice or other advantage That desiring to communicate with all Christians I am confined for opportunity of serving God with his Church to the scartered remains of the Church of England is that for which I complain If owning this offense I suffer mine indignation at the pretense of Inâ—allibility or of Reformation to escape from mee I do not therefore intend to revenge my self by words of disgrace Let him that thinks so call mee Prelatical let him use mee with no more moderation than I use In the mean time I remain secured that the offense which my opinion may give is imputable in the sight of God to those that cause the division One offense I acknowledg and cannot help That I undertake a design of this consequence and am not able to go through with it as it deserves I should not have set Pen to paper till my materials had been prepared in writing that no term might have escaped mee unexamined Till the quotations of mine Authors had been all before mee so as to need no recourse to the Copies A labor which I have not been able every where to undergo In fine till I had cleared all pretense of obscurity or ambiguity in my language For the obscurity of my mater I am not sory for If writing in English because here the occasion commences the reasons by which I determine the sense of the Scriptures in the Original if the consequence oâ— it in some maters seem obscure I conceive it ought to teach the World that the people are made parties to those disputes whereof they are not able to be judges And I am willing to bear the blame of obscure if that lesson may be learned by the people The desire of easing my thoughts by giving them vent hath resolved mee to put them into the world â—ough-baked on purpose to provoke the judgments of all parties â—or the furnishing of a second Edition if God grant mee life with that which shall be missing in this I am therefore content to confine my self to the model of an abridgment and referr my self for the consent of the Church to those books which I am best satiâ—fied with in each point When that could not be done I have alleged authorities which I may call translatitias because I lay them down as I finde them alleged Not doubting that I justifie my opinion so farr as I desire to do here that there is no consent of the Church against it What the sense of the Church is positively and hath been into which I conceive that which here I say hath made mee a fair entrance I shall upon examination of particulars indeavor to give satisfaction in that which may be found missing here In the mean time it shall suffice to have advanced thus much towards the common interest of Christianity in the re-union of the Church But let no man therefore barre mee the lot of Reconcilers To be contradicted on all sides I profess no such thing It is enough for the greatest Powers in Christendom to undertake If it be an offense for a man of my years equally concerned with all Christians in our common Christianity to say his opinion upon what terms the parties ought to reconcile themselves it remains that offenses remain unreconcileable But contradiction from all parties I shall not be displeased with Hee that will tell mee alone in writing what hee findes fault with and why shall do a work of charity to mee alone Hee that will tell the world the same shall do mee the same charity that hee does the world in it Hee who can delight in that barbarous course which Controversies in Religion have been managed with among Christians by casting personal aspersions Let him rather do it than be silent provided the stuff hee brings be considerable to bear out such inhumanity among civil people But let him consider the dependences and concernments of the point hee speaks to let him not say for answer that these things are answered by our Divines It is easie to make â—bjections but not easie to clear difficulties And whether or no these difficulties were clear already I must referr it to the Reader to judge In the mean time though no arbitrator to chuse a middle opinion for partiâ—s to agree in I take upon mee the person of a Divâ—ne in
Signifying that they expected salvation by the Law which indeed is not to be had but by his Gospel which the Law intimateth and involveth Yee think yee have it so as indeed yee have it not In the next place consider wee a while the Writings of the Prophets that is all that followes the Law in the Old Testament and wee shall finde there such intimations of the world to come such instruction to that conversation by which it is attained as may show that it was not covenanted for though attainable by Gods dispensation of that time That which wee reade in the Propher Esay XXVI 19. Thy dead shall live my carkasses shall arise awake and sing yee that dwell in the dust for thy dew is the dew of herbs and the earth shall cast forth the Gyants is the very picture of the Resurrection which Christians believe But what it signifies there let the consequence of the Scripture witnesse which showes it by the beginning of the Chapter to be part of a Song which should be sung in the Land of Judab at that day That is at such time as God having afflicted his people according to the Prophesies going afore should restore them again as hee prophesies there and afterwards The Vision of dry bones which the Prophet Ezekiel XXXIII saw upon the breathing of God clothed with flesh and skin to rise againe manifestly foretells the return of the Jewes from Captivity to be a Nation againe But â—o that it cannot be denied that S. Hilary had reason to call him several times the Prophet of the Resurrection for it Nor must wee make any other account of Daniel who having prophesied of the miseries that were to befall the Jewes especially under Antiochus Epiphanes and their deliverances in the end sets forth the glory and ignominy of those that had stuck to their Law till death or fallen from it after they had their freedom under the Maccabees by the figure of rising from the dead XII 1 2. For having first said at that time thy people shall escape whosoever is written in the book Which time is that persecution under Epiphanes when hee adds incontinently And many of those that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake some to everlasting life some to everlasting reproach and shame And teachers shall sbine as the shine of the sky and those that make many righteous as the starres for ever and ever I say this following immediately it cannot stand with common sense that it should not concerne the same times and persons Though wee allow it a competent argument that the Prophet which sets forth the deliverance of that people in such termes understood the Resurrection of the dead well enough and intended by using the same to make way for Christianity that professes it But the words of S. Job XIX 25. are more questionable I know saith hee that my Redeemer liveth and shall stand upon the earth at last And after they have pierced this my skin I shall see God out of my flesh But if wee compare this with what hath been hitherto produced out of the Prophets it will not seem probable that the Resurrection which they so darkly intimated should be so plainly preached either before the Law when Job lived or under the Law when the book of Job is said to have been penned And truly hee that perswaded himself that God would deliver him out of his present affliction might well say I know that my Redeemer liveth And hee that saith XLII 5. By the hearing of the eare I had heard of thee but now doth mine eye see thee might say to the same purpose that hee should see God standing at length upon the earth after that his skin had been pierced with sores Consider now those passages of the Prophets whereby they declare how they are moved to question Gods providence by seeing the righteous afflicted and the wicked to flourish in this world Psal LXXIII 2-20 Jer. XII 1 2. Mal. III. 13-18 besides all the discourses of this point in Job Ecclesiastes and elsewhere It is plaine every Christian can answer this out of the principles of his profession by saying That God reserves his full account to the day of judgment in the mean time maintaining sufficient evidence of his providence by the account which hee takes of some sinnes in this world And had this been a part of the old Covenant it had been no lesse ready for every one to answer with What saith David When I went into the Sanctuary of God then understood I the end of those men Forsooth thou settest them in slippery places and castest them down to ruine How came they to desolation in a moment they came to an end by terrors As when a man awakes out of a dreame Lord when thou awakest thou shalt scorn the image of them Is there any thing in all this to determine whether in this world or in the world to come Though the consequence be good not in this world therefore in the world to come What saith Jeremy And thou O Lord knowest mee and triest my heart before thee Pluck them out as sheep to be slain and consecrate them to the day of slaughter What saith Malachi They shall be mine saith the Lord of Hosts when I store up my Jewels and I will spare them as a man spareth his son that serveth him And yee shall again distinguish between the righteous and the wicked between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not All this is true to those that are in Covenant with God as the temporal promises are true even in this life and therefore expresses not the world to come whatsoever may be inferred by the foresaid consequence And truly Ecclesiastes is so farre from expressing the answer that Christianity maketh to this objection as to give some men occasion to imagine that it alloweth the world to come no more than the lives of worldly men do own it And all the obscurity of the book of Job will never be resolved without acknowledging that this truth was then a secret which the Prophets knew but preached it so sparingly and with such good husbandry which the Greek Fathers use to call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the hope of proficience by their Doctrine in their hearers did require The same account is to be had of the Prophet Habakkuk II. 3-14 where hee proposeth the difference between the Chaldeans and Israelites in these termes Behold the soul that is exalted is not right in him But the just shall live by faith And concludes See is not this of the Lord of Hosts And the people shall labor for fire and the Nations be weary for nothing For the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord as the waters cover the seas Which all the Prophets will witnesse to signifie the restoring of the people of God to the destruction of Idolatry and their enimies Idolaters No where is this truth more
governed by their own Nation shall wee imagine that this power was trusted with the High Priests because God had made them Soveraignes by the Law Or because after the King whom in that estate they could not have the High Priest was regularly the second person in the Kingdom For what a ridiculous thing is it to imagine that because Josue and the people to goe in and out at the word of the Lord by Eleazar the High Priest therefore the High Priest was alwaies Soveraigne Was it any more for Josue to be ruled by Elâ—azar the High Priest and his answer by Urim and Tummim not by going into the Sanctum Sanctorum than for Saul or David to be directed by the answer of the High Priest in those dayes when as our Author saith the right of the High Priest was by Gods permission though against Law seized in the Kings hands As for the Judges they that reade In those dayes there was no King in Israel every man did what was right in his own eyes with their eyes in their head do thereby understand that though the stories of the Idol in Dan and of Gibea are last in the book of Judges yet they are first in order of time before any Judge had succeded Josue the Judges having the same power for which Moses is called King in Israel Deut. XXXIV 5. For God being their King by the Covenant of the Law while hee raised up no Judge to be his Vicegerent in Moses stead hee governed theâ— by the Elders of the people to whom therefore Clemens and Eusebius and other Chronologers impute the time between Josue and Judges When this Government proved not of force to rule so stiff-necked a people and that God had raised up a Judge to refuse him was to refuse God who by manifest operations of his Spirit in him had declared him his Vicegerent Which is the plain reason why God pronounces that in refusing Samuel they had refused him and not Samuel For it is manifest that they might by the Law demand a King Deut. XVII 14 15. so ridiculous a thing it is to imagine that by demanding a King as other Nations had they rebelled against God who had made the High Priest their Soveraign For God expresseth their rebellion to consist in refusing Samuel whom hee had declared his Vicegerent who being once declared they were no more free do demand a King by the Law till his death Neither doth a Royal Priesthood or a Kingdome of Priests signifie that the High Priests were their Kings But that they who came out of bondage should now make a Kingdom themselves to be governed by their own Nation and Lawes which Lawes should consist much in offering sacrifices to God And those sacrifices though for the future special persons were to be appointed to offer them yet in regard they were offered in the name and on the behalf of the people whose offerings they were the body thereof are justly called Priests As all Christians to whom S. Peter challengeth the effect of this promise are ftiled by him a Royal Priesthood and by S. John Kings and Priests though nothing hinder them to have their Priests whose functions cannot be intermedled with by those who are no Priests without sacrilege In fine the effect of these words is that of the Prophet Esay LXI 5 6. that when the people shall be restored the Gentiles shall be their laborers and Vine-dressers while they in the mean time attend upon keeping holiday by offering sacrifices and feasting upon the sacrifices which they had offered It will now be easie to maintain that the Church when our Lord saith tell it the Church is not nor can be understood but of the Congregation of Christians though at that time in common speech it signified no more than the Congregation of Gods people For supposing that our Lord Christ came to contract a New Covenant with those that received him whereby they became his people on other termes and to other purpose than the people whom hee had before That hee conditioned with them to leave all things and take up his Cross That hee appointeth those that imbrace this condition to be baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost I say this being supposed they that before were the Congregation of Gods people are no more the Congregation of his people upon the same termes not by the same right or title though the same persons The one being his people under a Covenant for the Land of Promise and the condition of living by Moses Lawes The other under the promise of life everlasting which the former were not excluded from though not expresly included in it upon condition of receiving the Christian Faith and continuing in it Suppose wee that when our Lord Christ commanded them to baptize all Nations in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost his Disciples understood no more by all this than that those who should become Proselytes to this new and true Judaisme which our Lord preached should be initiated unto the same by Baptisme as Proselytes then by custome were unto the Law because wee see after the resurrection of our Lord how strange it was to them that the Gospel should be preached to the uncircumcised as such Suppoâ—e wee further that all the Nation of the Jewes whether in Jewry or wheresoever dispersed and none but Jewes had received the Gospel of Christ so as the ancient and New people of God to consist of all the same persons I say all this supposed shall make no maner of difference in the case But there shall be as much difference between the Old and New people of God considered as Societies and Bodies constituted and therefore distinguished by the several Covenants upon which they subsist as if they consisted of all several perâ—ons Should a man judge onely by his bodily eyes and see the people of Rome as it was when the Soveraign Power was in the people and again after it had been seized by Augustus I could not blame him to say that it was the same people But hee that should look upon that people with his understanding as a Civil Society State and Commonwealth and â—ay it was the same all men of understanding would laugh at him for it how much soever the interest of Augustus required that it should seem the same to grosse people Apply this instance to the case in hand and I shall need say no more Several things must either have several names or the same name in several notions or significations If our Lord took upon him to teach his Disciples the New Covenant hee came to introduce to make them the New people of God which hee came thereby to constitute such is the correspondence between the Old and the New the old Name served best to signifie the New thing But in the same sense it could not serve to represent to his hearers the several termes upon which Jewes and Christians are Gods people
