very day of their Birth they should fall into Misery and Evil. Where we see that after all those Brags of Sacred Oracles and Authority of Fathers our Author with all his Reason and Arguments is forced to conclude with probability Pag. 59. The Second Nicene Council would have this Doctrine proposed out of the Book of John Bishop of Thessalonica to be confirmed these are the Words concerning the Angels Arch-Angels and their Powers to which I also joyn our own Souls this is the Opinion of the catholick-Catholick-Church that they are 't is true intelligible yet not wholly incorporeal and invisible ANSWER Supposing that it were true as it is not what Mr. Blount hath delivered concerning the Second Nicene Council 's Confirming the Opinion of John Bishop of Thessalonica yet it cannot be concluded that this was the Opinion of the Catholick-Church as to the Corporiety of Angels and Souls Who knows not that the Conditions commonly required to make a General Council which only can Represent the Catholick-Church were wanting to the Second Nicene Petrus de Marca lib. 2. de Concordia c. 17. gives us this Account Secunda Synodus Nicaena ab Ecclesia Gallicana in Concilio Francofordiensi repudiata est The Gallicane Church Assembled in the Council of Francford hath rejected the Second Nicene Council And he subjoyns this excellent Reason Secundam Synodum Nicenam Oecumedicam dici posse negarunt quod occidentis provinciae per Epistolas more Ecclesiastico sententiam rogatae non fuissent The Second Nicene Synod was deny'd by them to be Oecumenical because no regard was had to the Provinces of the Western Churches in order to their consent according to the Custom received in the Church And the same De Marca lib. 6. c. 25. adds In Synodo Francofordiensi agitatum an Secunda Synodus Nicene recipienda foret tanquam septima Synodus oecumenica decretum autem in Canone Secundo Synodum illam repudiandam esse damnandam In the Synod held at Fracford it was Debated whether the Second Nicene Synod should be received as the Seventh General Council but it was Decreed in the Second Canon that it should be rejected and Condemned Agreeable hereunto is that of Launey some time a most Learned Doctor of the Sorbon in his Epistles Par. 8. Epist 11. Antiquiores Gallia Scriptores Nicaenam Secundam Vniversalibus non accensent conciliis The more Ancient French Writers do not enumerate the Second Nicene Council among those which they account Universal And Launey then descends to Particulars proving the same by the Ancient French Annals and many Historians If we consult the Church here in Britain in those times we shall find that they Rejected it also Simeon Dunelmensis an Ancient and good English Historian in his Book de Gestis regum Anglorum ad annum 792 says That Charles King of France seut a Synodal Book into Britain which he received from Constantinople in which Book were contained the Decrees of the Second Nicene Council Now how our Church in those days was pleased or rather displeased therewith the fame Dunelmensis tells us In quo Libro hu proh Dolor Multa inconvenientia verae fidei contraria reperiunt maxime quod ibidem confirmatum imagines adorare debere quod omnino Ecclesia Dei execratur In which Book alas Many inconvenient things were found and repugnant to the true Faith especially that which relates to the Worship of Images which the Church of God doth utterly abominate This Testimony is the more to be regarded for that it appears from hence that in those days our Church abhorred Image Worship This Testimony is Recorded also by Roger Hoveden Matthew Westminster and other our Ancient and best Historians And so much confounded the Romanists in the begining of the Reformation that their great Advocate Harpsfield could make no other Reply but that it was commentitia insulsa fabula a foolish and an invented Fable and that it was not Written by Simeon Dunelmensis or Matthew Westminster He makes no mention of Roger Hoveden nor of the Manuscript History of Rochester in the Cottonian Bibliothec whereas the same is now to be found in the Manuscript of Dunelmensis in Bennet Colledg Library in Cambridge And those who have been conversant in those things assure us that the same is to be seen in divers Manuscripts of Mathew Westminster and Hoveden and that all old and uncorrupted Copies testifie the same thing Of what Quallity Dunelmensis was I need not say much since the Preface to the Decem Scriptures is very full to this purpose I shall only here say that he is accounted one of our best Historians by the Pontifician and Reformed Parties He was Chantour of the Church of Saint Cuthberts in Durham and continued his History to the Days of King Henry the First But Supposing that this Synod was Universal or that which is all one that the Opinion of the Catholick-Church might be gathered from it as touching the Corporiety of Angels and Souls Doth it appear that such was the definition of that Synod in any of its Decrees Or doth it appear that they Confirmed the Opinion of John Bishop of Thessalonica in this Point No certainly nothing less And for this we appeal to Edmund Richâ—r a Doctor of the Sorbon in his Learned History of General Councils in his First Book p. 655. where we Read Angelos animas esse Corporeas nequaquam approbavit Synodus sed fuit peculiaris opinio Episcopi Thessalonicensis The Second Nicene Synod did not approve of the Doctrine of the Corporiety of Angels or Souls but it was the peculiar and private opinion of the Bishop of Thessalonica And the same Richer farther adds Accedit in Synodis non attendi oportere ad ea quae privatus aliquis narrat sed ad solam Synodi definitionem ut alias observatum est Besides in Reading Councils little regard is to be had to what a private Doctor or Bishop may declare or say we ought only to look to the Decree or Definition of the Synod And this says Richer I have Observed in another Place And now I may without doing any wrong Conclude that Mr. Blount hath Read the Councils very negligently and makes use of them at Second Hand The same may be said of the Fathers he quotes He hath injuriously imputed Heresy to the Catholick Church and hath fastened an untruth on the Second Council of Nice Pag. 73. St. Austin Would have all things that are said to be the Work of Six Days to have been Created in one moment altho Moses divided them into Classes and different times that he might the better help the Imagination of the People to Comprehend the Fiâ—st Originals of things God Almighty did in my Opinion Create out of nothing in one Moment and by one individual Act all Substances whether Intellectual or Câ—â—â—â—â—al nor did St. Austin in that come wide of 〈…〉 ANSWER I Remember that I have Read somwhere in Maldenate that Gregory Nazianzen Compares
not within the pale of the Church To which there needs no other Reply than the Testimonies of these two learned and pious Bishops If there had been such Constitutions in their times they could never have written as they did Besides the Authority of these pretended Constitutions as to this point is so fully refuted by Mr. Dalle in his Book de Pseudopigr Apostolicis pag. 326. that there is no place left for a Reply I may add hereunto the Law of the Emperour Julian the Apostate from Theodoret Eccles Hist lib. 4. c. 8. He first of all prohibited the use of Rhetoric Poetry and Philosophick Arts to the children of the Galileans so he called the Christians and the reason of the Law is in these words They wound us with our arrows as it is in the Proverb for out of our own Books they borrow arguments which they make use of to our confusion And all know this to be true who have read Tertullian Arnobius Lactantius and others in their Controversies with the Gentiles The Corollaries and Inferences I shall make are very plain First I affirm that there is no good Evidence for such a Canon anno 400. much less Canons as Mr. Blount says The Second is That this pretended Canon was made 75 years after the holding of the Nicene Council and therefore our Deist could not gather from this Canon the Ignorance of the Trinitarians of those times The Third is That it cannot be presumed that the Canons of the Church should be conform to the Decree of the Emperour Julian which was made on purpose to eradicate the Christian Religion no more can it can be presumed that Basil and N zianzen would impugn an Apostolical Constitution Lastly The Learning of the Gentiles was so amply treated of by the Fathers of the 4 first Centuries their Philosophy and Theology was so fully examined and refuted by them that unless these Books had been prohibited it was impossible for the Trinitarians of those times to have been ignorant of all the solid Learning contained in the Books of the Gentiles Pag. 103. And to shew how ignorant the Clergy were in the time of the Emp. Marcian we find the Greek Tongue so little understood at Rome and the Latin in Greece that the Bishops in both Countries in all 630. were glad to speak by Interpreters Nay in this very Council at Chalcedon the Emperor was fain to deliver the same speech in Greek to one party and in Latin to the others so that both might understand him the Council of Jerusalem for the same reason made certain Creeds both in Greek and Latin at the Council of Ephesus the Pope 's Legats had their Interpreter to expound the words and when Celestine 's Letters were there read the Acts tells us how the Bishops desired to to have them translated into Greek and read over again insomuch that the Romish Legats had almost made a controversy of it fearing least the Papal Authority should have been prejudiced by such an Act alledging therefore how it was the ancient custom to propose the Bulls of the See Apostolick in Latin only and that that might row suffice Whereupon those poor Greek Bishops were in danger not to have understood the Pope 's Latin till at length the Legats were content with Reasons when it was evidenced to them That the major part could not understand one word of Latin But the pleasantest of all is Pope Celestine 's Excuse to Nestorius for his so long delay in answering his Letters because he could not by any means get his Greek construed sooner Also Pope Gregory the Fiest ingeniously confesseth to the Bishop of Thessaly that hâ— understood not a jot of his Greek ANSWER Mr. Blount hath discovered much malignity against the Clergy in this and the next Page the great Imputation of their not being good Grecians cannot be charged on the present Clergy Besides we are not so ignorant as He is disingenuous who hath taken all those choice Remarks word for word out of Du Ranchin's Review of the Council of Trent p. 151 and 152. and yet makes no mention of the Author to whom he was so much obliged What our Author proposes to Himself by this Method is not very material for since the Latin and Greek are the Learned Languages why may not one of them be sufficient for a Clergy-man He that hath been in the least concern'd in the Popish Controversies cannot be ignorant that Casaubone Rainolds Dalle and others have sufficiently demonstrated how unskilful Baronius and Bellarmine have been in the Greek Tongue and yet who can doubt but that they were deservedly reputed great Clerks Who can doubt but that St. Austin and the African Bishops were very Pious and Learned Men and yet how meanly they were skilled in the Greek Tongue I have shown in another place If our Author be delighted with such Instances He might have brought some more pertinent to His purpose For Alphonsus a Castro tells us there were some Popes so illiterate as they were totally ignorant of Grammar Saint Amour tells us of a Pope who said He was a Canonist and no Divine The Learned Bishop of Sarum in the Preface to his Regale acquaints us with a Report at Rome at the Election of a Pope that Cardinal Albici should say For the Love of God let us at least have a Pope that is so learned that He may be able to read the Gospel in the Mass However it be none of Mr. Blount's Instances affect us of the Reformed Church whom yet I think he purposely designs to derogate from in his Paragraph For p. 97. he writes very contemptibly of them and says ' The Quicunque Men by which he understands the Clergy of England are as much below Mr. Hobbs his Resentments ' as he is above their Anger And this he writes near the beginning of this Chapter where these his Proofs are of the Ignorance of the Clergy but how unjust this charge is with respect to them is so manifest that it would be a madneâ—◠〈◊〉 â—â—fute him SECT VII Of the Immortality of the Soul and the Original of the Jews THese Oracles of Reason have nothing remarkable from p. 106 to p. 116. save only this That he borrows whole pages without any acknowledgment The Epistle to Mr. Wilwood is a translation out of Gassendus third and fourth Chapters of the third part Syntag. Epic. Philos his Treatise of Beneficence to Madam and his preference of Plato and Pythagoras to Aristotle are either purely Moral or else grounded on the Sentiments of those Philosophers with whom we have no mind to contest at present about those Points of Fate and Fortune Pag. 117. Your incomparable Version of that passage of Seneca where he begins with Post mortem nihil est ipsa mors nihil There is nothing after death and Death it self is nothing And pag. 128. he says This is Seneca 's Opinion ANSWER What Seneca's Opinion was of the Immortality of the Soul
The forecited Honor. Du Plessis in the 29. c. positively and truly affirms Quod ipsi Sanhedrin seu Juces 70. quos R. Moses Hadarsan ante adventum Messiae non destituros dicebat sub Assyriorum jugo sub Macchabaeorum Principatu persever abant The Sanhedrin or 70 Judges whom Rabbi Moses Hadarsan asserted should not cease till the the Coming of the Messiah continued under the Bondage of the Assyrians and the Government of the Macchabees He also adds In ipsa captivitate habuerunt perpetuo Judaei suum Reschgaluta id est Principem exulum ex tribu Juda exque ipsa Davidis stirpe quod Judaeorum Historiae testantur The Jewish Historians testify That when they were in Captivity they had their Prince of the Tribe of Judah of the Family of David And yet Mr. Blount contrary to all these Authorities peremptorily says That the Scepter in the Captivity under Nebuchadnezzar so departed from the Tribe of Judah as that it was never resetled in it more A plain Argument He had not well considered Revealed Religion which so ignorantly he impugns Pag. 159. Other Prophecies are either general and indefinitly exprest as to the time of their accomplishment or inexplicable from their obscurity or uncertain as to their Authority such as are the Weeks of Daniel which Book the Jews reckon among their Hagiographa or Sacred but not Canonical Books ANSWER The Prophesies of the Prophet Daniel which expresly point at the time of the Messiah's Coming and concur with our JESUS are very considerable The Prophesy in the 9th of Daniel ver 24 25 and 26. Seventy Weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city to finish the transgression and to make an end of sins and to make reconciliation for iniquity and to bring in the everlasting righteousness and to seal up the vision and prophesy and to anoint the most holy Ver. 25. Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and rebuild Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks and threescore and two weeks the street shall be built again and the war even in troublous times Ver. 26. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off but not for Himself and the people of the Prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary and the end thereof shall be with a flood and unto the ends of the war desolations are determined Ver. 27. And he shall confirm the Covenant with many for one week and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease and for the overspreading of Abominations he shall make it desolate even until the consummation and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate This Prophesy is clearly meant of the Messiah because here we have not only his Name but his Sufferings and the account of his Sufferings not for himself but the People The ancient Jews understood this place of the Messiah Hoornbeck to this purpose tells us that R. Saadias a gaon Rabbi Naahman Gerundensis and divers others expound this place of the Messias At last he gives us Manasse Ben Israel which being very material I shall quote it at large out of him Verum ut addam illud interpretationis hujus prophetiae varie etiam illa ab hujus aevi Hebraeis explicata est neque illud mirum cuique videre debet si in prophetia tam obscura variant sententiae But that I might add this of the Interpretation of this Prophesy for this is variously expounded by the Hebrews of this Age neither let this be a wonder to any if there be a difference of opinions in so obscure a Prophesy There are therefore those who take these 70 weeks so that they say After the end of them the Messiah is to come who would constitute the Jews Lords of the whole Earth And this truly all those did imagine that took arms against the Roman Emperour and altho' they were obnoxious to many miseries and labours yet notwithstanding they always placed their hope in the Messias that was to come because they thought he would afford the sight of himself when they were in the midst of their miseries wherefore these words To finish transgressions they expounded That after the expiration of 70 weeks sins are pardoned Thus far Hoornbeck out of Menasse Ben Israel We have here an evident testimony that the Jews that lived about the time of the Destruction of Jerusalem looked for the Messias then to come because they thought Daniel's Period was then ended and tho' by mistake they expected a temporal Prince yet 't is evident they thought this Prophesy did concern the time when the Messias should come That which is most difficult here is the direct time of the Messias's cutting off is told us under the name of so many Weeks which are not to be understood in our common acceptation of the word but are to be taken for Years The word Weeks in holy Scripture signifieth sometime the space of seven Days as here in this Prophesy 10. ch ver 2. where Daniel says That he mourned three Weeks or sevenets of Days And in the 16. of Deuteron 9. ver where commandment is given Seven Weeks shalt thou number unto thee begin to number the seven Weeks from such time as thou beginnest to put the sickle to the corn The word Weeks is sometime taken for Years in Scripture and containeth seven Years As in the 