Epiphanes but trusting in God for deliverance The rest serving to fill up the relation I will not say so much of the book of Tobit because it is so farr from creating any difficulty in point of time that it helps very much to dissolve those difficulties which are made otherwise But this I will confidently say that supposing it to be a meer parable relating what hapned to a true Israelite in whom was no guile continuing faithfull to God and to his people in a difficult time of persecution it will be of no lesse consequence to the animating of Christians in the like course then supposing the thing related to have come to pass As for the History of Susanna what pains Origen hath taken to perswade the learned Julius Africanus for to him as wee learn by S. Jerome in Catalogo his leter of this subject is directed that it is a true story every man that will take the pains to peruse that leter may see Some say that the Jews have the same story differing in the relation of it in that they make the two Elders to be punished by Nebucadnezar not by their own people And though Origen is witnesse that the Jews had the Power of the Sword sometimes in their dispersions Yet under the Chaldeans when they were lately transplanted it is like enough they had it not For these two Elders the Jews they will have to be Ahab and Colaiah of whom you reade Jer. XXIX 21. And truly there is appearance that this relation being delivered from hand to hand among the Jews was at length penned by some of them that used the Greek and so added to the Greek Bible For you have in the Great Bible two several Editions of it in the Syriack much differing one from the other in litle circumstances Though one of them gives the two Elders other names than the Jews do Which as it will not allow the Writing to be inspired by God so will it inforce as much edification from it not detracting from the truth of it For what doth it detract that hee that writ it useth an allusion from the names of Trees under which they accuse her to have committed uncleannesse which the Greek onely bears Daniel answering to him that saw her under a Holm tree in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to him that said under a Mastick tree 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is indeed an argument that hee who penned it in Greek was willing to bring in a figure to set forth a conceit which the Ebrew would not bear for Origen cannot perswade mee that there can have been those names for these trees in the Ebrew though now unknown to us vvhich hold the same allusion a chance of ten thousand to one but is the writing of ever the lesse effect and consequence to the incouraging and vvarning of Gods people to vvalk in his Lavv I vvill here adde the consideration of that vvhich I observe to be common to many of them and in my opinion serves to shovv hovv much there is in them of the sense of the Nevv Testament and of the doctrine of our Lord and his Apostles This consideration rises thus S. Jerome in his Preface to the Books of Solomon saith that some ancient Church Writers ascribe the Book of Wisedom to Philo the Jevv Not meaning as hee expresly addeth that Philo that lived under Caligula vvhose works wee have but another that lived under Onias the High Priest Therefore whatsoever may have been said since S. Jerome of the author of this book cannot make it to be of the age of Caligula S. Augustine de Civ Dei XVII 20. saith that Ecclesiasticus and it both have been ascribed to Solomon as S. Jerome also in Dan. IX saith that Ecclesiasticus was then called Solomons Wisedome propter nonnullam eloquii similitudinem Because there is some resemblance between the frame of Solomons stile and that which they use Which as it is most true so is it manifest that there is no maner of resemblance between the stile of them and of our Philo. As for the mater of the work the addresse which hee maketh to the Kings and Princes and Judges of the earth I. a. VI. 1 2-10 22. manifesteth that it is intended for an exhortation to the Gentiles under whose power Gods people was not to persecute them for serving the onely true God but rather to learn the knowledg and worship of him themselves This is the occasion of setting forth the Wisedom of God from whence the Law in which the wisedom of the Nation consisted according to Moses Deut. IV. 6 7. came and which dwelt afterwards as in Solomon so in the rest of the Prophets and Patriarchs from Adam downwards as you may see from that sixth Chapter in the processe of the Book This is the intent of that which is said concerning the wisedom of that people coming from God in the Book of Baruch III. 12-38 For intending to exhort them to stick fast to God and not to fall away to the Idols of the Nations in the Captivity as the Prophets Esay and Jeremy had done which is the cause why it is ascribed to Baruch hee puts them in minde that it was none but God that could discover that way of wisedom which the Law taught Israel Which wisedom saith hee afterwards was seen on earth and conversed among men For so I construe the words not to mean that God was seen on earth and conversed among men not because it is not true but because it is not so plainly said in the writings of the Prophets but the wisedom of God was seen on earth and conversed among men to wit in the Prophets who spoke by the word and wisedom of God In like maner when the three Squires of the Body to King Darius undertook to plead what is of most force the third having named women to be the strongest addeth that Truth prevaileth over all Meaning that the truth which God by his Law had declared to his people should prevail over all that is strong in this world And so incouraging the King to protect it by countenancing the building of the Temple As you may see in the third of Esdras II. III. 34-40 Which I suppose here to be a piece that comes from the Egyptian Jews being first read in the Greek Bible and not in any record of the Jews otherwise Finally Ecclesiasticus commending the Wisedom which hee pretendeth to teach and for the mater of his commendation having recourse to the original of it descants indeed upon Solomons plain song in the VIIIth and IXth of the Poverbs and therefore delivers no new revelations but the right intent of that Prophets doctrine but recommends the Wisedom of his Nation farr beyond all that can be said of any Wisedom of the Gentiles as coming from that Wisedom by which God made the world and governs it ever since Ecclesiasticus I. XXIV from which also the Law and the Prophets came Now Ecclesiasticus
God in Spirit and truth which the Gospel requireth is so plentifully preached in all those writings which wee call Apocrypha Whereas in our Saviors and his Apostles time and much more afterwards they promised themselves the kingdome of heaven upon the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees That is upon the outward and carnal observation of Moses Law and preciseness in all those little niceties which their Masters had fensed it with For it is no mervail that they who under persecution promised themselves a part in the resurrection of the righteous cleaving to God and his Law should finde themselves tyed to that obedience in spirit and truth which God who is a Spirit sees and allows But lesse mervail it is that having attained the carnal promises of the Law in the possession of the Land of Promise they should fall away from the like zeal and yet promise themselves the world to come upon that form of godliness which they observed being destitute of the force and power of it As an argument that this consideration is well grounded and true I will here adde the authority and practice of the primitive Church prescribing these books to be read by the Catechumeni or those that professed to believe the truth of Christianity and offered themselves to be instructed in the mater of it in order to Baptism and being made Christians For seeing these might be as well Jews as Gentiles this signifies that the doctrine of them was held by the Church a fit instruction towards Christianity even for those that were already acquainted with the doctrine of the Prophets S. Athanasius then in Synopsi testifieth that these books were read to the Catechumeni To the same purpose it is read in the Constitutions of the Apostles though the place is not at hand at present And that which the last Canon of the Apostles prescribes that besides the Canonical Scriptures the book of Ecclesiasticus be read by the youth seems to tend to the same purpose To the same purpose Dionysius de div Nom. cap. IV. calls the Book of Wisedom an Introduction to the divine Oracles But let no man think to inferr that the Apostles took these Books for Scripture inspired by God because I grant that they borrowed from them in their writings Origen hath met with this objection Prol. in Cant. where hee observeth That the Apostles have borrowed some things out of Apocryphal Scriptures as S. Jude out of the books of Enoch and the departure of Moses and yet addes that wee are not to give way to the reading of them because wee must not transgresse the bounds which our Fathers have fixed Where you see hee distinguisheth those books which the Church did not allow to be read under the name of Apocrypha from those which it did allow to be read and are therefore more properly called Ecclesiastical Scriptures which name hath particularly stuck by way of excellence upon the Wisedom of the son of Sirach though I contend not about names when wee call them Apocrypha because I see that S. Jerome hath sometimes done it And if S. Paul have alleged Aratus Menander and Epimenides heathen Poets hee did not thereby intend to allow the authors but the mater which hee allegeth If these things be so I shall not desire to abridg any mans liberty from arguing against the mater of these Books to prove them not inspired by God because not agreeing with those which wee know and agree to have been inspired by God But I shall warn them that take upon them thus to argue first to look about them that they bring not the unquestionable parts of Scripture into an undue suspicion for agreeing in something for which they have conceived a prejudice that these Books are not to be received The design of Judith and her proceeding in the execution of it is charged not to agree with Christianity neither is it my purpose here to maintain that it doth But I am more than afraid that those who object this do not know how to distinguish it from the fact of Jaell the wife of Heber the Kenite in the book of Judges which the Spirit of God in Deborah the Prophetesse so highly extolleth The like is to be said of the like passages questioned in the book of Tobit and the Maccabees and namely the fact of Razias killing himself least hee should fall into the hands of persecutors which seemeth to be related with much approbation 2 Mac. XIV 41-46 For to distinguish this fact from Samsons it will not serve the turn to say that Samson did it by inspiration of Gods Spirit supposing afore that it was contrary to Gods declared Law to do it The difficulty being greater in saying that the declared Law of God is violated by the motion of Gods Spirit when as the Spirit of God is not granted to any man but upon supposition of acknowledging Gods declared Law For howsoever Saul or Caiaphas or Balaam may be moved by the Spirit of God to speak such things as by the Scriptures inspired by God wee learn that they did speak Yet that God should imploy upon his own Commission as the Judges of whom it is said that the Spirit of God came upon them were manifestly imployed by God whom hee favored not is a thing which cannot agree with the presumption which all Christians have of the salvation of the Fathers As for the passage of Eccles XLVI 23. which seems to say that it was the soul of Samuel the Prophet and not an evil Spirit assuming his habit that foretold the death of Saul I do not understand why all this may not be said according to appearance not according to truth For it will still make for the honor of Samuel that the King whatsoever opinion hee had of this means of fore-knowledg should desire to see Samuel as him whom in his life time hee found so unquestionable But if it be said that this cannot satisfie the leter of the Scripture yet can it not be said that as Saul a wicked man did believe that hee might see Samuel so a good man at that time might not have the same Being then no part of the truth which true piety obliged all men to acknowledg In the book of Tobit there are several things besides questionable But they that imagine conjuring in the liver of a fish to drive away an unclean Spirit do not consider those exorcisms whereby it is evident both by the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles besides divers of the most ancient Fathers of the Church that the Jews both in our Lords times and after did cast out unclean Spirits For what force could they have but from the appointment of God from whom at first they were delivered for a testimony of his residence among his people Which makes me stick to condemn that relation of the Jews in the Talmud extant also in Suidas that there were admirable remedies delivered by Solomon which hee caused to be writ upon
that they were inspired by Gods Spirit or that the authors thereof ever spoke by the same And with this resolution the testimonies of Ecclesiastical writers will agree well enough if wee consider that to prove them to have the testimony of the Church to be inspired by God it is not enough to allege either the word or the deed either of Writers or Councils alleging the authority of them or calling them Holy Divine or Canonical Scriptures Nothing but universal consent making good this testimony which the dissent of any part creates an exception against For if those to whom any thing is said to be delivered agree not in it how can it be said to be delivered to them who protest not to have received it Wherefore having settled this afore that no decree of the Church inforceth more than the reason of preserving unity in the Church can require wee must by consequence say that if the credit of divine inspiration be denied them by such authors as the Church approveth no decree of the Church can oblige to believe them for such though how farr it may oblige to use them I dispute not here It shall therefore serve my turn to name S. Jerome in this cause Not as if Athanasius in Synopsi Melito of Sardis in Eusebius S. Gregory Nazianzene abundance of others both of the most ancient Writers of the Church and of others more modern who justly preferr S. Jerome in this cause did not reject all those parts or most of them which the Church of England rejecteth But because were S. Jerome alive in it there could be no Tradition of the Church for that which S. Jerome not onely a member but so received a Doctor of the Church refuseth For it will not serve the turn to say that hee writ when the Church had decreed nothing in it who had hee lived after the Council of Trent would have writ otherwise The reasons of his opinion standing for which no Council could decree otherwise Hee would therefore have obeyed the Church in using those books which it should prescribe But his belief whether inspired by God or not hee would have built upon such grounds the truth whereof the very being of the Church presupposeth Nor will I stand to scan the sayings of Ecclesiastical Writers or the acts of Councils concerning the authority of all and every one of these books any further in this place There is extant of late a Scholastical History of the Canon of the Scripture in which this is exactly done And upon that I will discharge my self in this point referring my Reader for the consent of the Church unto it And what importeth it I beseech you that they are called Sacred or Canonical Scriptures As if all such writings were not holy which serve to settle the holy Faith of Christians And though it is now received that they are called Canonical because they contain the Rule of our Faith and maners and perhaps are so called in this notion by S. Augustine and other Fathers of the Church Yet if wee go to the most ancient use of this word Canon from which the attribute of Canonical Scripture descendeth it will easily appear that it signifieth no more than the list or Catalogue of Scriptures received by the Church For who should make or settle the list of Scriptures receivable but the Church that receiveth the same it being manifest that they who writ the particulars knew not what the whole should contain And truly as I said afore that the Church of Rome it self doth not by any act of the force of Law challenge that the decrees of the Church are infallible So is it to be acknowledged that in this point of all other it doth most really use in effect that power which formally and expresly it no where challengeth Proceeding to order those books to be received with the like affection of piety as those which are agreed to be inspired by God which it is evident by expresse testimonies of Church writers were not so received from the beginning by the Church So that they who made the decree renouncing all pretense of revelation to themselves in common or to every one in particular can give no account how they came to know that which they decree to be true So great inconveniences the not duely limiting the power of the Church contrives even them into that think themselves therefore free from mistake in managing of it not because they think they know what they do but because they think they cannot do amisse It remaineth therefore that standing to the proper sense of this decree importing that wee are to believe these books as inspired by God neither can they maintain nor wee receive it But if it shall be condescended to abate the proper and native meaning of it so as to signifie onely the same affection of piety moving to receive them not the same object obliging Christian piety to the esteem of them it will remain then determinable by that which shall be said to prove how these books may or ought to be recommended or injoyned by the Church or received of and from the Church CHAP. XXXIII Onely the Original Copy can be Authentick But the truth thereof may as well be found in the translations of the Old Testament as in the Jewes Copies The Jewes have not falsified them of malice The Points come neither from Moses nor Esdras but from the Talmud Jewes AS to the other point it is by consequence manifest that the Church hath nothing to do to injoyn any Copy of the Scripture to be received as authentick but that which it self originally received because it is what it is before the Church receive it Therefore seeing the Scripture of the Old Testament was penned first and delivered in the Ebrew Tongue for I need not here except that little part of Esdras and Daniel which is in the Chaldee the same reason holding in both that of the New in the Greek there is no question to be made but those are the authentick Copies Neither can the decree of the Council of Trent bear any dispute to them who have admitted the premises if it be taken to import that the Church thereby settleth the credit of Scripture inspired by God upon the Copy which it self advanceth taking the same away from the Copy which the author penned That credit depending meerly upon the commission of God and his Spirit upon the which the very being of the Church equally dependeth But it is manifest that it cannot be said that the said decree necessarily importeth so much because it is at this day free for every one to maintain that the Original Ebrew and Greek are the Authentick Copies the Vulgar Latine onely injoyned not to be refused in act of dispute or question which hindreth no recourse to the Originals for the determining of the meaning which it importeth Hee that will see this tried need go no further than a little book of Sorbonne Doctor called