29. chap. Genes ver 27. Fulfil her Week and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other Years As also Leviticus ch 25. ver 8. And thou shalt number seven Sabbaths of Years unto thee seven times seven Years and the space of the seven Sabbaths of Years shall be unto thee forty and nine Years The Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in approved Authors is in like manner used not only for seven Days but also for seven Years space as in the end of the 7th Book of Aristotle's Politicks where mention is made of such as divided Ages by Sevenets of Years 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Varro in his first Book of Images writeth Se jam duodecimam annorum hebdomadam ingressum esse That he had now entred into the twelfth Sennet of Years which Expression is plain and full In this Signification the Word is to be taken in this place understanding by 70 Sevennets 490 Years having Proof thereof from Holy Scripture and Prophane Authors And to those before mentioned we may add Censorinus de die Natali c. 14. and Macrobius Book first in Somnium Scipionis c. 6. As for those who stretch the Word further to a Sevenet of Tenths or Jubilies or Hundreds of Years as some have done their Opinion hath neither warrant of God's Word nor any likelyhood of Truth The greatest Difficulty is about the Beginning of those Weeks concerning which we need not say any thing considering that those must
be wilfully blind that deny the completion thereof But our Author is not to be born withal as to what he says concerning the Prophecy's Authority and that the Jews reckon it not among their Canonical Books Father Simon who had well weighed this Point in his Critical History of the Old Testament Book 1. Chap. 9. says There are many learned Men who find fault that the Jews exclude Daniel from the number of the Prophets and Theodoret hath reproved them very severely But it is easie to reconcile their Opinion in this Point with that of the Christians since they agree that the Books of the Bible which are called Canonical have been equally inspired by God and moreover that the Book of Daniel is of the number of these Canonical Books Josephus in the Tenth Book of his Antiquities Chap. 12. writing of Daniel says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That he was endued with a Divine Spirit and that he was of the number of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was one of the greatest Prophets that his Books were read by the Jews which abundantly demonstrated that he conversed with God For he did not only foretel things to come to pass as the other Prophets did but he determined the very time in which they were to be fulfilled And whereas other Prophets predicted Calamities and so lost their Esteem among the Princes and the People He foretold Good Things to come by which he conciliated the Favour of all Persons and as for the certainty of Events he obtained a Belief amongst all Men. Porphiry the Philosopher the Scholar of Plotinus and cotemporary with Origen who made it his Business to refel the Prophesies of Daniel when he found all things so punctually delivered as that there was no place for a Refutation he finally assumed the Impudence to affirm that not Daniel but an Impostor under his Name who lived in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes Published these Prophecies And this his Impudence was much more tolerable than that of Mr. Blount's who asserts that Daniel's 70 Weeks were uncertain as to their Authority Pag. 162. He never evinced his Genealogy from David for tho' some mean Persons called him the Son of David and the Mobb by that Title did cry Hosannah to him yet did he acquiesce in terming himself the Son of Man As also when he made his Cavalcade upon an Asinego they extolled him as the Descendant of King David ANSWER This is a very bold Stroke Infidelity unmasked To what purpose should our Saviour evince his Genealogy from David The honourable Du Plessis Chap. 30. observes Nusquam in Evangelio exprobratum Jesu legamus quod ex stirpe Davidis seu ex tribu Juda oriundus nonesset sed quod fabri filius ut diuturnae Davidicae domus erumnae ad inopiam nonnullos redegerant We never read in the Gospel that our Lord was upbraided with his not being of the Tribe of Judah or Lineage of David it was objected that he was a Carpenters Son for the Miseries that had befallen the House of David had reduced some of that Family to great Penury Agreeable hereunto is that of Episcopius lib. 3. Instit Jesum Nostrum ex tribu Judae ortum duxisse nemo circae ista tempora quibus discipuli ejus vivebant dubitavit That our Lord Iesus sprang out of the Tribe of Judah no one doubted in the Days of his Disciples The Jews did all acknowledge it as appears by the Question of our Saviour How say the Scribes that Christ is the Son of David What think ye of Christ Whose Son is he They say unto him The Son of David The Genealogy of Jesus shews his Family the first Words of the Gospel are The Book of the Generation of Jesus Christ the Son of David The Apostle in his 7th Chapter of the Hebrews Verse 14. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah Benjamine Tudelensis whom Abraham Zacuth in his Chronicon calls the great Luminary in his Itinerary affirms that the very Mahometans call the Messiah the Son of David How impious is our Author then in this Expression That they were but mean Persons that called him the Son of David How blasphemous he is in his Expression of the Mobb the Cavalcade on the Asinego is manifest to all those that have any Reverence for the Holy Gospel and the Prophets Pag. 164. It is apparent that not only the Jews but also the Christians were Millenaries and did believe and expect the Temporal Reign of a Messiah together with the Vnion of the Jews and Gentiles under one most happy Monarchy ANSWER It must be granted that many eminent Persons for Sanctity favoured the Millenaries But if we impartially examin this matter we shall find that it wholly rests on the Authority of Papias who pretended Apostolical Tradition Now of what Authority this Author was I report from the Words of Casaubon in his 16th Exercitation Number 74. Narrat Eusebius in tertio Historiarum papiam hunc Scriptorem fuisse futilissimum qui omnes traditionum fabellas mirifice amplecteretur scriptis Mandaret Multa igitur falsa absurdaque de Christo Apostolis scripsisse quaedam etiam fabulis propriora Eusebius declares in the third Book of his History that this Papias was a most triflng Scribler who embraced all manner of fabulous Traditions and committed them to Writing He writ many false things of Christ and the Apostles and some of his Narrations look more like Dreams and Fables then true History And in that number Casaubon gives a pregnant Instance out of Oecumenius Now as Papias pretended this Tradition to come from the Apostles so he did nothing but what others in those primitive times were wont to do It was usual for Sectaries to boast that they taught the Doctrine of the Apostles or at least their Disciples We read in Clemens Alexand. lib. 7. Strom. That Basilides an ancient Heretick boldly avouched that he had for his Master Glaucias St. Peter's Interpreter and that Valentinus affirmed with the like boldness that he had been instructed in Religion by Theodad who was one of Saint Paul's familiar Acquaintance It would be difficult to show the difference in the Cases before-mentioned and consequently this Tradition of Papias may be as well rejected as that of Basilides or that of Valentinus and that Tradition can be no certain Rule for us to walk by Pag. 165. Not one of the two first Ages dissented from the Opinion of the Millenaries and they who oppose it never quote any for themselves before Dionysius Alexandrinus who lived at least 250 Years after Christ Of this Opinion was Justin Martyr and as he says all other Christians that were exactly Orthodox Irenaeus relates the very Words which Christ used when he taught this Doctrine This Pretence and Millenary Invention stopt the Mouths of the Unbelieving Jews ANSWER It is a great Boldness to affirm that not one of the two first Centuries opposed this Opinion For how could our
although if they had then a being yet they made no Figure in the World He fully tells us that the Arians appealed for tryal to the Fathers that they were condemned at Nice by a Party and by the Artifice of the Emperor Where he also gives us a monstrous Account of the Number of the Bishops there assembled And p. 99. he affirms that the Arians had not Freedome to dispute their Cause He represents the Arian Councils of Ariminum very Erroneously He manifests his Malignity when he accuses the Trinitarians of Ignorance and for Proof cites a Canon of the Church and p. 103. he gives many Instances of the same where we have proved that there is no such Canon as far as a Negative is capable of being proved And we have discovered his disingenuity in not mentioning Du Ranckin from whom he borrowed all his Materials word for word The seventh Section is of the Immortality of the soul and of the Original of the Jews In this Section the necessity of revealed Religion is proved from the insufficiency of Philosophical Reasons to this purpose As also with relation to a future State Which as Mr. Blount confesses p. 118. hath so much ruffled and entangled mens Minds The principal philosophic Reason is examined and refell'd From whence it will be evident that the Scriptures alone give a satisfactory Account of those things Sir Henry Savil's translating Tacitus and omiting the Original of the Jews is here defended Institution of Divine Worship proved to be before Moses and Abraham As also that Moses and the Israelites did not learn Circumcision from the Aegyptians and that our Author in this Method followed Celsus and Julian The eighth Section of marrying two Sisters Judaism Christianity Millenaries In which the Scriptures brought to prove it unlawful are defended The Nature of Penal Laws in this case makes more against our Deists then for him his Error proceeds from neglecting the Hebrew and following the Greek Translation The Apostolic Canon in this case considered Dr. Hammond's Mistake discovered about a Woman's leaving her Husband and marrying again As also Mr. Blount's Abuse of the Council of Eliberis where we are necessitated to speak on something concerning Excommunication the Churches great Censure Grotius his Error in his Inference from the Apostolic Canon reproved and his Collection from the Council of Eliberis proved unwarrantable St. Basil's Epistle to Diadorus in this case is considered Mr. Blount's great Falshood and Abuse of the civil Law in this case is laid open the Sects of the Jews and the case of the Messiah is rightly stated Mr. Blount's manner of Arguing is reprehended We have defended the Prophecy of Daniel in this case and have shown the Original of the Millinaries The ninth Section of Augury Origine of Good and Evil plurality of Worlds Ocellus Lucanus c. From his account of Augury I have collected the Necessity of revealed Religion discovered his mistake of Christian Processions If what Varenius concerning whole Nations being Atheistical affirms be true the most learned Dr. Stilling fleet seems to be under some mistake Varenius his Assertion argues the Necessity of revealed Religion the Chinensian and Aegyptian account of time proved to be vain and ridiculous as also the Chaldean the main Props of our Author's Hypothesis the Origine of Good and Evil not to be known by natural Religion If Mr. Blount's Supposition be granted concerning the Persians the Deist must be an Idolater his reason for plurality of worlds refuted the principal Arguments of Ocellus Lucanus refell'd his Age examined with some uncommon Observations relating to him and our Author 's great Vanity in making him cotemporary with or ancienter then Moses exposed Mr. Blount's great Argument for a double Creation out of the first and second Chapters of Genesis enquired into and proved ineffectual From hence we may see the reason why in his 5th Page he propounds it as a Difficulty how distinct pieces of the World should be Peopled as America and the like without a miracle and of Mathusalem's being the longest llv'd of all Adam's Posterity because in his Hypothesis of two distinct Originals of mankind they have an easie Solution although they have a truer and a much easier one in ours This method of his is indeed allowable in Philosophy which varies according to every new Phaenomenon but hath no place in matters of Religion His Disingenuity in relation to Cicero reproved the Difference between Ocellus and the Chaldeans is observed There are many other Matters contained in this Book which for Brevities sake I have omited but are perspicuously treated of and I hope to the Readers satisfaction Two things remain which I think fit to acquaint my Reader with one is that these Oracles are many of them transcribed out of modern Authors of whom I have taken no Notice but require all at Mr. Blount's Hands he being the Person that gave them the Title of Oracles neither take I any Notice of others concerned he being the chief Architect The other is that these Controversies depending much on Authority I am necessitated to make frequent appeals to Greek and Latin Authors whom for the Benefit of some Readers I have translated into English where if I have not kept my self strictly to the Words yet I have taken all care not to deviate from tne true sense Lastly As in all Duty bound I humbly submit the censure of what I have written to my Superiors in the Cnurch of England Farewel Mr. BLOUNT's Oracles of Reason Examined and Answered In Nine SECTIONS c. SECT I. Of the Mosaic Creation and the Divine Miracles MR. Blount Page the Second says That many Fathers of the Church have concluded that the whole Mosaic Creation seems to have been but a pious Allegory ANSWER It is worth observing that although the Author of these pretended Oracles of Reason hath little regard for the Holy Scriptures and without all peradventure less for the Fathers of the Church yet upon all Occasions he makes use of their Authorities and frequently quotes them Upon reading this Imputation and his fastning such a Charge upon many Fathers of the Church I forthwith consulted Mr. Dally of the Use of the Fathers Book the second Chapter three and fourth where he treats professedly of the Fathers Errors and I find nothing there that favours this bold Assertion On the contrary I find an Expression of Dally's from the unanimous Consent of the Fathers which if it be true this of the Oracle must necessarily be false None of the ancient Fathers can be charged with this Mistake if Origen his Interpreters I take not into the Number and perhaps St. Ambrose be excepted St. Ambrose Chap. 2. of Paradise speaks not of above One that was of this Opinion and the Margent refers us to Origen Whereas had it been true what these Oracles suggests p. 49. That in the first Ages of the Christian Church the more candid Interpreters deviated from the literal reading of Moses's History
renounce all Sin the Devil and all his Works to confess all their Sins to fast and pray for God's Pardon in order thereunto What is this but Repentance as well with relation to Original as Actual Sins Besides he promises amendment in this particular Never to be lead by his corrupt Affections Agreeable hereunto is that in the Larger Creed in Epiphanius's Ancorate where Baptism is call'd Baptism of Repentance and in the Creed of the Church of Jerusalem I believe one Baptism of Repentance for the Remission of Sins Pag. 16. It hath been a Point very much disputed among several Foliticians in the Common-wealth of Learning Who was the real and true Author of the Pentateuch P. 17. It is evident that the five Books of Moses were written by another Hand after his Decease ANSWER Gregory the Great in his Preface on Job discoursing about the Author of that Book hath these Words Sen quis haec scripserit valde supervacue quaeritur cum tamen auctor libri spiritus sanctus fideliter credatur Ipsi igitur haec scripsit qui haec scribendo dictavit ipse scripsit qui illis operis inspirator extitit It is to no purpose to enquire after the Author of this Book it is sufficient to believe that the Holy Ghost is the Author He therefore writ the Book who dedicated the things that are written in it he writ it by whose Inspiration it was written Hieronymus a sancta fide p. 54. truly says Constat Theodoretum complures alios patres doctissimasque aetatis nostrae Theologes in ea esse sententia ut de autoribus multorum veteris instrumenti librorum nihil certi affirmari potest ut pluribus verbis ostendit sixtus senensis alis qui hoc argumentum tractarunt It is manifest that Theodoret and many other Fathers and the most learned Divines of our Times are of Opinion that nothing can certainly be determined who were the Writers of many of the Books of the Old Testament and this is proved at large by Sixtus Senensis and others who have examined and treated of this Argument Dr. Hammond discoursing concerning the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews whether it be St. Paul or St. Luke makes this Conclusion All which can be said in this Matter can amount no higher than too probable or conjectural it is no Matter of any Weight or Necessity that it be defined who the Author was whether St. Paul or St. Luke a constant Companion of St. Paul's for many Years and the Author of two other Books of the Sacred Cannon I know not any thing justly to be censured in the Opinions of those Divines those are to be blamed that misunderstand and misapply what they have truly written This I am sure of that nothing can be drawn from them which may be any way serviceable for Mr. Blount's design who with a strange Boldness dares to affirm that Moses was not the Author of the Pentateuch There is no Book in the World whose Author can be more plainly demonstrated than that of the Pentateuch it can be made appear out of the Holy Scriptures for which if Mr. Blount had any Reverence he could never have fallen into so great an Error It can be made appear from the Consent of all Nations and all Authors except some Modern ones who make any mention of the Pentateuch whether Jews or Christians or Gentiles they all admit it as a certain Truth that Moses was the Author thereof Our Saviour in the fifth Chapter of St. John Ver. 46 and 47 says Had ye believed Moses ye would have believed me for he wrote of me But if ye believe not his Writings how shall ye