any body but by him that translated the rest Therefore wee are as much to seek for the author of this Translation as if wee did not grant that ever the Law was translated by LXXII persons sent from Jerusalem to Philadelphus And therefore I make no difficulty to grant that this Translation which cannot be ascribed to those LXXII was made by the Jews of Alexandria or Aegypt where the Jews injoyed great liberties from the first Ptolomees time flourishing in learning and neglecting their own language for the Greek whereupon they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say Jews that spoke Greek But I say withall that I do not understand why the reputation of this Translation should be ever a whit the worse than if it had been made by LXXII sent from Jerusalem to Alexandria on purpose supposing it to have been done by the Jews of Alexandria The reasons why I think it was made by the Jews of Alexandria supposing the translating of the Law by the LXX I confesse are but probabilities but which finding the truth ballanced by the difficulties premised seem to way down on that side First in Caninius his Hellenismus at the Imperfect Tense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Boeoticè Chalcidicè 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quae forma LXX Int. frequens Nam Asianis etiam vernacula Lycophron 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Boeotick and Chalcidick saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which form the LXX Translators frequent For it is the Asiaticks mother language Lycophron uses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which hee saith of the Asiatick Greeks I have not yet found All that use this dialect so farr as I have observed are the Greek Bible the books wee call Apocrypha and Epiphanius Excepting Lycophron who was born at Chalcis in Euboea standing upon the confines of Boeotia but lived at Alexandria And therefore I conceive Caniniâ—u should have counted it Alexandrian and not Boeotick or Chalcidick The like I say when for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the second Aorist or indefinite tense hee makes the Boeotick to say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For in the same authors namely the Greek Bible the Apocrypha Epiphanius and Lycophron you shall finde the like and in some of them if my memory fail mee not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which dialect Caninius also alleges out of some Grammarians Now I have not found this Greek used by any author that lived in Palestine where Epiphanius though hee conversed much yet cannot well be thought to have learned his Greek And therefore it is to mee a mark that an Alexandrian rather than a Palestine Jew should make it Secondly whereas by Josephus Antiq. III. 9. by S. Jerome Hesychius and many others it is manifest that the Jews Shekel was equal to the Attick tetradrachme or piece of four drachmes it is alwayes translated by them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or piece of two drachmes A thing which hath bred strange opinions in some mens fansies and caused whole books to be written that the Jews used two Shekels and that the Shekel of the Sanctuary was double the vulgar Whereas all this difficulty vanishes if wee say that they translate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Alexandrian drachma because that was indeed double the Attick For first Julius Pollux Onomast IX 6. affirmeth that the Talent of every Greekish State consisted of VI M drachmes of the same coin as the Attick Talent contained VI M. Attick drachmes Then Festus in the word Talentum saith that the Alexandrian Talent contained XII M. Attick drachmes Which cannot otherwise be true unlesse the Alexandrian drachme be double the Attick Now it is no lesse improbable that Palestine Jews though translating at Alexandria should translate according to the value of that coin which was current at Alexandria all other Writers testifying that in Palestine they accounted otherwise then it is probable that Alexandrian Jews should do it So long then as I am peremptorily barred from believing the Translation which wee use to be the work of any LXXII sent from Jerusalem I shall accept of these inklings of historical truth that intitle the Egyptian Jews who first took up the Greek to it For as for the difference of Copies which I grant is very great in the Greek Bible I suppose no man in his right senses will argue that it is derived from any other Copies than one which by the wantonnesse of Copyists having suffered some change in lesse maters discovers the same plainsong by variety of descants that are framed upon it As for the credit of this Translation why should it be thought ever a whit the worse coming from the Egyptian Jews than those of Palestine My reason is I demand what there is to be found in all the writings of that Nation since the Prophets of like consequence to Christianity with that which the Jews of Aegypt have transmitted to us Why the Greek Bible should not be as well thought of coming from them as if it came from LXXII men sent from the High Priest at Jerusalem For here I set aside all prejudicate fansies and reports of inspiration by which it is said that there LXXII all translated the Law in the same words as meer fables I go to issue upon evidence of that which appears in this translation compared both with the present Jews Copy and other translations which the Church useth of many ages Onely I question why it should not be of as good credit coming from the Jews of Alexandria as from LXXII sent from Jerusalem The prejudice that is alleged against it is an addition to the Book of Esther in the Greek which sayes thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the fourth year of the raign of Ptolomee and Cleopatra Dojitheus calling himself a Priest and Levite and Ptolomee his son brought the foresaid leter of Phrurim which you have in the Greek Bible after Esther VIII 12. translated as they said by Lysimachus son of Ptolomee of Jerusalem This Ptolomee and Cleopatra are those by whose permission Onias and Dositheus whether hee that is here named or another of that name Jews having faithfully served them in their warrs built a like Temple to that of Jerusalem in the Country of Heliopolis in Aegypt as Josephus contr Ap. II. Ant. XIII 6. testifieth Incurring thereby the like crime of Schism as the Samaritanes had committed in setting up their Temple on Mount Gerizim and undertaking to serve God there after Jerusalem was lawfully chosen for the place to which the Law confined Gods service And so this translation is supposed to come from the Jews of Aegypt when they were under that Schism and the sacrilege of it To which I answer that neither it doth appear by this addition to Esther which in one of these two Copies which the late Lord Primate of Ireland hath published out of the
of the Holy Ghost Where you see that upon inlightning that is Baptism we become partakers of the Holy Ghost And this consideration utterly voides the only reason why our Lord when he sayes to Nicodemus John III. 5. Verily verily I say unto thee unlesse a man be born again of waâ—er and of the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God should not seem to speak of the Sacrament of Baptism For at that time neither was the Sacrament of Baptism instituted nor the promise of the Holy Ghost annexed to it The Holy Ghost that is to say the gift of the Holy Ghost is no where promised before the ascension of Christ For besides that which I alledged in the beginning to show that it presupposeth Christianity When it is said John VII 37. The Holy Ghost was not yet because Christ was not yet glorified The dependance thereof upon the glorifying of our Lord is plainly expressed And that according to S. Paul Ephes IV. 8. 12. Shewing out of Psal LXVIII 18. that the graces of the Holy Ghost by which the Church is united and compacted into one Body are sent down by God as a largess in consideration of the advancement of our Lord to the right hand of God as in honour of that triumph Wherewith agreeth S. Peter Acts II. 33. Being then exalted to or by the right hand of God and having received the gift of the Holy Ghost as it is also called Acts X. 54. he hath shed forth this which ye now see and hear Now let any man say that these visible operations of Holy Ghost whereby the world was to be convinced of the presence of God in the Church of Christians these indeed depend upon the ascension of Christ But without the invisible operation of the Holy Ghost no man ever to salvation from the beginning supposing this for the present but not granting it if any man that is a Christian demand proof for it Though this be true yet it was not expresly promised by God nor expresly Covenanted for by man till the publishing of Christianity upon the ascension of Christ Therefore the Baptism of repentance which John preached was without question effectuall to the remission of sins as the Gospels propose it Mark I. 4. Luke III. 3 For if I maintain the salvation of those who living under the Law understood the Covenant of Grace to be folded up in it by the preaching of the Prophets much more easily can I maintain the salvation of those who have imbraced the Baptism of Repentance for remission of sins which Joâ—n Preached provided that they came to Christ to whom John Baptist sent his Disciples so soon as the command of Christianity should take place and not otherwise But not by vertue of the Covenant of Grace published which it was not to be till the ascention of Christ but by vertue of the Covenant of Grace vailed under the Law which was not unvailed as yet during the time of passage from the Law to the Gospel when the baptism of John might take place Neither was the baptism of John in the name of the Father Son and the Holy Ghost which baptism our Lord never established till after his rising again Mat. XXVIII 19. but in the name of him that was comming as S. Paul saith to the Disciples Acts XIX 4. John truly baptised the baptism of repentance saing to the people that they should believe on him that was comming after him that is in Christ Jesus which words some have endeavoured to set upon the rack and to pull them from those which follow but they hearing this were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus as if they were not S. Lukes words but S. Pauls speaking of S. John's hearers that they were baptized by him in the name of the Lord Jesus A thing altogether unreasonable to imagine that the Disciples of John should make a question whether our L. Jesus were the Christ or not as Mat. XI 2. Luke VII 18. if they had been from the beginning baptized in his Name And the words might have served to represse this conceit in them that had submitted to take the meaning from the words For it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which their meaning were it the meaning of the text would require Nor is it strange that they who had been baptized into the profession of admitting him that was comming for the Christ in hope by him to have remission of sins as their Fathers had alwayes hoped acknowledging our Lord Jesus not only to be the Christ but further sent by the Father to send the Holy Ghost should be baptized again in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost For the receiving of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of S. Pauls hands which followeth in S. Luke is sufficient evidence that it is the baptism of Christ and not of John Baptist whereof he speaketh Let us hear then the Commission of our Lord Christ to his Apostles Mat. XXVIII 19. Go make Disciples all Nation babtizing them in the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek in the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if we insist upon the property of the word must necessarily signifie make Disciples But who are Christs Disciples Those that take up his Crosse to follow him Those that will do whatsoever he commandeth Those that bear much fruit Those of whom our Lord saith John VIII 34. If ye abide in my Word then are ye truly my Disciples As I shewed you before speaking of the profession of Christianity This before Christs death and the institution of Baptism Afterwards who are his Disciples Acts XI 26. It came to passe that the Disciples were first called Christians at Antivchia First at Antiochia but afterwards all over that Book as well as afore they are oftner called Disciples then Christians Neither is the name given to any but Christians saving those Disciples which I spoke of just now who under the baptism of John had given up themselves to our Lord Jesus as the Christ but through invincible ignorance knew not yet that the gift of the Holy Ghost presupposed Christs Baptism being ready as we see to receive it so soon as they understood it by the means of S. Paul Now there is nothing more manifest than that the gift of the holy Ghost is promised by our Lord in the Gospel to supply the want of his bodily presence and therefore when he declared unto them his departure and not much afore it Which things if they be true of necessity the promise of the Holy Ghost is annexed to the precept of being baptized given by our Lord at his departure and from that time to take place Neither is the meaning of his commission in the words alledged that they should first teach and then baptize though teaching that which Christianity professeth
possessed by still silence and night was at the middle of her course thy almighty Word came from thy Royall Throne in heaven strong as a man of Warre into the midst of a Land to be destroyed bringing thy unâ—ained command like a sharp sword and standing filled aâ— with death while reaching to heaven he stood upon the earth The like you have in the Wisdome of the Sonne of Sirach when he proclaimeth that Wisdome which God brought forth and by which he made all things to be the Author of that Wisdome which he teacheth And in the additions to Jeremy under the name of Baruch in the Greek Bibles shewing the Israelites that they were in bondage for deserting that way of Wisdome which unknown to the Idolatrous Nations he that founded the Earth and ordained the rest of the World by Wisdome hath seen and made known to them addes immediately Baruch III. 12-15 this is our God nor shall any other be valued besides him He found out the way of Knowledge and gave it to Jacob his servant and to Israel his beloved Afterwards he appeared on â—arth and conversed with men Which words I much marvaile to see stand suspected to some great Scholars as foisted in by Christiane Copyists For what do they import more then that the Wisdome of God which dealt with men by the flesh of Christ dealt with them afore by the Prophets Which the Jewes themselves who deny the Wisdome of God to be incarnate in our Lord Christ cannot refuse This Wisdome of God this Word of God this Spirit of God this image of his glory this mirror of his substance by which he made the World coming to holy men by the ministery of Angels in whom it was resident for that service made them Gods friends and Prophets as coming to us in the flesh of Christ which he took never to let go it hath made us the children of God that is Christians This is indeed that great figure in which the eloquence of the Old Testament consisteth and may be called as by the Greek Fathers many times it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or good husbandry of language intimating the way of Gods dispensing the knowledge oâ— himself which that time was capable of by such sparing expressions as being expounded by the appearance of our Lord Christ in the flesh may well make all doubt of the true intent of them to vanish And therefore I must needs applaude the practice of the Primitive Church related afore out of S. Athaâ—asius in Synopsi Scripturâ— and others to instruct the learners of Christistianity out of those books which we now call Apocrypha For by this point which cantaineth the summe of Christianity it doth appear as also by divers others it may appear that the Secret of Christianity folded up in the writings of the Prophets unfolded in the writings of the Apostles though the same for substance yet without disparagement to the Prophets because the counsaile of God required it is more clearly and plainly set forth in them then in the writings of the Prophets as the twilight is a degree to the light which the sun-rise bringeth with it What impressions of this sense may yet be discerned in the Jews writings I will not stand to inquire here where I write to all English so farre as they are capeable of those things wherein they are all concerned whether capable or not remitting the Readers that are capable to those that maintaine the truth of Christianity against the Jewes And to those things which Grotius upon the beginning of S. Johns Gospel whereof hitherto I maintaine the true meaning and upon other Texts which I have imployed to that purpose hath observed ouâ— of the Chaldee Paraphrase Philo the Jew and others of that nation besides diverse Heathen Philosophers whose sayings otherwise ungrounded seem to come from the sense of that people One thing I will observe which is very ordinary among their Ancient Doctors to call the Angel which speakes to the Fathers under the proper Name and in the person of God Metatron signifying neither more nor lesse then Metator in Latine as you may see in Buxtorfius his great Lexicon that is an harbinger or quartermaster of lodgings Whereof it is impossible to give so fit a reason as this That they understood him to be the fore-runner or harbinger of the Messias and therefore the Messias is our Lord Jesus The ancient Fathers of the Church having declared from the very mouth of the Apostles that those dispensations were managed by the Word of God now dwelling in our flesh as prefaces and praeludes to the incarnation of our Lord making way for it by the Ministery of the Prophets as Saint John the Baptist did at a nearer distance before his coming CHAP. XVII Answer to those texts of Scripture that seem to abate the true Godhead in Christ Of that creature whereof Christ is the first-borne and that which the Wisdome of God made That this beliefe is the originall Tradition of the Church What meanes this dispute furnisheth us with against the Arrians That it is reason to submit to revelation concerning the nature of God The use of reason is no way renounced by holding this Faith I Have in this defense given the true meaning to very many texts of Scripture that are alledged against the Faith of the Church Some remaine which I thinke fit to repeate and answer in this abridgment There be those that lay a great waight upon that of our Lord John XVII 3. This is eternal life to know thee the onely true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent But the same exclusive onely or something of the same force is found in many other places 1 Cor. VIII 4 5 6. There is no other God but one Ephes IV. 6. One God and Father of all 1 Tim. II. 5. There is one God and one Mediator of God and man the man Christ Jesus And wheresoever we read the onely God or the onely wise God or the like The rest are not many that I shall name Mat. XXIV 36. Of that day and hower knoweth no man nor the Angels of heaven nor the Sonne but the Father alone Col. â— 15. The first-born of the whole creature Seemeth to ranck Christ with the creatures being of the same birth John XIV 28. The Father is greater then I. For answer to the first I will not insist that the words are to be construed thus This is eternall life to know thee and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent to be the onely true God Or thus To know thee onely to be the true God and to know Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent For the Greek article which the Latine wanteth the English punctually answereth determines the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the onely true God to go together as agreeing in the same case with thee that went afore But this I say that the exceptive onely can by no reason be understood to exclude the attribute of the true