believe my Words Therefore Moses writ and he writ those Books which the Jews read as writ by him and no Man can deny but those Books are the Pentateuch 'T is certain that Christ always distinguished the Prophets from the Law of Moses and by the Law understood the Pentateuch Philip said to Nathaniel John 1. We have found him of whom Moses writ in the Law of whom the Prophets have spoken Luke 24. Ver. 27. And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets he expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself And in the 15th of the Acts Ver. 21. For Moses of old time hath in every City them that preach him being read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day Out of which it appears without all peradventure that Moses writ the Law by which Word Philo Judaeus and Josephus say the whole Pentateuch is meant And that the Modern Jews understand the Word Law in the same manner we have the Authority of Leo Modena a Rabbi of Venice in his History of the present Iews throughout the World in which Book p. 247. he hath these Words We shall here in the last place glve the Reader a View of the Thirteen Articles of their Belief as it is delivered by Rabbi Moses Egyptus in his Exposition upon the Miscna in Sanedim cap. Helech which Articles are generally believed by all Jews without contra diction The Seventh Article of their Faith is That Moses was the greatest Prophet that ever hath been and that he was endued with a different and higher Degree of Prophecy than any other The Eighth is That the Law which was given by Moses was wholly dictated by God and that Moses put not one Syllable in of himself What this Law is appears out of the first Page of that History among the Rites which are observed by all the Jews and he says are the Precepts of the Written Law Namely such as are contained in the Pentateuch or five Books of Moses which are in all Six hundred and thirteen in Number that is to say Two hundred forty eight affirmative and Three hundred sixty five negative And these they call Mizuoth de Oraita that is to say Precepts of the Law From hence we may conclude without all manner of doubt that by the Word Law in our Saviour's Speech and in those other places of Scripture which I have cited the whole Pentateuch is understood The Testimony which is brought from the Consent of all Nations is so fully explicated and declared by Huetius that none can doubt of the Truth thereof and to whom I had rather refer my Reader then here to transcribe him Especially considering I have so fully proved the same from the Holy Scriptures and Indisputable Authority I shall only add two or three Observations hereunto belonging and conclude this Point The First Observation is that neither Julian nor Porphiry nor any of the most inveterate Enemies of the Christian or Jewish Faith did ever make it a Question whether Moses was the Author of the Pentateuch The first that ever started those Objections against it and are now so much valued was one Abenezra a Jew who although he did not dare to be so bold fac'd as to deny openly so important a Truth yet by the Difficulties he proposed and by the manner
of his proposing them as Mr. Blount doth his Oracles he plainly enough insinuates to an intelligent Reader that his design was no other than to overthrow the Authority of the Pentateuch out of his Store-house it is that Hobbs Spinosa and other such Politicians in Mr. Blount's Common-wealth of Learning have furnished themselves with Objections such as they are and which have been often answered My Second Observation is That not only Philo Judaeus Josephus and all others as well Ancient and Modern Jews did understand by the Law the whole Pentateuch but also the Gentiles did understand it in the same manner and consequently it cannot be imagined that the Law mentioned by our Lord should be taken in a different Sense The Author I shall cite for Proof hereof is Dionysius Longinus in his Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sect 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the Legislator of the Jews no common Person when he declares and makes known the Power of his God according to his Majesty presently in the beginning of his Laws he tells us that God said Let there be Light and it was so Longinus in this place calls the beginning of Genesis the beginning of Moses's Laws And if Genesis comes under that Denomination I think no question can be made of the other Books nor of the true Sense of those places by me brought out of the New Testament My Last Observation is That one of the great Proofs of revealed Religion depends on the Antiquity and Verity of the Mosaic Writings if these Books were not written by Moses a wide Gate would be opened for Libertines and Deists to redicule them and to expose them for Fables Preadamitism and the Eternity of the World might be received as uncontroulable Doctrines and Christian Religion deprived of the Support of those Writings to which our Lord was pleased to make an Appeal So that is is no wonder that Mr. Blount should be so positive and endeavour with such Confidence to subvert these Writings by affirming That it is evident that Moses was not the Author of them He well knowing that his pretended Oracles of Reason will be accounted Scandalous and False as long as this part of Holy Scriptures the Mosaic Writings can be defended SECT II. Of PARADISE IN this Section the Mosaic History of the Creation is wickedly ridiculed What Ireneus says of some of the Ancient Heresies viz. That the very naming of them is a sufficient Refutation the same may be said of some Passages I shall here Transcribe Pag. 25. There is a Dialogue between the Serpent and Eve It hapned upon a time that Eve sitting solitary under a Tree without her Husband there came to her a Serpent or Adder which I know not by what Means or Power civilly accosted the Woman in these Words or to this Purpose All hail most fair One What are you doing so solitary and serious under this Shade Pag. 26. Eve says Let me see had I best use it or no What can be more beautiful than this Apple How sweetly it smells but it may be it tasts ill Serpent If it tasts ill throw it away and say I am a great Lyar. Eve Well I 'll try thou hast not deceived me Give me one that I may carry it to my Husband Serpent Well thought on here 's another for you go to your Husband with it Farewel young Woman Pag. 27. God says to the Serpent Hereafter vile Beast instead of eating Apples thou shalt lick the Dust of the Earth and as for you Mistress Curious in sorrow shall you bring forth Children Pag. 33. It perplexes me how out of one Rib the whole Mass of a Womans Body could be built for a Rib doth not equal the hundredth perhaps not the thousandth Part of an entire Body Pag. 44. The Text says They sewed Fig-Leaves together and therewith made themselves Aprons From whence you may deduce the Original of the Taylors Trade But where had they Needles and where their Thread the very first Day of their Creation since the Thâ—ead-makers Art was not yet found out nor yet the Art of Working in Iron ANSWER In this Section are many such Queries but these are more then sufficient to make any Man Nauseate For what Man that hath but a Mâ—â—e of Piety will not be concerned to read such Expressions to read the Holy Oracles of God to be thus droll'd on by these pretended ones and this sacred Book of God to be thus exposed by a scurrilous Libel Our Author often cites the Canons of the Church when they serve his Turn Here he mentions none and I am certain there is good Reason for it for not to mention ancient Canons which he must necessarily know condemns this Practice The Council of Trent condemns it and in Session 4th condemns them who shall convert and wrest the Words of Holy Scripture to Prophaneness Scurrilousness Fabulousness Flatteries Distractions Superstitions or too scurrilous Libels The first Council of Millain declares That their Rashness is very wicked who absue the Words or Sentences of Holy Scripture to Flattery Contumely Superstition Impiety or to any prophane Purposes and that the Bishops are to punish such Offenders according to the holy Canons So that as far as I know this folly of our Author in sporting thus with Holy Scripture is condemned by all Christians of any particular Denomination in the whole World What is material and worthy of Consideration in this Section we will now examine Pag. 36. These are the Words of Moses There comes a River out of Eden to water the Garden and from thence it divides it self into four Branches the Name of the first is Pishon c. Gen. 2. Ver. 10. Whereby it is apparent that either in the Entrance or Exit of the Garden there were four Rivers and that those four Rivers did proceed from one and the same Fountain-head in Eden Now pray tell me in what part of the Earth is this Country of Eden where Four Rivers arise from one and the same Spring ANSWER That there may be a plain and a full Solution of the difficulties the Oracle proposes both in this Paragaph and in the other which shall be examined in this Section I shall premise a Consideration or Two of good use in the Matters under Debate The First Consideration shall be of the Opinions of the Ancient Jews and Christians as to this Book of Genesis The Second shall be of the great alterations that have happened to many places of the Earth since the Creation Out of which it will appear that many places then well known may now be wholy unknown to us Lastly I shall make a brief Reply to what the Oracle hath here declared The First Consideration relating to the Ancient Jews is that they always looked on the Book Genesis as a Book hard to be understood yet to contain a literal Sense St. Jerom in his Preface to his Commentaries on Ezechiel says Nisi quis apud eos aetatem Sacerdotalis
less than two hundred Dissenters and not three only as Mr. Blount bears us in hand that held the contrary As to what is added concerning the Persecutions used by the Arians we own it to be true and the Orthodox frequently inveighed against the Arians for these their Barbarities I shall therefore acquaint my Reader what Grotius says lib 2. De Jur. Pacis Belli cap. 21. sect 5. Athanasius is very vehement against the Arian Heresy for in his Epist ad Solit. they were the first who made use of the Temporal Power to punish dissenters with Stripes Imprisonments Confiscations and Banishments says Mr. Blount Those Bishops were condemned in France by the judgment of the Church which persecuted the Priscillianists to death and in the East that Synod was condemned which consented to the Burning of Bogomilus Page 100. As for the Trinitarians of those times I must confess that I cannot but esteem them as enemies to all Humane Learning for they had Canons forbidding them to read any Ethnick Books ANSWER I have seldom found such Confidence any where as these Oracles do in all places afford us How ridiculous this insulting of Mr. Blount's is will fully appear in handling this Point In prosecution of which I shall First Lay down the Discourse of Father Paul relating hereunto Secondly I shall show what Reasons I have to dissent from that learned and worthy Person Thirdly I shall consult the Opinions of some of the most Learned of the Eastern Church with my Reason for so doing Lastly I shall make plain Inferences which will be sufficient to cramp the Presumption of our Deist and to defend the Trinitarians as he calls them against the Imputation of Ignorance Of what Candor and Learning Father Paul was every Man knows that hath read his History of the Council of Trent where p. 472. he hath this Discourse In the Church of Martyrs there was no Ecclesiastical Prohibition though some godly Men made Conscience of reading bad Books for fear of offending against one of the three Points of the Law of God to avoid the Contagion of Evil not to expose ones self to Temptations without Necessity or Profit and not to spend time vainly These Laws being Natural do remain always and should oblige us to beware of reading bad Books though there were no Ecclesiastical Law for it But these Respects ceasing the Example of Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria a famous Doctor did happen who about the Year of our Lord 240. being reprehended by some of his Priests for these Causes and troubled with these Respects had a Vision that he should read all Books because he was able to judge of them yet they thought that there was greater Danger in the Books of the Gentiles than of the Hereticks the reading whereof was more abhorred and reprehended because it was more used by Christian Doctors for a vanity of Human Eloquence For this cause St. Jerom either in a Version or in a Sleep was beaten by the Devil So that about the Year 400 a Council in Carthage did forbid to read the Books of the Gentiles but allowed them to read the Books of Hereticks the Decrees whereof is among the Canons collected by Gratian and this was the first Ecclesiastical Prohibition by way of Canon Thus far Paul And now I come to the second thing The Council of Carthage which Father Paul relates to is that which is commonly called the 4th Carthaginian Council whose 16th Canon is ut Episcopus Gentilium libâ—os non legat Haereticorum autem pro necessitate tempore That a Bishop do not read the Books of the Gentiles but in reading the Books of Hereticks He is to have regard to Necessity and Opportunity Now in this particular I dissent from Paul and joyn with that great Antiquary Justellus who in his Preface to the Code of the African Church says Concilium quod vocant quartum Carthaginense plane repudiandum est nec fides adhibenda Canonibus 104 quos sine auctoritate huic Concilio adscribunt The Council which is commonly called the fourth Carthaginian is to be wholly rejected neither is there any Faith to be given to the 104 Canons which without any good Authority they ascribe to it There is no mention of these Canons in the Collection of Ferrandus nor in that of Dionysius Exiguus nor in the Code of the African Church nor in the Collection commonly called the Afr. Council In a Manuscript that belonged to Cardinal Barberini they are entituled Ancient Statutes of the Eastern Church But these Canons themselves prove the contrary The Ceremonies of the Ordination of the lesser Orders as they are sate forth in this Council are agreeable enough to the Practice of the Western Church where these Orders were conferred by delivering holy Vessels but not to the Eastern Church where these Orders were always conferred by Imposition of Hands In other Manuscripts they are entituled The ancient Statutes of the Church In a word there can be no sufficient reason given why they should not be found in the ancient Collections if they were genuine The ancientest Author Father Paul cites is Gratian whose testimony is of no weight if not strengthen'd by some collateral Evidence For all know He is a perfect Rhapsodist and this is so fully made out by August Tarraconensis in his Book de Emendat Gratiani that there is not any place left for the least doubt Which prejudice together with that of Moderness may be objected against Isidore Burchardus Hincmare Ivo Carnotensis c. and the defence which Schelstrate makes is so weak and dull as that it savours little of a Vaticane Library keeper whereas otherwise in his Ecclesia Africana He discovers much Learning and Reading I am now to consult the Opinions of some in the Eastern Church and to bring my reason for doing so Saint Basil in the first Tome of his Works hath a Homily whose Title is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Homily was compos'd for young Men not to prohibite them to read the Books of the Gentiles but to direct them and to shew what benefit they might reap thereby Amongst other things He takes notice that Moses was educated in the Learning of the Egyptians and so proceeded to the knowledge of the true God In like manner in following ages Dauiel at Babylon learned the Learning of the Chaldeans and from thence proceeded to Divine Doctrines Gregory Nazianzen ad Seleucum Iambie 3. treats of this matter where he prohibits nothing as touching reading the Books of the Gentiles but only lays down this Rule That from the same Plant Roses may be gathered and Thorns and that we ought to take one and leave the other The reason of these two citations is to stop the mouths of those who pretend that the Apostles prohibited the reading the Books of the Gentiles and for that purpose quote chap. 5. of the Apostolical Constitutions whose Title is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning reading the Books of such as are
Blount to any Man but to him in Lucian who was half White and half Black or to him in the Comedy that out of the same Mouth blowed both Hot and Cold. But he may in some fashion be excused for he hath really observed Pliny's Rule relating to the Title of his Book That of Cardan in the 19th Book De Subtilitate is here verified and he says demonstrated in his Book De Fato Si Oracula ambigua non essent non essent Oracula If these Oracles are not Ambiguous and Contradictory they would not be Mr. Blount's Oracles And here I cannot but admire that Mr. Blount should be guilty of the same fault of which he accuses Sir Henry Savil for he Translates not much above two Thirds of Tacitus's account of the Jews Shall we say he did this to complement the Jewish and to rob the English Nation of the Spirit behind Was he not obliged to do it for his deservedly Honoured and most Ingenious Major A. as he calls him p. 126 Or shall we say that he only separated the Dregs for his ingenious Major A I am sure he hath been very disingenious in his Translation for he hath not only abused his Major but his Reader also nay Tacitus himself Tacitus says that the Jews did Effigiem animalis quo monstratore errorem sitimque depulerant penetrali sacravere Which place he thus Translates They likewise Consecrated the Effigies of an Ass for being their Guide to the Waters where they satisfied their Thirst Whereas Tacitus makes no mention of an Ass unless Animal be Latin for an Ass And whereas Tacitus says they consecrated an Animal in penetrali that is their Holy of Holies he omitted that Word The Lye was so great that the ingenious Major could not swallow it For my part I cannot conjecture why he should only translate two Thirds and omit the other but that he conceived the Part untranslated would have spoiled his Project For there is a palpable Contradiction in Tacitus which renders his Account Fabulous In the Part untranslated