vvhich is the proper signification of the Greek vvord here used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same sense vvith the Latine create liberos as I sayd I know how much dispute there is that our Lord when he sayth The Father is greater then I is to be understood of his humane nature VVhich to me I confesse seems very hard that our Saviour should tell his Disciples for their comfort that God is greater then man and that therefore they ought to be comforted because he was going to God And having alwaies given this reason vvhy the eternall VVord of God was imployed in redeeming mankind because it came from God from everlasting I find that the priviledge of being the fountain of the Godhead vvhich is of necessity proper to the Father alone importeth that which the Sonne and the holy Ghost cannot have Not as if they had not the Godhead which is the same in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost But because they have it not from themselves and that it is necessarily more to give then to receive Whereupon it cannot be denied that the Sonne and the holy Ghost though honoured with the titles works attributes and worship of God are neverthelesse expressed and signified by the Scriptures as depending upon the Father and as something of his namely his Sonne and his Spirit though the same God also neverthelesse And this is without doubt the true answer to most of what Crellius brings in the second part of his first book De Deo that our Lord came not from himself nor to do his own will or to seek his own glory that he that believeth in him believeth not in him but in the Father that sent him John XII 4â— that he was called of God as Aaron Heb. V. 4. 5. that he received instruction from the Father that he prays to him that his words and workes are not his own but his Fathers and much more containing one and the very same difficulty which is assoiled by saying That wheresoever the weaknesse of his humane nature is not signified by the importance of what is said the rest is to be referred to the commission which he undertook to execute in our flesh which Commission supposes his coming from the Father of everlasting as the ground and reason of his undertaking of it This is that which the Prophet David signifieth Psalm XL. 7 8 9. Sacrifice and meat offering thou desirest none mine ears hast thou bored Which the Apostle Heb X. 9. quotes thus A body hast thou fitted for me The taking of our flesh being his giving up of himself for a servant to do Gods message in it as the servant that had his ear bored was to be free no more Exod. XXI 5. Burnt offering and sacrifice for sinne thou acceptest not Then said I loe I come To do thy will O God written of me in the voâ—lume of the Book is my desire yea thy Law is within my heart For his freedome in undertaking this commission as it supposeth a ground why it should be tendered so it importeth that obedience which God rewardeth And this is the cause why our Saviour tells his disciples If you loved me you would be glad that I go to my Father because the Father â—â— greater then I For if the Commission came from him then is he to performe all that the execution thereof inferreth That is to exalt our Lord to that estate which his disciples would be glad of if they knew what it were Nor let any man think that there is any danger of Arrius his heresie in all this I confesse the reasons I have advanced against Socinus do not formally destroy the pretense of the Arrians And the reason is because I find that I cannot kill those two birds with one stone Nor make the reasons that I advance to evidence the meaning of these Scriptures which are in question not to be that which Socinus would have to reach so farre as expresly and formally to destroy that sense which Arrius pretendeth I am confident that who will take the paines to consider that the Word was in the beginning when all was made shall have no ground to say that there was another beginning before the beginning of all things when that Word was made That this word was with God at the beginning as his bosome counseller Shall not sâ—y when God wanted his counsell That this Word was God Shall not say that any Christian is to count that God which is made of nothing That all things were made by it That any thing was made by that which is not God That the glory thereof in our flesh is the glory of the onely begotten Sonne of the Father shall make any difference between the honour of the Father and the honour of the Sonne And so I count it enough that the sense of the Scriptures here pleaded hath in it enough to resist the Arians with though this resistance be not here expressed But thus much is evident that as the Latine Fathers especially since S. Augustine have understood these words to be meant of our Lord Christ according to his humane nature so the Greek Fathers have understood them to be true even according to the divine nature upon that reason which I have declared And S. Hilary of the Latine Church though afore S. Augustine expresseth the reason which I have alledged ab authoritate originis because the priviledge of being Author and originall in respect of the Sonne and holy Ghost is that which they in respect of the Father can have nothing to countervail And this I say because I am perswaded that it is a consideration necessary to the maintaining and evidencing of the Tradition of the Church in this point For those that understand the state of this dispute must needs know that the most ancient writers of the Church Justine the Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian Origen and the rest that were before the Council of Nicaea do speak of the Sonne of God as of the Minister and workman to execute the counsels of God in making and governing of the World And therefore are spoken of by very learned men of these times enemies enough to those Heresies as men to be suspected in the sincerity of the Christiane Faith A thing not to be marvailed at in those that believe the expresse act and decree of the present Church to be the reason and ground of believing For upon that account what hinders that to become matter of Faith being decreed by those which are enabled on behalf of the Church which was not matter of Faith an hour before But those that draw the reason why they believe from the evidence which the society communion of the church tender to common sense that nothing could be refused by the whole body thereof but that which appeared to all contrary to that which all have received from the beginning will count it a violent abuse to all reason to make the Christiane Faith larger
figures hereof and read their bringing out of Egypt into the land of Promise and the maintainance of them in the inheritance thereof notwithstanding their enemies yea notwithstanding their frequent transgressing of it imputed to the Covenant with their Fathers believing with S. Paul that all Gods promises are yea and amen in Christ they cannot consequently make doubt to believe not onely that they are spiritually made good to Christians but also were spiâ—itually made good to them who lived the life of Christians under the faith of Christ to come during the Law in consideration of his merits and sufferings And therefore it is not for nothing that I insist upon this that not onely the giving of the Law but the ambassages by which God dealt with the Fathers and Prophets of old time were performed by the same Word of God which afterwards becoming incarnate is now our Lord Christ assuming for the time the ministery of an Angel that represented and bore the person of God in the likenesse of man As prefaces and preludes to his coming in our flesh not to leave it any more For if it pleased God to use this ministery in order to that which was to purchase of him that grace which should build the Church is it marvail if in consideration of his Sonne by whom this intercourse between God and man was managed he should grant those helps at that time which by the meanes of that knowledge which that intercourse maintained were effectuall to reduce them to that spirituall obedience to God which made them friends to God at that time And therefore I marvaile not that the ancient Church according to that which I said afore should make use of those bookes which now we call Apocrypha for the instruction of those whom by the name of Catechumeni they prepared for baptisme For in as much as we have in them those expresse testimonies which I have quoted of the Wisdome of God dealing with mankâ—nd from the fall of Adam to reduce them to the knowledge of God and to maintaine them in it insomuch it affordeth a necessary instruction to informe all that desire to be Christians by what means the world was saved before and after the Law and yet no salvation but by Christianity Which they that neglect will sooner betray the cause of our common Christianity then give a good account of so great a difficulty The Socinians for certaine will want footing against the Jews either in shewing how the Fathers were saved or why they are rejected It remaineth that I give a reason why the position of Socinus or of Pelagius in denying the grace of Christ as the cure of Originall sinne is not consistent with the grounds of Christianity which is to say that the account which they are able to give for the coming of our Lord Christ is not sufficient not reasonable because they deny this grace Socinus liberally granteth the grace of God in sending Christ to publish his Gospel and to assure all mankind that he is ready to pardon the sinnes of all that receive it and to give them eternall life living here as Christians undertake to do That having provided that our Lord Christ should be born of a Virgine by the holy Ghost of his free grace he hath exalted him to the power and honour of God under himself thereby both rewarding his undertaking and performing this ambassage above merit and assuring us both of the truth of the Gospel and of the performance of it to them that live conformable to Christs Crosse who have a man of our own kind indowed with Gods own power to deliver us from all enemies of our own free will believing his Gospel so tendered and living as it requireth But in all this neither he nor Pelagius who as I said in the beginning as freely acknowledgeth that grace of God which consisteth in giving the Gospel besides that free will which we come into the world with tenders us any account at all how it comes to passe that all mankind iâ— become enemy to God and subject to his wrath Which untill it be supposed to be true there is no cause why the Apostles and the Church after them should invite the world to undertake so much hardship as Christianity importeth And therefore S. Paul hath had care to set it forth as the ground of Christianity in the beginning of his Epistle to the Romanes For it will not serve the turn to have recourse to the examples of their predecessors and the nature of man apt to imitate them as a sufficient reason hereof seeing this reason can go no higher then Adam and that there is evidence that through the grace of God good examples of his posterity such as walked with God if not of himself as the book of Wisdome affirms X. 1. and we have no cause to doubt were performed before the eyes of them who notwithstanding imitated the apostasy which he disclaimed How then shall we imagine supposing a good and an evil branch in his posterity that the bad example should so be followed that all the world should runne after strange Gods Onely a few Fathers by that entercourse which God granted them of grace and the doctrine which came from their Fathers but to their Fathers by grace being preserved intire to God How comes the same to passe after the floud in the posterity of so just a man as Noe after such a horrible warning as the deluge Had the light of reason been such in discerning the difference between good and bad as the Law of Nature and by consequence the state of mans creation requireth had mans inclination been without any bias contrary to that which the light of reason such as it is shewes how could this have been How comes it to passe that the excellence of mans nature and the reason that he is endowed with serves for a reproach to all mankind that now follows it That those who see the difference of good and bad when they are alone without witnesse when they are under publick ingagements commit those oppressions upon men whereof they have no example even from beasts Doth not all the learning all the experience of the world thus farre give testimony to Christianity and shall we think fit to advantage our selves upon this plea against those that are not Christians and straight to deny the consequence of it to Christians Especially having the fall of Adam so evident a beginning of it set forth by Moses and the comming of Christ by S. Paul for the cure of it Thus farre then we plead from the motives of our common faith But when we come to measure the grace of Christ which is the cure by the person of Christ I suppose I have right to demand for true that which I have proved that he is God and man not by grace noâ— by reward but by birth And give notice to Pelagius that Socinus in a more cunning age of disputing found it requisite for
to mankind Seeing there is a reason to be given for all that fall under the same in the nature of the finall or the meritorious cause God stands as much glorified man as much obliged to worke out his salvation with feare and trembling as if he knew the bottome of Gods secret counsaile And thus the objection is void It remaineth that we consider the Tradition of the Church what it declareth concerning the truth of that which I have resolved or towards it Where we must take notice of the Monkes of Adrymetus under Valentine who received S. Agustines doctrine of Gods effectuall grace and predestination to it from everlasting in such a sense that they inferred from it all indeavours of men all exhortations reproofes instructions and prayers to be utterly fruitlesse and vaine as tending to that which dependeth upon the meere appointment of God which cannot be defeated and without which nothing can serve To rectifie this mistake S. Augustine lived to write them his book yet extant de correptione Gratia wherein he declareth all that he had said of the grace of God and the efficacy thereof to proceed upon supposition of free will in man though inslaved to sin by the fall of Adam from the bondage whereof the grace of Christ voluntarily though effectually redeemeth those that are freed by it whereby as by the rest of his writings concerning the grace of Christ against Pelagius he establisheth two points belonging to the foundation of the Christian faith The first of the freedome of mans will though not from sin since the fall of Adam yet from necessity determing the resolution of it when by the treaty which the Gospell advanceth it is invited to imbrace Christianity and to live according to it Which were all a mere nullity were not any man free to resolve himselfe upon it The second of the grace of God by Christ which if it may be purchased by the indevour of mans free will then was it not necessary to send our Lord Christ as the second Adam to repaire the breach which the first Adam had made This being the sum of the Catholike faith in this mater and the rest which is advanced to shew how those two points both stand true together belonging to the skill of a Divine not to the faith of a Christian so far as by maintayning them men destroy the foundation of Christianity on neither side Which it is no marvail that some things which S. Augustin had said in giving a reason hereof seemed to some to do seeing those that accepted of his doctrine in Africk drew from it a consequence utterly destructive to Christianity I speake of those in the parts of France about Provence and Marsailles who inferring from S. Augustines saying that in his opinion God makes the farr greater part of men on purpose to condemne them to death seemed to mainetaine the beginning of salvation to come from those indeavours of mans will born as he is under originall sin which God faileth not to second with those helps of Grace which the mater requireth There is great appearance of that which Jansenius disputeth so eagerly de Haeresi Pelag. VII 5. sâ—q that the maine ground of their opposition was the decree of predestination which S. Austine would have to be absolute As being perswaded that thereby the effects of free will become fatal in which that reason of reward and punishment which the Covenant of Grace establisheth requires contingence And herewith the occasion which Faustus pretendeth for the writing of his book de Gratia et Libero Arbitrio agreeth To wit that a certaine Priest called Lucidus is required by him in the name of a Synod held at Arles under Leontius Bishop to recant certaine positions tending to maintaine the necessity of being damned for originall sin by the foreknowledg of God in them for whom Christ dyed not dying onely for sin And this by a letter subscribed by one of the Bishops This recantation being made Faustus pretendeth to write at the intreaty of the Synod to lay forth their sense and reasons But to have added something upon the decree of an other Synod held afterwards at Lions True it is indeed which Vâ—ssius observeth Historiae Pelag. VI. Thesi XIV that whereas some of them insisted on nothing else others proceeded to deny the necessity of preventing grace For whatsoever we say of Cassianâ— who hath writ to severall purposes in severall places Faustus manifestly affirmeth that by the act of free will in beginning to believe a Christian obtaines the grace of God which his owne choice preventeth Which if we understand the Faith which he speaketh of to signifie Christianity and the act of believing to consist in becoming a Christian is nothing else but the fundamentall faith of Christianity That the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost is granted in consideration of a mans turning Christian But who believes that the actuall grace of the Holy Ghost whereby the world is converted to be as well as convicted that it ought to be Christiane is obtayned by the exaltation as purchased by the humiliation of Christ which Faustus supposing the preaching of the Gospell being the meanes which it useth no way denyeth acknowledgeth by consequence that act of faith which preventeth the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost to be prevented by the actuall helps of Grace which the preaching of the Gospel importeth And Jansenius de Haeresi Pelag VIII 1-9 acknowledgeth that they had no designe to destroy the grace of God through Christ as Pelagius had therefore did acknowledg not onely the outward preaching of the gospel but inward inspiration to make it effectuall Onely that making the effect of that grace which God appointeth to depend on free wil they fel into the heresy of Palagius which they desired to a void Now Pelagius indeed acckowledged that grace which the preaching of the gospell signifyed according to his own opinion which was false For not believing that our will is any thing the worse for Adams fall he could not allow that Christ hath purchased any help to repaire the breach and to cure the disease which he had made But as he could not deny it to be an act of bounty in God to propose the reward of everlasting life which is supernatupall So he must affirme that it is purchsed by the merre naturall act of free will without any help of grace granted of Gods mercy in Christ in consideration of his obedience And by this meanes he brought the death of Christ to no effect Seeing God might have assured the tender of his gospell to come indeed from him without it And so the merit of grace that is the reason that obliges God to give it is originally ascribed to the works of free Will according to Pelagius But according to those who acknowledging Originall sin acknowledg the cure of it by the helpe of grace purchased by Christ which the preaching of the gospell bringeth not
I would not have you ignorant brethren that our Fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the Sea and all were baptized unto Moses in the cloude and in the Sea and all eate the same spirituall meate and all drank the same spirituall drink For they all drank of the spirituall rock that followed them Now the rock was Christ They that entred into a Covenant of workes to obtaine the Land of promise as I have showed they did entred not expressely into a Covenant of Faith in Christ for obtaining the world to come No more then being baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the Sea as he sayes here they were that is into his goverment into the observation of the Lawes he should give in hope of the promises he should give they can be said to have been baptized expressely into Christ and that profession which his promises require Wherefore when he saith that the rock was Christ his meaning is not immediately and to those that rested in this temporall Covenant of workes But as the Manna was Christ and Moses was Christ by the meanes of that faith which God then received at their hands to wit the assurance of everlasting happinesse for them who under this calling should tender God the spirituall obedience of the inward man upon those grounds which his temperall goodnesse the tradition of their Fathers and the instruction of their Prophets afforded at that time Now I appeale to the sense of all men how those can be said to have that interest in Christ which I have showed that Christians have and therefore upon the same ground if there were no consideration of Christ in the blessings of Christ which they injoyed Wherefore when S. Paul proceeds hereupon to exhort them not to tempt Christ as some of them tempted we must not understand that he forbids us to tempt Christ as they tempted God But that they also tempted Christ who went along with them in that Angel in whom the name of God and his word was as I said afore So when the Apostle saith that Moses counted the reproch of Christ greater riches then the treasures of Aegypt for he looked at the recempense of reward Ebr. XI 26 when putting them in mind to follow their teachers considering the end which they had attained and Moses aimed at he addeth Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and to day and for everlasting Ebr. XIII 8. when S. Peter sayes that the Prophets who foretold the Gospell searched against what time the Spirit of Christ that was in them declared and testified before hand the sufferings of Christ and the glorious things that followed 1 Pet. I. 10. when S. Paul saith that all Gods promises are yea and Amen in Christ 2 Cor. I. 20. me thinkes it is strange that a Christian should imagine that there was no confideration of Christ in these promises under which they ranne the race of Christians Nor could S. Paul say As by Adam all dy so by Christ shall all be made alive 1 Cor. XV. 22 Nor could the comparison hold betweene the first and second Adam which he makes Rom. V. 12-19 if that life which I have showed how Christ restores Christians to were given to the Fathers before Christ without confideration of Christ Nor could the Apostle otherwise say That Christ is the mediator of a New Covenant that dâ—â—th coming for the ransome of those transgressions that were under the Old they that are called may receive the promise of an everlasting inheritance Ebr. IX 15. but because those sinnes which were redeemed onely to a temporall effect by the sacrifices of the Old Law as also those which were not redeemed at all by any as I said were by the sacrifice of Christ redeemed to the purchase of the world to come Which is that which S. Paul tells the Jewes Acts XIII 29. that through Christ every one that beleeveth is justifiyed from all thinges which they could not be justified of by the Law of Moses For as the Law did not expiate capitall offenses so it expiated none but to the effect of a civil promise And though we construe the wordes of S. John Apoc. XIII 8. whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lambe slaine from the foundation of the world out of the same sense repeated Apoc. XIII 8. Not that the Lambe was slaine from the foundation of the world but that their names were written in his book from the foundation of the world yet in as much as it is called the book of the Lambe that was foreknown from the foundation of the world 1 Pet. I. 19. when Moses demands not to be written in Gods book or when mention is made of it in the New Testament it must be the book of Christ in the mysticall sense And when S. Paul sayes that Christ gave himselfe a ransome for all A testimony for due time What can he meane but that though he gave himselfe for all yet this was not to be testified till the proper time of preaching the Gospell And what is this but that though this is testified onely by the preaching of the Gospell yet he was a ransome for all Which reason suffers not the same terme all Ebr. II. 9. Rom. III. 23. to be restrained from that generality which it naturally signifies Lastly when the Apostle argues that if Christ should offer himselfe more then once that he might more then once enter into the Holy of Holies he must have suffered oft from the foundation of the world that is before the end of the world in which he came indeed Ebr. IX 25. 26. he must needs suppose that he suffered for all that were saved before the Gospell For what pretense can there be that he should suffer for sinnes under the Gospell before the Gospell more then that the High Priest before the Law should expiate those sinnes which were committed against the Law by entring into the Holy of Holies And here you may see that I intend not to affirme that all that were saved under the Law though in consideration of Christ did know in what consideration Christ should be their salvation as Christians under the Gospell doe But to referre my selfe to the determination of S. Augustine and other Fathers and Docters of the Church that they understood it in their Elders and Superiors the Prophets of God and their disciples the Judges of Israell who were also Prophets and the Fathers of severall ages of whom you read Ebrews XI who being acquainted with the secret of Gods purpose were to acquaint the people with it so sparingly and by such degrees as the secret wisdome of God had appointed These things thus premised I do acknowledge and challenge the act of God in dispensing in the execution of his originall Law and bringing the Gospel into effect in stead of it not to be the act of a private person remitting this particular interest in the punishment of those sinnes whereby
is admitted to Baptism is likewise invested with a right and due title to the promises of the Gospel remission of sâ—nnes and everlasting life As it may appear to all that hâ—ve contracted with the Church of England in Gods name that continuing in that which they professed and undertook on ttheir part at their Baptism they are â—ssured of no lesse by the Church And therefore this is and ought to be accounted that power of the Keyes by which men are admitted to the House of God which is his Church as S. Paul saith At least that part of it that is seen and exercised in this first office that the Church can minister to a Christian And seeing no man can challenge the priviledge of that communion to which he is admitted upon condition of that profession which Baptism supposed unlesse he proceed to live according to it it cannot seem strange that the same should be thought to be exercised in the celebration of the Eucharist as it is done with a purpose to communicate the Sacrament thereof to those that receive I shall desire any man that counts this sâ—râ—nge to consider that which I quoted even now out of Epiphanius That the Patriarch of the Jews at Tiberias being baptized by the Bishop put a considerable sum of Gold into his hand saying Offer for me For it is written Whatsoever ye bind on â—atrh shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever ye lose on earth shall be losed in heaven For so it follows in Epiphanius And when S. Cyprian blames or forbids offering up the names or offering up the Eucharist in the names of those that had fallen away from the Church in time of persecution till they were reconciled to the Church by Penance doth he not exercise the power of the Keyes in his hands by denying the benefit of those Prayers which the Eucharist is celebrated with to them who had forfeited their right to it by failing of that which by their baptism they undertook As on the other side whosoever the Eucharist is offered for that is whosoever hath a part in those Prayers which it is celebrated with is thereby declared loose by the Church upon supposition that he is indeed what he professes And whatsoever Canons of the Church there are of which there are not a few which take order that the offerings of such or such shall or shall not be received they all proceed upon this suppoâ—â—tion that by the power of the Keys they are to be allowed or refused their part of benefit in the Communion of the Eucharist and the effects of iâ— For not to speak of what is by the corruption of men but what ought to be by the appointment of God it is manifest that the admission of a man to the communion of the Eucharist is an allowance of his Christianity as conâ—ormable to that which Baptism professeth though in no sâ—ate of the Church it is a sufficient and reasonable presumption that a man is indeed and before God intitled to the promises of the Gospel that he is admitted to the communion of the Eucharist by the Church because whatsoever profession the Church can receive may be counâ—erfeit But so that it is to be indeavoured by all means possible for the Church to use that the right of communicating with the Church in the Sacrament of the Eucharist be not allowed any man by the Church but upon such terms and according to such laws that a man being qualified according to them may be really and indeed qualified for those promises which the Gospell tendreth Which being supposed every Christian must of necessity acknowledge how great and eminent a power the Lord hath trusted his Church with in celebrating and giving of the Eucharist when he is convinced to believe that the body and blood of Christ is thereby tendred him though mystically and as in a Sacrament yet so truly that the spirit of Christ is no lesse really present with it to inable the souls of all them that receive it with sincere Christianity then the Sacrament is to their bodies or then the same spirit is present in the flesh and bloud of Christ naturally being in the heavens For suppose that by faith alone without receiving this Sacrament a man is assured of the spirit of Christ as by faith alone understanding faith alone as S. Paul meant it I shall show that he may be assured of it yet if he have determined a visible act to be done to the due performance whereof he hath annexed a promise of the participation of the Spirit of Christ by our Spirit no lesse then of the body â—nd blood of Christ Sacramentally present by our bodies And if he hath made the doing of this a part of the Christianity which under the title of Faith alone inâ—iâ—leth to promises of the Gospell for who can be said to professe Christianity that owneth not such an Ordinâ—nce upon such a promise Then hath he determined and limited the truth of that faith which onely justifieth us at the beginning of every mans Christianity to the Sacrament of Baptism but in the proceeding of the same to that of the Eucharist These being the first Powers of the Church and having resolved from the beginning that the power of the Church extends to the deterâ—ining or limiting of any thing requisite to the communion of the Church the determination or limitation wherof by such an act as ought to have the force of Law to them that are of the Church becomes requisite to the communion of Christians in the offices of Gods service in unity I cannot see any of the controversies whereby we stand now divided that can deserve a place in our consideration before that of the Baptism of Infants For as it is a dispute belonging to the first and originall power of the Church to consider whether it extend so farre as when it is acknowledged that there is no written Law of God to that purpose that it may and justly hath provided that all the Children of Christian Parents be baptized Infants so it will apear to concern their salvation more immediately then other Laws limiting the exercise of the Churches power or the circumstances of exercising those offices of God service which it tendeth to determine can be thought to do But Before I come to dispute this point I will here take notice once more of the Book called the Doctrine of Baptisms one of the fruits of this blessed Reformation commonly attributed to the Master of a Colledge in Cambridge proving by a studied dispute that it was never intended by our Lord Christ and his Apostles that Christians should be Baptized at all That John indeed was sent to baptize with water but that the Baptism of Christ is baptism with the Holy Ghost and fire And so long as the Ceremonies of the Law were not abolished in point of fact though become void in point of right so long also baptism by water was practised by the Apostles as
about to impose new Laws upon the Church But those new Laws I show you were excepted against from the beginning of pretending them Let any man show me that voluntary confession of secret sins was ever exceped against in Tertullian who writ that Book when he was of the Catholick Church earnestly perswading to it Likewise though he writ his Book de Pâ—dicitia when he was become a Montanist yet it is easie to discern what he speaks in it as a Montanist by discerning what the Catholick Church contests and what it allows of his doctrine In the seventh Chapter of that Book it is manifest that he calls those sinnes to Penance which he were a mad man that should take either for scandalous or for notorious The Novatians being a branch of the Montanists and refusing to reconcile the greatest sins are to be thought to have followed their order in reconciling lesse sins as it is manifest by S. Ambrose de Poenit. V. 2. that they did Therefore they and therefore the Catholick Church did practice the discipline of Penance upon sins neither notorious nor scandalous In S. Cyprianâ— you have severall places where he mentions Penance for those sinnes which were to be confessed according to the custome of the Church after a certain time of humiliation when they were to be admitted to imposition of hands that is to the prayers of the Church for the pardon of him whom the Bishops blessing which the â—mposition of hands signifies acknowledged hopefull for remission of sinnes Epist X. LV. The same S. Cypriane de lapsis manifestly instances in those that had committed Idolatry secretly or had resolved towards it what befel them because they revealed it not to the Church so that sometimes they did reveal it Here cometh in the fact of Nectarius related by Socrates V. 19. because the custome being to confesse to a Priest deputed to that purpose sinnes not otherwise known who was to direct what she should publickly declare when she came before the congregation a certain noble Woman whose case is there related proceeded to declare that which caused such scandall that thereupon Nectarius then Bishop of Constantinople thought fit to put down the office which that Priest then held and executed of receiving the confession of those sinnes which were afterwards in part to be made known to the Church as the Priest intrusted should direct For Socrates relating the discourse which he had with the Priest which advised Nectarius to abolish the office aforesaid saith that he told him it was to be feared that he had given occasion to bring S. Pauls precept to no effect which saith Communicate not in the fruitlesse workes of darknesse but rather reprove them Which must suppose the publishing of those sinnes which a man may pretend by brotherly correction to restore And it is manifest that secret confession of sinnes hath remained in the Eastern Church and in that of Constantinople particularly even to this time So that no man can imagine that it was abrogated by Nectarius Origen in Psal XXXVII Hom. II. advises indeed to look about you for a skilful Physitian to whom you may open the disease of your soul good reason For there being a number of Presbyters by whom every Church was governed and it being in a mans choice whom he would have recourse to were he not to blame that should not make diligent choice But when he adviseth further that if he think the sinne fit to be declared to the assembly of the Church as where it is to be cured doth he not require necessary Penance upon voluntary confessions S. Ambrose de Pâ—nit II. 7. I. 6. II. 8. 9. laboureth to abate the shame of confessing sinnes If he speak of publick sinnes there can be no reason why For what hath he to do to abate that shame that cannot be avoided That which may be avoided is that which cometh by confessing such sins as it is in a mans power to conceal The same is evident in S. Augustinâ— Hom. ult ex L. And is further cleared by this that it is evident that he who was discovered not to have discovered to the Church that sinne which he was privy to but the world was not is by many acts of the Church constrained to undergo Penance for that default And in the Eliberitanâ— Canons it is provided that he who confesseth of his own accord shall come off with a lighter Penance he who is revealed by another shall be liable to a harder censure Can. LXXVI But no evidence can be so effectuall as the introducing of the Law of auricular confession that is of confessing once a year as well as receiving the Eucharist once a year For be it granted as it is most true that this Law comes into force and effect by the secular power of those soveraignties of Christendom which complying with the interest of the Church of Rome have agreed and do agree to inact the decrees of those Councils which have been held by the authority of it or the provisions thereof during the time that no Councils are held by temporall penalties upon their iubjects Is it therefore imaginable that the Councill could have pretended to introduce this limitation and demand the secular power to inact it had it not been a custome in force before that act was done that people should submit themselves to Penance for those sinâ—es which the Church without themselves could not charge them with Could any man offer so much violence to his own reason as to affirm that which himself cannot believe he would easily be convinced by producing the fashion of Ashwednesday and the order for the greatest part of Christians to declare themselves Penitents at the beginning of Lent with a pretence of obtaining absolution to the intent of receiving the communion of the Eucharist at Easter Which being more ancient then that law sufficiently demonstrateth that the effect of it was not to introduce the confession of secret sinnes which alwayes had been in use and force in the Church but expresly to limit and determine that which had been alwayes done formerly for the future to be done by all and at the least once a year It remains now to show the originall and generall practice of the Church that there is no Tradition to evidence that no sinne after Baptism can obtain remission but by the Church speaking of such sinnes as make the grace of Baptism void which is sufficiently done already if we remenber that not only the Montâ—nists or the Novatians but the Church also did sometimes exclude some sinnes from all hope of reconciliation by the Church not excluding them neverthelesse from hope of pardon with God but not ingaging the Church to warrant it For I demand in what consideration that pardon is obtained which the Church supposes possible for them to obtain Is it not upon the same score as all Christians obtain padon of sin To wit by being qualified for it with that disposition of mind which