Tacitus says Aegyptii Effigies venerantur Judai sola mente The Egyptians worship Images the Jews abhor them Tacitus also adds Judaei nulla simulachra habent in urbibus nedum in Templis The Jews have no Graven Images nor Idols to be seen in their Cities much less in their Temples The contrary whereof we find in the Translation of Mr. Blount as also in Tacitus Pag. 132. Abraham and Moses seemed first to institute Religious Worship and both of them were well skilled in Egyptian Learning which gave â—ecasion for some to think that Moses and the Jews took divers of their Customs from the Egyptians as for instance their Circumcision because Herodotus says That the Phaenicians and Syrians in Palestine whieh must be the Jews since none else used it in Palestine took their Circumcision from the Egyptians as also says he they confess the fame themselves nor does Josephus deny as much ANSWER We know nothing for certain concerning the Institution of Divine Worship but from Moses And from him Gen. 4. ver 26. we learn That Men began to call upon the Name of the Lord in the Days of Enos That is The number of Families increasing in the Days of Enos they appointed more Publick Places for God's Service in which at set Times they might together and in a more solemn Congregation worship their great Creator This is the Sense of the Chaldeo Interpreter and approved by our present most Reverend Arch-Bishop in his Discourse of Idolatry p. 40. Josephus in the first Book of his Antiquities Chap. 4. says That for seven Generations Men persevered in Worshipping the true God and had a regard to Vertue but in process of Time Men degenerated and forsook 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Institutions of their Ancestors If this seems otherwise to Mr. Blount it is not to be wondered at since p. 17. he positively affirms That it is evident that the five Books of Moses were written by another Hand after his decease That Moses was instituted in the Egyptian Learning we readily grant he was accounted but some of the Gentiles an Egyptian Priest but the same cannot be affirmed of Abraham Josephus is very plain when in the first Book of his Antiquities Chap. 9. he asserts That the Egyptians learned all the Knowledge they had in Arithmetick and Astronomy from Abraham 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When Abraham came into Egypt he taught the Egyptians Astronomy and Arithmetick of which they were ignorant before So that the Knowledge of these Sciences came first from the Chaldeans to the Egyptians and from them to the Greeks Whether Moses and the Jews took Circumcision from the Egyptians hath been a Subject of great Dispute The well known place in Herodotus seems to me to say so much although our late great Critick Bisnagius in his Exerc. Hist Critic p. 119. will by no means grant it Grotius in his Annotations on the 1st Book of the Truth of Christ Religion cites Herodotus at large and chargeth Herodotus with reporting an Untruth He doth not deny but that Herodotus says that the Jews confess that they learned the Rite of Circumcision from the Jews but he says Herodotus did them an Injury in saying so Tantum vero abest says Grotius ut Judaei fassi sunt unquam ab Aegyptiis se accepisse hunc ritum ut contra aperte dicunt Aegyptios ab Josepho didicisse circumcidi 'T is so far from Truth that the Jews should confess that they received this Rite from the Egyptians that on the contrary they boldly affirm that the Egyptians learned Circumcision from Joseph And for this Grotius in the place cited refers to Authorities What Mr. Blount writes concerning Josephus the Historian is of no moment Josephus in the 8th Book of his Antiquities ch 4. cites this place of Herodotus He cites the same place also in his first Book against Apian Neither doth he deny in those places what Herodotus affirms but is altogether silent of which Silence Bisnagius Exerc. Hist Crit. p. 120. gives a good Account Because saith he Josephus had long before express'd his Opinion of the Original of Circumcision lib. 1. Antiq. c. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God commanded that the Posterity of Abraham should be circumcised that they might keep themselves a part and separate from all others And Josephus to the same purpose lib. 1. c. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Abraham being an hundred years old when Isaac was born who was circumcised the eighth day And the same custom is continued for the Circumcision of Children after the same number of days From which it necessarily follows That Josephus his Opinion of Circumcision was very different from that of Herodotus He says the Jews had it from the Egyptians Josephus says they had it from God and that they might be distinguish'd from other Nations and consequently Circumcision was among the Jews long before the Egyptians had it So that Mr. Blount may justly
so much Assistance in this Point It is to be lamented that such a Person should give any Countenance to so great an Error Pag. 142. Canon Elibertinus 61. Si Quis post obitum uxoris suae sororem ejus duxerit ipsa fuerit fidelis per quinquennium cum a communione abstinere eo ipso ostendens manere vinculum Matrimonii ut jam diximus in Canonibus qui Apostolici dicuntur qui duas sorores duxerit aut fratris filiam tantum Clericus fieri prohibetur This Mr. Blount hath out of Grotius lib. 2. cap. 5. de Iure pacis Belli and he thus Translates it If any one after the Death of his Wife Marries her Sister and she proves faithful to him he must during five Years abstain from the Communion which plainly shews that the Bond of Matrimony still remains inviolable And as we have already said in those Canons which are called Apostolical whosoever Marries two Sisters or his Brothers Daughter is only forbid to be a Priest ANSWER Mr. Blount in his Translation hath changed the ipsa She into ipsi Him the Nominative into the Dative He hath changed the Sense of Fidelis which here signifieth a Christian and is opposed to Gentilis a Gentile into a Womans Chastness and Fidelity to her Husband which as Gabriel Albaspine sometimes Bishop of Orleance in his Notes on this Council shews alters the Case much I much admire how Grotius could gather out of this Council that the Bond of such a Matrimony should remain inviolable since the Canon makes no mention thereof 't is very illogical to conclude so peremptorily from the silence of tne Council and from a Negative to infer such an Affirmative which we have reason to think repugnant to the Opinion of the Council If a Man commits Incest by Marryng his Daughter the highest Spiritual Punishment the Church can inflict is Excommunication how unreasonable would it be to conclude from hence that the Church did adjudge the Bond of such a Matrimony to be inviolable That Mr. Blount did err in this Conclusion is a thing not much to be wondred at Grotius's Authority is a probable Apology for an Error Would to God he had followed him in all things But in this Mr. Blount is blameable that he is not agreeable to himself His Rule p. 137. is That Penal Laws are straitly to be tied to the express Letter of the Law If this be true he hath transgressed his own Rule in his Reduction and Inference from this Canon which is purely Penal the greatest Punishment in the Old Canon Law is Excommunication as Duarenus hath it in his Body of the Canon Law And the same is asserted by Petrus de Marca in his Book de Concordia by Widdrincton in his Apology for Princes by Richerius in his Book of Ecclesiastical Authority and others who are reputed most Learned in the Roman Communion This Punishment is inflicted on Incest Homicide Adultery and other grievous Crimes St. Austin in his first Book Contra advers Legis Prophet says that to be Excommunicated is Gravius quam ferro puniri quam flammis consumi quam feris subjici it is a greater Punishment than to be Beheaded than to be consumed by Fire than to be thrown before Wild beasts to be devoured Tertullian in his Apol. Sect. 39. calls it Censura Divina God's Censure Summumque futuri judicii praejudicium est si quis ita deliquerit ut a communicatione orationis Conventus omnis sancti commercii relegetur The Excommunicating of a Man and separating of him from the Benifit of the publick Prayers and the holy Communion and the holy Assemblies is a representation of the final judgment of Condemnation at the last Day This is Religiously to be considered of by such Persons who in our Days make a Mock at and contemn Ecclesiastical Authority What concerns the Apostolical Canons in this Paragraph hath been before examined He that impartially weighs the weakness of Mr. Blount's Inference from the silence of the Canon in this place and the weakness of his other Arguments must think him over bold when p. 136. he declares That in the Defence of Marrying two Sisters he will enter the Lists of Argument against any Levitical or Canonical Gamester whatever The Queries and other things which in this Controversie are made use of by Mr. Blount in the following Pages being only Corallaries and Conclusions of what hath been examined and refuted we wholly pretermit as unnecessary and inconsiderable I purposed here to have concluded this Subject but considering two things relating thereunto and that