that people yet gaped for the temporall promises of the old Testament And therefore seeing those who worshipped many false Gods abound with earthly goods which they expected at Gods hands for great maters first upon the blandishments of their wives they were afraid to offend then they were induced also to worship them But under the Gospel the mariage of Gentiles not being against Gods Law becomes not unlawfull when the one turns Christian And justice allowing to part for fornication unbeliefe being a greater fornication justifies him or her that parts in consideration of it having never contracted it insoluble All this is evident by the ancientest instance of this case that the Church hath in Justine the Martyrs Apology for the Christians or rather in Eusebius Eccles Hist IV. 17. where the passage of Justine is related intire which in R. Stevens Copy of Justine is maimed in this part It is the case of a Gentleman so debauched to the â—ust of women that he was content his wife should play the good fellow as well as himselfe that she might not have to reproach him with It pleased God the wife being reclamed to Christianity thought it necessary to relinquish so riotous a Husband But being perswaded by her friends had the patience to try whether there remained any hope of reducing him And when he being gone to Alexandria had flown out more loosly then ever into the debauches of the place that she might not seem a party to his wickednesse dweling with him whom it was in her power to part with she sent him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Justin such a Leter of divorce as the Law alloweth the wife to discharge her selfe with Which example justifies the relation of Basil of Selâ—â—cia concerning S. Thecla the first Martyr of the Woman-kind in his first Book of her life that being contracted to a noble man of the Country called Thâ—â—â—yris being converted to Christianity by the preaching of S. Paul at Iconicus forsook her spouse a declared enemy to Christianity I say that there is in all this nothing contrary to Christianity the other example justifies Onely both of them give us sufficient occasion to say that S. Paul is not well understood by them that would have him to extend that cause of divorce which our Lord had delivered unto the case of desertion upon the conversion of the other to the faith For if the premises be true it is not a divorce which S. Paul allows but a nullity which he pronounces of those mariages which stand not upon profession of that interess in one anothers bodies which Christianity requires And therefore S. Augustine in his Book de Fide operibus cap. XIX doubts of her who being a Concubine professeth that if her Lord should dismiss her she will never mary any body else whether she is to be admitted to Baptisme or not For indeed there is no doubt in the case Not because the Church from the beginning generally condemned those Concubines who under a profession of fidelity to their own Lords professing interchangeably to know no woman else contented themselves with that right of a wife which Christianity requires without the secular priviledge of dâ—wry or the right to it which obliges the Husband to expense answerable For the same Augustine de bonâ— conjug cap V. declares such a conjunction as this to be mariage as to Gods Law though not as to the priviledges of the world whereas not supposing this profession he condemns it for meer adultery And they are expresly allovved by the Council of Toledo can XVII Though S. Leo Ep. XCV allovv the mariage of a vvoman to a man that already hath a Concubine as no maried man For that may be upon supposition that there never was any such troth between him and his Concubine Which must be the reason vvhy S. Austine condemns them in another place Hom. XLIX L. S. Jerome truly and Genâ—adius de Eccles dogmat cap. LXXII allovv the 〈…〉 effect to a Concubine as to a Wife in making a man digamus as to the Caâ—ons And for this reason Conjugales ergo tabulae jura dotalia nâ—n coituâ— ab Apâ—stâ—â—â— condemnâ—â—tur In the vvords of S. Jerome Is it then the deed and right of 〈…〉 or carnall knowledge that the Apostle condemneth This is not then the reason why S. Austine refuses a Concubine Baptism but because she is a Concubine without mutuall profession of that interess in one anothers boâ—â—â—s which makes her a wife as to Christianity Nor am I moved to the contrary by seeing that S. Austine refused Baptism to those that put away their vvives and maried others as Adulterers manifest Which is the occasion of his Book de â—ide operibus as he sayes in the beginning of it It vvas but his opinion or at the most a locall custome For Concil Eliber can X. Siâ—â—a quam Câ—techâ—â—eâ—â—â— reliquit duxerit maritum potest ad fontem lavacri admitti Hoc circa feminas Catechâ—â—eâ—â—â—â—â—it observandum If a woman dimissed by a pretender to Christianity mâ—ry a Husband she may be admitted to the Fâ—nt of Baptism The samâ—â—s to be observed concerning women that pretend to Christianity In case thâ—y dismiâ—â— a Husband that maries again and then desires Baptism because of the nullity of mariage made in unbelief when one party turns Christian In the Constitutions of the Apostles VIII 33 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Christian man or woman maried in bondage let them either part or be ejected Here the mariage of slaves is supposed void to the party that turns Christian The Church further commands it to be voided How stands that vvith that vvhich went afore VIII 32 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If he have a wife or a woman a husband let them be taught to contain themselves to one another according to Christs Law But if the one party be not under Christs Law so that it cannot be presumed that a slave will do so they must be parted And by this means it remains demonstrated that it is our Lord Christ alone that hath introduced a new Lavv into his Church of the mariage of one to one alone Which though it be expressed in the Scripture rightly interpreted yet had not the practice of the Church having received this right sense for Law to their conversation giving bounds to the licentiousnesse of those wits whose interess might be to destroy the strictnesse of the Lavv it cannot be imagined that there should never be any visible attempt within the body of the Church to infringe the validity of it For seeing there is no more mention in the Scripture of that dispensation in the first Ordinance of mariage in Paradise whereby it was lawfull under the Lavv to have more vvives then one and seeing it is a maxime of such appearance in the Scripture that nothing is prohibited by the Gospell which the lavv allovveth vvould no such pretence have framed a plea for those that never wanted will
though we question whither it contain the due bounds of this prohibition as it was first delivered to mankind after the flood And hereupon well may wee answer with them that when Moses saith that for these abominations the seven nations were driven out before the children of Israel he is to be understood respectively to those abominations which were committed against the true intent of the prohibition of uncleannesse injoyned on all mankind but not to those things which we see were in use among the Fathers before the Law nor to whatsoever was committed against the first institution of Paradise Which if it be admitted then all that is established by the Law of Levit. XVIII will oblige the whole Church without dispensation by any power of it though not because by the act of giving the Law to the Israelites the Church is obliged but because there is more reason why Christianity should restrain that which was allowed by the Law then that the Law should restrain that which was allowed by the Patriarchs And upon this principle we shall not need to runne upon any inconvenience to obtain one degree of affinity and one of consanguinity to be unlawful for Christians though not expressed in the leter of the Scripture to wit the mariage of the sister to a mans deceased wife and that of cousin Germanes The former is thought to be secured by the Text of Levit. Thou shalt not uncover the nakednesse of thy Brothers wife it is thy Brothers nakednesse For the wives sister being as neer as the Brothers wife the one being prohibited and neernesse the onely reason of the prohibition the other cannot be licensed saving the reason of the Law Therefore the provision of Dâ—ut XXV 5-10 that the next of kin though a Brother should mary the wife of the Brother deceased so that the children should be in account of Law the children of the deceased All this signifies no more but that the Law being positive this exception is made to it by him that made it So that when it follows Levit. XVIII 18. Thou shalt not take a wife to her sister to vex her to uncover her nakedness beside her in her life time It is observed that in the Ebrue to take a wife to her sister is to take a wife to another wife And therefore that this Law is a prohibition of Polygamy at least when the taking of another wife may be an occasion to vex the former wife Not that a Jew was licensed hereby to mary his wives sister after her death This indeed was the interpretation of the Sadduces and of those Jews that admit no interpretation of the Law of Tradition but onely by the leter of it for which they are reproved by the Talmudâ—sts the off-spring of the Pharisees in the Book called Pesikta Though it is to me difficult to believe that the Sadduces of old or their successors the Scriptuary Jewes did thereupon tie themselves to one wife It is indeed difficult enough to give an evident reason of difference in nearnesse of blood wherefore the brother should be prohibited his brothers wife and the sister allowed her Brothers husband But it is one thing to alledge an inconvenience an other thing to answer an argument nor are we to presume that God doth nothing by his Law without acquainting them whom he imposed it upon with the reason of it Now this interpretation cannot subsist without overthrowing all that hath been said to show that Polygamy after the flood was first prohibited by Christianity For when thy Brothers wife is generally prohibited in Leviticus and afterwards licensed or commanded in case he die childlesse it is but a particular exception to a general But if in Ex. XXI 10. a man is supposed to have power of having more wives then one and by Lev. XXIII 10. injoyned to have no more then one in Deut. XXI 11-15-18 supposed to have more then one can these be thought reconcilable Certainly the tenor of these Lawes imports no such thing as dispensing but a liberty already in use which the Law restrains not but this Law would restrain if had it been thus meant And why should the Law say in her life time if the intent of it were that a man should not have two wives at once Could there be any question whether a man might mary a second wife or not Therefore that clause must be thought to be added to signifie that after death this Law forbids not to take the wives sister to wife And so that which Jacob had done before is by this Lavv forbidden to be done for the future For Jacob vvhen first he found that he had beded his vvives sister vvas innocent for all that vvas done but had been utterly disabled to have companied vvith any other for the future vvithout dispensation in this Lavv vvhich vve must imagine either to have come betvveen Labans proposition of marrying both and Jacobs assent or else to have gone before all the actions of like nature vvhich the Scripture testifies vvhereof vvhither is the more reasonable let any man of reason chuse As for the limitation added to the right of having more vvives then one under the Lavv Exod. XXI 10. vvhereby he that hath an inferiour vvife bought vvith his silver of Gods people is bound to pay her the benevoâ—ence due to a vvife though it make the mariage void by abuse of his right for it is said He shall let her go free vvhich implies the dissolution of the marriage yet it no vvay signifies that he vvas not able to mary her afore And vvhen the Prophet Mal. 11. 14. 15. 16. blames the Jevvs for oppressing their vvives out of love to strange vvives vvhich by the Lavv they might not have be this adultery if you please because such a mariage as I have shovved vvas ipso facto void be it treachery in transgressing his covenant vvith the first vvife yet did not he that took a second vvife so as to oppresse the first violate this Lavv of Levit. XVIII 18. For hovv can a mariage that is good and valid become void by oppressing but as an Ebrue slave that one maries is made free by the Law if she be not used as a wife and so no longer his wife that reliefe being onely provided by the law in that case Therefore when the Law saith to vex her it is not limitation but a reason which the Lavv follows in sisters because in them as it is more likely to come to passe so it is more unreasonable as in Jacobs example whereas being a perpetual attendant of Polygamy as in the wives of Elkanah it was not nevertheless admitted for a reason totally to prohibite it And therefore I say that I am no waies tied to give a reason why God who prohibited two Brothers to have the same wife should allow two sisters to have the same husband after death For the Lavv being positive as it is confessed by the dispensation introduced by the Law on
which they hear from those that do not profess to Preach within those bounds who can deny that they are guilty to their own death What those bounds are I shall say by and by In the mean time let them take heed whose neglect of the written word or whose zeal to preaching shuts the Scriptures out the Church that they contribute not to the bringing in of the secret and invisible Word of the Enthusiasts It is now no dainty to hear that the word which we have written in our Bibles is not the Word that saveth but that which is secretly and invisibly spoken to us within by Gods Spirit And whosoever attributeth the reverence due to Gods word to any such dictate without dependence upon the Scriptures that is deriving the same from the Scripture by those means which God hath allowed us for the understanding of them according to the premises what shall hinder him to preferre the dictate of his own Spirit under pretense of Gods before that which he admitteth to come from Gods Spirit For he who admitteth the greater contradiction of two parallel Soveraigns why should he not admit a less that the written word is not Gods word in competition with the dictate of his own Spirit when there is so easie a cloke of expounding the written word though against all reason and rule of expounding it yet so as to submit even the substance of Christianty to the dictate of a private spirit We have an example for it in the impostures of Mahomet For doth not the Alcoran acknowledge both our Lord Christ and Moses true Prophets of God besides all other attributes yet in as much as it pretendeth the Spirit given to Mahomet in such a degree as to controle them both it smoothes the way to the renouncing of Christianity when the power of the sword fell out on the side of it Simon Magus and his followers the Gnosticks might have done the like had the like power been on their side as the Manichees did in part if those things be true that we read in Cedronus of a party of them possessed of the Power of the Sword about the parts of Armenia all upon pretense of higher revelations then were granted to the Apostles The same is alleged against the Paraclete of Montanus and perhaps his followers being disowned by the Church might fall to such extremities but at the beginning it doth not appear that he pretended any more then to introduce certain strict orders into the Church as injoyned by his Spirit and those of his fellow Prophets which it was not expedient for the Church to undertake and being so it was requisite for him to conform unto the Church any pretense of the Spirit notwithstanding but otherwise were no way destructive to Christianity Suppose then the reading of the Scriptures to be one of those offices for the which the Church is to assemble the order of reading them which is that which remains is a thing to subject so common reason that there need not much dispute about it If we look upon Tertullianes or before him Justin Martyrs Apologies for the Christians there will appear no more then this that every Church that is every Body of Christians under one Bishop did prescribe themselves that order for reading the Scriptures in the Church which they found requisite And if that primitive simplicity which the Christianity under persecution was managed with had continued what fault could have been found with it But when the World was come into the Church which he that injoyes his right senses will not believe did come into it all with the like affections to the professions which they undertook it was in vain to hope that differences would not rise or might not rise about this as well as other points in which the exercise of Christianity consisted Differences arising the greater authority is that to which the ending of them obliges all men to have recourse The greater authority you have seen is that of the greatest Churches whither in Synods or not requiring Synods to oblige the less by reason of the exigence or reasonableness of the case The order of reading the Scriptures and of singing or saying the Psalms and Hymns of Gods praises being grounded upon no other reason nor tending to any other end then that of exercising and improving the Christianity of Gods people I need noâ— dispute that the Order which the power of the Church of Rome hâ—d introduced here as well in the rest of the West was such as made the Assemblies of the Church fruitlesse to that purpose For what could those shreds of Psalms and Lessonâ— which that order prescribeth contribute that might be considerable to that purpose Nor need I argue how considerable the order of the Church of England is to the same For to finish the Psalter once a year the New Testament thrice a year the Old once besides for reverence to the ancient Ordinance of the Church another Order for beginning the Prophet Esay at Advent and Genesis at Septuagesima to be prosecuted on Festival days is an Order from which the Church hath reason to expect a good effect in the instruction of Gods people And the interweaving of the Lessons with Hymns as it is agreeable to the rules and the practice of the ancient Church so it is in reason a fit mean to preserve attention and quicken devotion in them who use it In the mean time supposing there were considerable objections to be made against this or that order yet Order in generall being a thing so requisite to the preservation of Unity in the Body of the Church there is no reason to be given why any body should be admitted to dispute any Order received that cannot advance another Order which he can pretend to be more effectual to the purpose in which the parties must needs agree I am here to answer that part of the question concerning the Canon of Scripture which I said in the first book concerneth the Law not the faith of the Church whither the reading of those Scriptures which S. Jerome calls Apocryphall Ruffinus upon the Creed Ecclesiasticall for part of the Church office be for the ediâ—ication of the Church or not And a few words shall serve me to answer it with The very name of Ecclesiastical serves him that admits the Church to be one Body the unity whereof requires some uniformity in the order of those offices the communion whereof is one part of the end for which it subsisteth For it is manifest that the whole Church hath frequented the reading of them and that they are called Ecclesiastical for no other reason but because the reading of them hath been frequented by the Church in the Church And whosoever makes this any title of separation from the Church of Rome will make his Title Schismatical separating for that which is common to the present Church of Rome with the whole Church But because the repute of the Church is so slight
in the judgement of many that think themselves the most refined Christians that they allow it not that common sense in managing the businesse of Christianity which they must needs allow Jews Pagans Mahometans in faithfully serving their own faithlesse suppositions and which all experience shows us that it serves all mankind to what purpose soever it is imployed and that notwithstanding so great a triall of it as the governing of so great a Body as the Church is in unity so farre and so long as this Unity hath prevailed it is therefore necessary to give a reason why the Church so used them Which supposing the premises it will be as easie as it is necessary for me to give and that more sufficient if I mistake not then can possibly be given not supposing the same For if the secret of the resurrection the general judgement and the World to come if the mystery of the Holy Triniâ—y consisting in the Word or Wisdome and Spirit of God if the inward and spiritual service of God in truth of heart be more clearly opened in them by the work of Providence dispensing the effect of Canonicall Scripture by the occurrences of time then in the Law and the Prophets themselves which I have showed both that so it is and why so it is from the ground of the difference between the Old and the New Testament then I suppose there is sufficient reason why those who admit the Old Testament to be made for common edification in the Church should not put any question concerning those Scriptures Those new lights among us who do not allow the Psalter to be pertinently and reasonably imployed for the publick service of God upon all occasions as the Church hath alwaies imployed it may assure us that they understand not why the Scriptures of the Old Testament are read in the Church because they understand not the correspondence between the Old and the New Testament in the understanding whereof the edification of the Church by the Scriptures of the Old Testament consisteth There may be offence taken at divers things in these Scriptures I deny not But there may be offence taken in like maner at divers things in the Canonicall Scriptures of the Old Testament The humility of Christians requires them edifying themselves in that which they understand in the Scriptures according to our common Christianity in the rest which they understand not to refer themselves to their Superiours The Church understood well enough this difference and this correspondence to be discovered by these writings as the time required when it appointed Learners to read them And though I stand not upon terms yet I conceive they are more properly called Ecclesiastical because the Church hath imployed them to be read in the Church then Apocryphal according to the use of that word in the Church to signifie such writings as the Church suspecteth and therefore alloweth not to be read whither in publick or in private Whereupon I conceive also that the term of Canonical Scripture hath and ought to have two senses one when we speak of the Jews Canon in the Old Testament another when we speak of the Canon of the Church For seeing the Tradition of the Synagogue is perfect evidence what Scriptures of the old Testament are to be received as inspired by God the word Canon in that case may well signifie the Rule of our Faith or maners But because the Church cannot pretend to create that evidence originally but onely to transmit what she receiveth from the Synagogue Pretending neverthelesse to give a Rule what shall be read for the edification of the Church the word Canon therefore in that case will signifie onely the list or Catalogue of Scriptures which the Church appoints to be read in the Church which seems to reconcile the diverse accounts extant in severall Records of the Church CHAP. XXIII The consideration of the Eucharist prescribed by Tradition for the mater of it Lords Prayer prescribed in all services The mater of Prayers for all estates prescribed The form of Baptism necessary to be prescribed The same reason holdeth in the forms of other Offices IN the next place I do maintain that the Order of celebrating the Eucharist and the Prayer which it was was from the beginning solemnized with were from the beginning prescribed the Church by unwritten custome that is by Tradition from the Apoâ—â—les containing though not so many words that it was not lawful to use more or lesse for these were always occasions for celebrating the Eucharist emergent which must be intimated in fewer or more words in the celebrating of it yet the mater and substance of the Consecration of it together with the mater and substance of the necessities of the Church for which it was offered that is to say for which the Church was and is to pray at the celebration of it as hoping to obtain them by the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross which it representeth as received from the beginning was every were known to be the same This I inferr from that which I have said in the Book afore quoted of those Texts of S. Paul where those Prayers of the Church which the Eucharist is consecrated with are called Eucharistia or Thanksgiving if not rather the thanksgiving because it was a certain form of Thanksgiving well known to all Christians by that name from whence the Sacrament â—o consecrated was also so called from the time that our Lord hâ—ing blessed or given thanks to the Father over the Elements had said This is my body this is my blood and order is given that at the celebration thereof Prayers be made for the necessities of the Church and of all people 1 Cor. XIV 25. 26. 1 Tiâ—â— II. 1-8 Together with those passages of primitive antiquity from whence it appeareth there that the form of consecrating the Eucharist used and known generally in the Church is called Eucharistia and that the custome of interceding for all the necessities of the Church and for the reducing of unbelievers to the same is and hath been taken up and ever frequented by the Church in obedience to and prosecution of the said precept of the Apostles This observation might perhaps be thought too obscure evidence â—o bring to light a point of this consequence were it not justified by all that I produced afore to show that the Eucharist is consecrated by the Prayers of the Church which celebrateth it upon the faith of our Lords institution and promise For the mater of these Prayers tending to a certain purpose that the Elements may become the Body and Blood of Christ and convay his Spirit to those who receive them with living faith the Consecration which is the effect of them requires that the form of them be prescript and certain though not in number of words yet in sense in tent and substance And this by the evidence there produced may appear to have been maintained from the beginning by Tradition in
divinity of Plato was a tradition derived by Pythagoras from the familiarity which he had with uncleane spirits seeking to refine the grosse Idolatry of the Gentiles into a more subtill way of worshiping the Devile Which being imitated by Simon Magus and his followers of whom Menander professed Magick as Basilides and Marcus also did and the monuments of the Basilidians Magicke are extant to this day in the hands of Antiquaries as you may see in Baronius his Annales and the life of Peireski written by Gassendus and still more plentifully in a latter Booke on purpose to expound the monuments of the Basillidians God called Abraxas in those severall Fulnesses of the Godhead which the severall sects of them tuaght worshipped brought forth that worship of Angels which S. Paul condemned Col. II. 8-9 Whether as belonging to the fulnesse of the Godhead or as revealers of it Especially if it be considered that the deriving of the Originall and beginning of evill from a principle belonging to that Fulnesse of the Godhead which each sect of the Gnosticks acknowledged a position common to them all is also a part of Plato and Pythagoras his Philosophy which the Stoicks also from whom the Heretick Hermogenes in Tertullian deriveth it were tainted with as well as with the opinion of Fate utterly inconsistant with the worship of the true God as Aristotle and Epicurus his Philosophy free enough from familiarity with uncleane spirits is with denying of providence at least in human affaires which the eternity of the world necessarily produceth Neither is the Heresy of Cerdon and Marcion which succeeded the Gnosticks any thing else but Pythagoras his position of a principle of Good and an other of Evil applyed to the supposition of Christianity though such as they thought good to admit As for that of the Manichees we may an well allow Epiphanius deriving it from one Scythianus a rich merchant from Arabia to Egypt who having also learned their Magick writ foure books to maintaine Pythagoras his two principles And going unto Jerusalem to confer with the Christians there who maintained one true God and getting the worse betook himselfe to his Magick and exercising the same on the top of an house was cast downe from thence and dyed His disciple also and slave Terbinthus whom he left his heire going into Persia to confer with the priests of Mithras about the same purpose and being worsted betook himselfe to his masters Magick and got his death as his master had done Thus saith Epiphanius and that Manes marying his widow by his books and by his wealth became author of this sect onely that having got the books of the Old New Testament he used what colours they would afford him to intitle his device to Christianity for the seducing of Christians But whoso considers what master Pocâ—â—k hath produced out of the relations of the Saracens concerning the religion of the Persians p. 146. 150. whatsoever contest his predecessors might have with the Persians must acknowledg the Heresy of the Manichees to come from the Idolatry of the Persians the divines where of acknowedg a Principle of darknesse opposite to a Principle of light as we read also in Agathias expressely lib. II. that the religion of the Persians is that of Manichees And these considerations here put together upon this occasion may well seeme as I conceive to satisfie us that it is no marvaile the Pagane Greeks Romans should be so brutish as to worship stocks and stones having among them those wits that have left such excellent things of God and of mans duety to God upon record Seeing it appeares that the most divine of them were no otherwise taught then as it might best serve the Deviles turne to detaine them in the more subtill Idolatry of Magicians The rest being tainted with such positions as stand not with the worship of one true God So that it is no marvaile if they complyed with the vulgar Idolatries of their nations to him that considers that which I have written in the review of my booke of the right of the Church in a Christian state p. CLXVII to show that the followers of Plato and Pythagoras in the first times of Christianity as they were themselves Magicians so were great instruments to promote the persecuting of Christianity Which is also the true reason why the Gnosticks having devised every sect a way of Idolatry proper to themseves did indifferently counterfeit themselves Jewes Christians or Pagans for avoiding of persecution or for gaining of Proselytes eating things sacrificed to Idoles in despite of S Paul and taking part in the Idolatrous spectacles and sight of the Gentiles as Irenaeus with the rest of the Fathers witnesseth These particulars I have thus far inlarged to make a full induction of all the waies of Idolatry mentioned in the scriptures wherewith all the writings of the Jewes Pagans and Christians exactly agree by which induction it may appeare that all the waies of Idolatry which the Scripture mentioneth doe presuppose the beliefe of some imaginary and false Godhead properly called an idole as imaginary and without subsistence though that name is no lesse properly attributed to the image of it then the Image of any thing is called by the name of that which it representeth because of the intercourse which by the meanes of such Images those that worshipped them had with the author of such Imaginations even the Devile thinking they had it with theire imaginary Deities And the worshipping of those Dieties whether before under such an image or without it is that which is called Idolatry in the Scriptures For though the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may generally signifie all images and can have no bad sense in the usage of Hethen writers because they could never thinke amisse of the Images which they thought represented their Deities Yet when Christianity had brought in a beliefe that it was the Devile whom the Gentiles worshipped under those Images the word Idole being appropriated to them must needs be are a sense of that which the Christians detested Iust as I said even now of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it must needs beare another sense to the eares of Christans then it could among the heathen poets or Philosophers This language S. Jerome useth when in his translation of Eusebius his Chronicle num MDCCCLIV he saith of Judas Maccabaeus Templum ab Idolrum imaginibus expurgavit that he purged the temple from images of Idoles supposing the difference which I make between imaginary deityes and their Images And S. Austine in lib. Jud. Quaest XLI speaking of the case of Gedeon Cum Idolum non fuerit id est cujusdam Dei falsi simulacrum seeing it was no idole that is to say the image of any false God Which if it be true it will no way be possible to exempt the case of Aaron or Jereboam from that reason of Idolatry which this induction inforceth Or to imagine that
whereby they thought they held their estate whether of this world or the hope they might have of the world to come For my opinion obligeth me not to say that Idolatry was commanded by this law of Jeroboam or practised by all that conformed to it But that though not expresly commanded yet it followed by necessary consequence upon the introducing of the Law Not by consequence of naturall necessity from that which the terms thereof imported but by that necessity which the Schoole calls morall when the common discretion of men that are able to judge in such matters evidences that supposing such a Law it must needs and will come to passe CHAP. XXVI The Place or rather the State of happy and miserable Soules otherwise understood by Gods people before Christs ascension then after it What the Apocalypse what the rest of the Apostles declare Onely Martyrs before Gods Throne Of the sight of God I Come now to the nicest point if I mistake not of all that occasions the present Controversies and divisions of the Western Church the state of soules departed with the profession of Christianity till the day of Judgement The resolution whereof that which remaines concerning the publick service of God the order and circumstances of the same must presuppose This resolution must procede upon supposition of that which the first book hath declared concerning the knowledge of the Resurrection and the world to come under the Old Testament and the reservation and good husbandry in declaring it which is used in the writings of it The consideration whereof mightily commendeth the wisdome and judgment of the ancient Church in proposing the bookes which we call Apocrypha for the instruction of the Ca echumeni or learners of Christianity For these are they in which the Resurrection and the world to come and the happy state of righteous soules after death is plainly and without circumstance first set forth I need not here repeat the seven Maccabees and their mother professing to dy for Gods Law in confidence of Resurrection to the world to come 2 Mac. VII 9 11 23 36. nor the Apostle Ebr. XI 35-38 testifying the same of them and the rest that lived or died in their case But I must not omit the Wisdom of Solomon the subject whereof as I said afore is to commend the Law of God to the Gentiles that in stead of persecuting Gods people they might learn the worship of the onely true God For this he doth by this argument that those who persecute Gods people think there remains no life after this but shall find that the righteous were at rest as soone at they were dead and in the day of judgement shall triumph over their enemies Wisdome II. III. 1-8 V From hence proceeding to show how the wisdome of Gods people derives it selfe from Gods wisdome who so strangely delivered them from the persecutions of Pharaoh and the Egyptians for a warning to those that might undertake the like In particular the Kings of Egypt under whom this was writ and the Jewes most used the Greek The Wisdome of Jesus the sonne of Sirach pretending to lay down those rules of righteous conversation which the study of the Law the off-spring of Gods Wisdome had furnished him with is not so copious in this point though the precepts of inward and spirituall obedience and service of God from the heart which he delivers throughout can by no meanes be parted from the hope of the world to come being grounded upon nothing else And he proposeth it plainly from the beginning when he saith He that feareth God it shall go well with him in the end and at the day of his death he shall be blessed The very additions to Daniel are a bulwarke to the Faith of the Church when it appeares that the happinesse of righteous soules after death is not taken up by any blind tradition among Christians but before Christianity expressed for the sense of Daniels fellows in those words of their hymne O ye spirits and souls of the righteous blesse ye the Lord praise him and magnify him for ever And whatsoever we may make of the second book of Maccabees the antiquity of it will alwayes be evidence that the principall author of it Jason of Cyrene could never have been either so senselesse or so impudent as to impose upon his nation that prayers or sacrifices were used by them in regard of the resurrection if they believed not the being and sense of humane souls after death 2 Mac. XII 43. Proceed we to those passages concerning this point which the Gospell afford us and consider how well they agree herewith I will not here dispute that our Lord intended to relate a thing that really was come to passe but to propose a parable or resemblance of that which might and did come to passe when he said Luke XVI 19 There was a certaine rich man that was clad with fine linnen and purple and made good chear every day But I will presume upon this That no man that meanes not to make a mockery of the Scriptures will indure that our Lord should represent unto us in such terms as we are able to bear that which falls out to righteous and wicked soules after death if there were no such thing as sense and capacity of pleasure and paine in souls departed according to that which they do here I will also propose to consideration the description of the place whereby he represents unto us the different estate of those whom it receiveth And in Hell lifting up his eyes being in torments he sees Abraham from afarre and Lazarus in his bosome And afterwards And besides all this between us and you there is a great gappe fixed so that those who would passe from hence cannot nor may they passe from thence to us For I perceive it is swallowed for Gospell amongst us that Dives being in Hell saw Lazarus in the third heavens Whereas the Scripture saith onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the invisible place of good and bad â—oules For so the processe of the Parable obliges us to understand it Sâ—â—ing it would be somewhat strange to understand that gappe wherewith the place of happy soules is here described to be parted from the place of torments to be the earth and all that is between the third heavens and it The Jewes at this time as we see by the Gospell believing according to the testimonies alleged that righteous soules were in rest and pleasure and happinesse wicked in misery and torments called the place or state of those torments Gehenna from the valley of the sonnes of Hinnom neer Jerusalem where those that of old time sacrificed their children to devils burnt them with fire The horror of which place it appears was taken up for a resemblance fit to represent the torment of the wicked soules after death In like manner Gods people being sensible of Gods mercy in using meanes to bring them back to the ancient inheritance
shall confirme it by so visible an instance as this Death was proposed to Adam for the mark of Gods wrath and vengeance which he was become liable to by sinne The turning of this curse into a blessing was to be the effect of Christs Crosse which was not yet to be revealed The life of the Land of Promise was proposed for the reward of keeping Gods law in stead of the life of Paradise Therefore the cutting off of that life was to be taken for a mark of that curse which mankind became subject to by the first Adam till it should be declared the way to a better life by the Crosse of Christ Therefore the Giants that left it with the markes of enmity with God upon them are described as within the dominion of Hell but not asleep unlesse we can think that it is a mark of misery to go to them that sleep when all do sleep Prov. II. 17. IX 18. XXI 17. Esay XXVI 14. For that there should be no praising of God after death holds punctually in virtue of the Old Covenant which brought no man to life and was then on foot though they who writ those things might and did know that by the virtue of the New Covenant under which they knew themselves to be they should not be deprived of the priviledge of praising God after death and before the resurrection how sparing soever they were to be in imparting this knowledge openly to all the world For how otherwise should they whom the Apostle Ebr. XI declareth to have sought the kingdom of heaven have showed themselves otherwise affected with death then the Martyrs that suffered for Christ were afterwards How could it be thought the same Spirit that moved them to such a difference of effects according to the difference of time And therefore the same Solomon that saith there is nothing to be done in the grave Eccles IX 10. saith further Eccles XII 8. that when the dust returns to the earth then the soul returns to God that gave it And when Exoch and Elias were taken away by God in their Bodies neither sleep they seeing Moses and Elias attend our Lord Christ at his transfiguration Mat. XVII 3 4. Mark IX 4 5. Luke IX 30. nor is it possible for any man that would have soules to sleep to give a reason why the Covenant by which all are ordered being the same the soules of Christians should sleep when their souls sleep not And therefore when our Lord proves the resurrection by this That God is called the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob whereas God is not the God of the dead but of the living Mat. XXII 32. Mark XII 26. Luke XX. 37. he not onely supposes that his argument is good but that his adversaries the Sadduces granted it to be good And so Saint Paul when he argues that if the dead rise not againe then are we the most miserable of all people As having no further hope then this life 1 Cor. XV. 19. For what needed more to them that owned the Law of Moses and the Gospel of Christ and yet would deny the world to come questioning the resurrection that supposes it For the rest I will not repeate that which I produced afore out of the Books we call Apocrypha which he that peruseth will find a difference between the language of the Patriarchs and Prophets speaking of themselves and the language of those Bookes speaking of them But I will insist upon this that our Lord when he proposeth the Parable of Dives and Lazarus manifestly accepts of that opinion which notwithstanding such difficulties from the Scriptures of the Old Testament had prevailed over the better part of that people by Tradition of the Fathers and Prophets To wit that the soules of good and bad are alive in joy and paine according to the qualities in which they depart hence and shall resume their bodies to give account in them for their workes here The same doth the appearance of Moses and Elias at his transfiguration the rendering of his soul into his Fathers hand the promise of bringing the thiefe into Paradise the same day signify Whereby it appeareth that whatsoever might seeme to argue either that the soules of the Fathers were in the devils hands till the death and resurrection of Christ or that all soules go out like sparks when men dy and are kindled anew when they rise againe prove nothing because they prove too much For if they prove any thing they must prove that there is no world to come as the disputes of Ecclesiastes and Job seem to say because by the accidents of this world there is no ground of a mans estate in it Which seeing it is so farre from leaving any dispute among Christians that among Jewes the Sadduces were reputed Sectaries It is evident that whatsoever may seem to look that way in the Old Testament cannot prove that the soules of the Fathers were in the Verge of Hell till Christ riseing againe the graves were opened and many bodies of Saints which slept arose and came out of the graves after his resurrection and went into the holy City and appeared to many as we read in the Gospel of Mat. XXVII 52 53. This indeed were something if the Scripture had said that those Saints who arose with their bodies when our Lord Christ was risen againe had ascended into heaven with him in their bodies Which because it derogates from the generallity of the last resurrection having no ground in the Scripture can beare no dispute Therefore seeing these Saints as Lazarus afore and the Widowes sonne of Naim whom our Lord raised restored their bodies to the grave there is no presumption from hence that their soules were brought from Hell by our Lord to be translated into the full happinesse of the world to come with his owne I do therefore allow that which is written in the Apocryphall 2 Esdras IV. 41 42. In the grave the chambers of souls are like the womb of a woman For like as a woman that travaileth maketh hast to escape the pressure of her travaile Even so do those places haste to deliver the things that are committed unto them And VII 32. And the earth shall restore those that are asleep in her and so shall the dust those that dwell in silence and the secret places shall deliver those soules that were committed unto them For in most of those writings which the ancient Church counteth Apocryphal because they are suspected to intend some poisonous doctrine excellent things are contained which the agreement of them with Canonicall Scripture and their consequence and dependance upon the truth which they settle renders recommendable even from dangerous authors And for that which is here said whether we suppose this book to be written by a Christian or not before Christ or after Seeing there is no mention of any Saints in those visions of the old Testament where God is represented sitting upon his Throne but
in opposition to the flesh seeing the soules of the Fatherâ— which by the dispensation of the Law appeared not freed from the Devin wâ—re indeed free by the Gospel uâ—der the Law it is no marvaile that â—ur Lord Christ represents his soule as in the power oâ— those who had the power oâ— death who â—aith This is your time and the time of the powers of darkenesse Doâ—h S. Paul make any more oâ— thâ—s text Heare his words Actâ— Xâ—Iâ— 34-37 That he raised him from the dead no more to returne to corruptioâ— thus he saith I will give you the sure meâ—cies of David Wherefore he saith also in an other Psalm Thou shall no suffer thine holy one to see corruption For David having served the counsaile of God in his generation fell asleep and was added to his Fathers and saw corruption But he whom God raised â—â—w no corruption He argues the mysticall sense in our Lord Christ 〈◊〉 the literall sense in David was come to nothing by his death but how the mysticall sense in our Lord Christ By his triumphing in Hell or by rising againe Therefore S. Paul againe Rom. X 6-9 thus wrâ—steth the words of Moses out of the Jewes hands to the establishing of the Gospel upon supposition that the law is the figure of it Say not in thy heart who shall goe up into heaven as Moses Deut. XXX 12. faith The Law is not in heaven that thou shouldest say would to God some body would bring it us from heaven that we might heare and doe it So saith he of the Gospel thou needest not say would to God some body would go up into heaven To wit to bring downe Christ Or who shall goe downe into the deep as Moses addeth The Law is not beyond sea that that thou needest say would to God some body would goe beyond sea and bring it us that we might heare and doe it So thou needst not say would to God some body would goe downe into the deep To wit to bring Christ up from the dead But what saith it The Law correspondent to the Gospell The word is neere in thy mouth and in thy heart That is the word of Faith which wee preach That if thou prâ—fesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus believing with thy heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved Here it is plaine the deepe is not named for the place of the damned but for that place or for that state out of which it was hard to recover Christ supposing him dead As it was hard to bring the law from beyond the seas The deep I deny not represents to us the place of the damned Luke VIII 31. as also the parts that are under the earth Phi. II. 10. Apoc. V. 13. may comprehend also the dead Therefore the deep signifies the place of the damned not necessarily as here but because the speech is of the region of Devils of the sealing up of the devill in the deep Just as I said of the grave the pit and the place under the earth that when the scripture speakes of the Giants of the enemieâ— of Gods people of Davids enemies in Gods people it signifies either the place or at least the state of the damned which the Old Testament must needs acknowledg acknowledging the happinesse of Gods people Psalme IX 18. Proverbs V. 8 VII 27. IX 18. And so went Corah and his complices quick into Hell Num. XVI 30 33. So Psalme LV. 24. LXIII 10. The proper place of the dâ—mned spirits seemeth to be properly called by S. Peter Tartara when he saies that God delivered them to be kept for judgement 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in chaines of darkenesse being cast downe into Tartara or Hell 1. Peter II. 4. Now the state of death brings not Christian soules into Hell unlâ—sse wee suppose that the place of good souls under the Law which supposition I have destroyed Therefore the bringing of Christ from the deep is done by raising him again So quoting David againe Ephes IV. 8 9 10. Therefore he saith Psa LXVIII 17. Going upon high he led captivity captive and gave men gifts Now that he ascended what is it but that he first descended into the lower paâ—ts of the Earth He that descended is the same that ascended far above all things to fill or fulfill all things The Psalme speakes of the Arke going up into the Tabernacle or Temple figuring the going up of our Lord to the right hand of God as Psalme XXIV 6-10 XLVII 5. The going up of the Arke was Gods triumph over the Idolatrous nations whom he cast out of the Land of promise giving gifts to his people in it The going up of our Lord Christ S. Paul saies implies that he had come downe before into the lower pâ—rt of the Eearth Either in respect of mount Sinai upon which the Psalme describes God with that attendance which the aâ—ke the Cherubines thereof signifie his host of Angels in the words just afore Or we may well understand the lower parts of the earth to signifie by the figure of apposition the earth that is below as flumen Rheni Vrbs Patavii signifie the river Rhine and the City Padna For we have a peremptory instance in Psa CXXXIX 15 where David saith that he was fashioned in the lower parts of the earth speaking of his mothers wombe therefore meaning the earth below The ascension therefore of Christ pretending to fill rather then fulfill all with his graces of which he proceeds to speake requires no descent into hell which he pretends not to fill with his Graces If the resurrection ascension of Christ satisfie these texts so that they require no further descent then into the state of deaâ—h supposing what I said before of the soules of the fathers under the Old Testament I must needs conclude that the body of Christ being buryed his soule went with the good theifes soule into Paradise or the bosome of Abraham where the soules of the Fathers were refreshed of their travells till the first and then the second comming of our Lord. Paradise we know was the place of mans happniesse wherein he was created whence having sinned he was shut out In our Lords time Gods people it is plaine understood well enough the state of the righteous soules in the other world You have seene it out of those boâ—kes which we call Apocrypha Supposing the place unknown as indeed it is how could it be more properly signified then by the name of Paradise opening unto us the whole allegory by which the happinesse which wee seeke to recover by the covâ—nant of grâ—ce was expressed to us by God first in the Land of promise secondly in the Church after in the heavens after the redemption of our bodies The true Land of promise to which the Gospell and the Church secretly taught and built under the Law introduceth us because the Law cannot is that Paradise to which Christ restoreth Adam that was
you say something more to limit the ground upon which they may be no lesse What limitation I would adde is plain by the premises The preaching of that Word and that ministring of the Sacraments which the Tradition of the whole Church confineth the sense of the Scriptures to intend is the onely mark of the Church that can be visible For I suppose preaching twice a Sunday is not if a man be left free to preach what he will onely professing to beleeve the Bible which what Heresy disowneth and to make what he thinks good of it And yet how is the generality of people provided for otherwise unlesse it be because they have preachers that are counted godly men by those whom what warrants to be godly men themselves In the mean time is it not evident that Preachers and people are overspread with a damnable heresy of Antinomians and Enthusiasts formerly when Puritanes were not divided from the Church of England called Etonists and Grindeltons according to severall Countries These believe so to be saved by the free Grace of God by which our Lord died for the Elect that by the revelation thereof which is justifying Faith all their sinnes past present and to come are remitted So that to repent of sinne or to contend against it is the renouncing of Gods free Grace and saving Faith How much might be alledged to show how all is now overspread with it The Book called Animadversions upon a Petition out of Wales shall serve to speak the sense of them who call themselves the godly party as speaking to them in Body Thus it speaks pag. 36. Look through your vail of duties profession and ordinances and try your heart with what spirit of love obedience and truth you are in your work And whether will you stand to this judgement Or rather that God should judge you according to grace to the name and nature of Christ written upon you and in you Sure the great Judge will thus judge us at last by his great judgement or last judgement Not by the outward conversation nor inward intention but finally by his eternall Election according to the Book of Life This just afore he calleth the seed of Christ and his righteousnesse in a Christian And pag. 38. When we are inraged we let fly at mens principles being not satisfied to rebuke mens actions opinions and workes but would be avenged of their Principles too As if we would kill them at the very hart pull them up by the Rootes and leave them in an uncurable condition rotten in their Principles But Principles ly deeper then the heart and are indeed Christ who is the Principle and beginning of all things who though heart fail and flesh faile yet he abides the root of all Shall he pretend to be a Christian that professes this Shall any pretend to be a Church that spue it not out Let heaven and earth judge whether poor soules are otherwise to be secured of the Word then by two sermons a Sunday when the sense of the Godly is claimed to consist in a position so peremptorily destructive to salvation as this It will be said perhaps that now the Ministers of the Congregations have subscribed the confession of the Assembly But alas the covering is too short When a Bishop in the Catholick Church subscribed a Councile there was just presumption that no man under his authority could be seduced from the Faith subscribed Because no man communicated with the Catholick Church but by communicating with him that had subscribed it Who shall warrant that the godly who have this sense not liable to any authority in the Church shall stand to the subscriptions of those Ministers or to the authority of the Assembly pretended by the Presbyteries If they would declare themselves tied so to do who shall warrant that there is not a salvo for it in the Confession which they subscribe If there were not why should any difficulty be made to spue out that position which is the seed of it That justifying Faith consisteth in believing that a man is of the number of the Elect for whom Christ died excluding others Why that which is the fruit of it That they who transgresse the Covenant of Baptisme come not under the state of sin and damnation come not from under the state of Grace Why but because a back-door must be left for them that draw the true conclusion from their own premises reserving themselves the liberty to deny the conclusion admitting the premises It is not then a confession of faith that will make the Word that is preached a mark of the Church without some mark visible to common sense warranting that confession of Faith As for the Sacraments no Church no Sacraments If they suppose that ground upon which that intent to which the whole Church hath used them there is no further cause of division in the Church for that secures the rule of Faith If not they are no Sacraments but by equivocation of words they are sacriledges in profaning Gods Ordinances The Sacrament of Baptisme because the necessary meanes of salvation is admitted for good when ministred by those who are not of the Church but alwaies void of the effect of grace To which it reviveth so soone as the true Faith is professed in the unity of the Church If a Sacrament be a visible signe of invisible grace that baptisme is no baptisme which signifieth the grace it should effect but indeed effecteth not Such is that Baptisme which is used to seale a Covenant of Grace without the condition of Christianity a Covenant that is not the Covenant of two parties but the promise of one Whence comes the humor of rebaptizing but to be discharged of that Christianity which the baptisme of the Church of England exacteth Why do they refuse Baptisme in New England to all that refuse to enter into the Covenant of Congregations How comes it more necessary to salvation to be of a Congregation then to be Baptized and made a Christian Is it not because it is thought that salvation is to be had without that profession of Christianity which the Sacrament of Baptisme sealeth That it is not to be had without renouncing it Upon these termes those that are denied Baptisme by the Congregations because they are not of the Congregations are denied salvation as much as in them lies but not indeed and in truth For the necessity of baptisme supposing a profession of the Catholicke Church they perish not by refusing it who will not have it by renouncing the Catholicke Church that is by covenanting themselves into Congregations They that are so affected must know that they have authority of themselves to baptize to effect which no Congregation in New England is able to do If the Sacrament of the Eucharist seale that Covenant of Grace which conditioneth not for Christianity it is no sacrament but by equivocation of words Where that conditionall is doubtfull or voide there is no security