one serves for the better illustrating what hath been already written and the other discovers the great Disingenuity of Mr. Blount I shall try my Readers Patience a little longer whilst I lay them down in order The first is this There are several learned Men in the World who prefer the Greek Version of the 70 before the present Hebrew which they account as a Copy not an Original And whereas the contrary Hypothesis is the Ground of our Answer to that place of the 18th of Leviticus Ver. 8. which is the principal place in the whole Controversie I think it convenient to wave this Priviledge and to joyn Issue upon the contrary Hypothesis I shall therefore lay down the Argument as it is in the Oracles and subjoyn an Answer Pag. 139. The Translation of the Bible in Queen Elizabeth 's Reign Printed Anno Dom. 1599. reads that of Leviticus after this manner Thou shalt not take a Wife with her Sister during her Life to vex her in uncovering her Shame upon her Which seems to be very suitable to the Greek Translation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the Prohibition running upon these Terms or containing these Conditions That a Man shall not take a Wife 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with her Sister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 during her Life because it would be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Vexation to her but she being dead all those Inconveniencies expire with her and so it may probably be imagined Cessante ratione cessat prohibitio ANSWER This Case of Marrying two Sisters was much agitated in the Primitive Times the Apostolical Canons and the Council of Eliberis are sufficient Proofs hereof In the times of St. Basil this Question was Controverted especially between him and one Diodorus or by one under his Name as appears out of St. Basil Epist 197. and as great brags were then made as now by Mr. Blount And this Oracle was then carried about as a Trophy over that eminent Father The excellent Reply St. Basil made may make us cease to wonder why Grotius did not cite it To be sure his Silence is a sufficient Shield for Mr. Blount we will therefore translate what is there written and pass over the Original which is very long Because says he the Writer of the Epistle by corrupt Argumentation hath endeavoured to induce Men into the Commission of so grievous a Sin
It is a necessary Duty incumbent on us to prevent the same by true Ratiocination The Epistle says 't is written in Leviticus Thou shalt not Marry thy Wife's Sister to vex her whilst she is living From whence saith the Epistle 't is manifest you may Marry her Sister when your Wife is dead We are asked Whether it is not written That a Man may Marry his Wife's Sister We say it is a certain Truth that no such thing is written No Person but the Legislator ought by virtue of any Consequence to infer any thing from the silence of a Law For if this Liberty be allowed a Man may Marry his Wife's Sister tho' his Wife be Living For this Sophism will serve that turn too 't is written Thou shalt not take thy Sister that she may not vex thy Wife therefore where there is no Vexation in the case the thing is lawful They who are for this Opinion may soon pretend that there will be no Vexation nor Jealosies between the two Sisters Wherefore the Cause being removed for which the Legislator prohibited a Man to have two Sisters to Wife at one time What should hinder it But you will say this is not written in the Law neither say I is the other there written But I say if Consequences be allowed the Consequence is equal on either side it grants equal License and Liberty How much this sort of Marriage was abominated by the Ancient Christians St. Basil abundantly declares when in his Epistle he makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Uncleanness to be the cause of it and the Marriage it self he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an unlawful dwelling together and no Marriage You may see how effectually Basil hath refuted this pretended Oracle without Recourse to the Hebrew for he makes use only of the Translation of the 70. and Quotes the place of Leviticus in the same manner our Deist doth the Septuaginta having suffered no Alteration in this place Pag. 144. Whether the Solution of Justinian in the like cases of Affinity in the first Book of his Institutions Tit. 10. de Nuptiis be not properly applicable to Leviticus 18. Ver. 18. Si una tibi nupta est ideo alteram uxorem ducere non poteris quia duas sorores eodem tempore habere non licet If you are Married to one you cannot Marry the other because you cannot that is you ought not to be Married to two Sisters at one time ANSWER I do not remember that I have met with a greater Disingenuity in any Author than I have here found in this place of Mr. Blount's I have consulted Justinian's Institutes with the Commentaries of Antonius Contius Jacobus Gothofredus and Franciscus Acoursius and I cannot find the place cited in any of these Editions There is a place or two Tit. de Nuptiis concerning Marrying two Wifes but not a Word of Marrying two Sisters So that I have reason to think that Mr. Blount wilfully and fraudulently changed these Words duas uxores twice used in that Title into duas sorores two Wifes into two Sisters although the present case is wholly omitted And I am verily perswaded that nothing can excuse him unless perhaps some invisible Manuscript or some Edition never heard of before It is not to be passed over in silence that our Deist in this Page proposes a Query concerning the Canons of the Church of England viz. Whether if any of the Canons of the Church of England be dubious it may not be proper and convenient to consult the antient Canons for Explanation and Illustration What he designs by this Query his other Queries have either nothing to the purpose or have been already answered I cannot conjecture considering his Concessions relating to the 99th Canon and the Table of Marriage set forth by Authority 1563. Wherefore to put all out of doubt and to vindicate the Perspicuity of the forementioned Canon and that the Illustration it receives from former Canons makes more against Mr. Blount then otherwise I will set down the Opinion of our Church concerning these Marriages out of the Book Entituled Liber quorundam Canonum disciplinae Ecclesiae Anglicanae Anno 1581. in which Book we find these Words Omnia Matrimonia quae uspiam contracta sunt intra gradus cognationis aut affinitatis prohibitos in 18 Levitici autoritate Episcopi dissâ—lventur maxime vero si quis priore uxore demortua ejus sororem uxorem duxerit hic enim gradus communi Dostorum virorum consensu judicio puâ—atur in Levitico prohiberi That is All Marriages which have been at any time contracted within the Degrees of Cognation or Affinity prohibited in the 18th of Leviticus shall by Episcopal Authority be dissolved Especially if a Man marries his deceased Wife's Sister It is the Opinion of the Learned that this Degree is prohibited in the forenamed Book of Leviticus The Conclusion is very obvious and our Author 's wonted Subtilty hath proved a Disadvantage to his Design Pag. 157. I cannot find any Authentick Ground to believe that the Sects among the Jews were more Antient then the Days of the Maccabees ANSWER It is a common Opinion among learned Men that all the Sects of the Jews had their Beginning after the Death of their Prophets And this is substantially proved by Cunaeus lib. 2. c. 17. de Repub. Hebraeorum But how long after their Deaths is a very great Question as Pfeiffer says Exercit. 4ta speaking of the Pharisees Casaubon in his first Exercit. against Baronius quotes Josephus lib. 13. c. 9. for mentioning the Pharisees Sadduces and Essenes in the Affairs of Jonathan Asmonaeus 140 Years before the Nativity of Christ The same Josephus lib. 18. c. 2. affirms that those three Sects or as he calls them Philosophies were known to the Jews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Translator renders multis retro saeculis many Ages past Of all their Sects the Sadduces are the most ancient and Casaubon in the place cited thinks the Pharisees to be soon after them Antigonus Sochaeus whose Disciple Zadoch the Author of the Sect of the Sadduces was succeeded Simeon the Just whom the Jews commonly and among them Abraham Zacuth makes to be the same with Jaddus that went out to meet Alexander 330 Years before Christ So that Mr. Blount seems to be somewhat mistaken as to the Antiquity of these Sects Pag. 158. The Introduction of those Sects and of that Caballa occasioned that Exposition of the Prophecy of Jacob viz. The Scepret shall not depart from Judah nor a Law-giver between his Feet until Shiloh come and unto him shall the gathering of the People be from whence they did according to that fantastick Caballa imagine that whensoever the Scepter should depart from Judah and the Dominion thereof cease that then there should arrive a Messiah ANSWER The Exposition of this Place with respect to the Messiah is evident from the Consent of the Ancient Jews who never understood it in any other manner
All the old Paraphrasts call Shilo the Messias the Targum of Jerusalem renders it expresly untill the time when King Messiah shall come Jonathan renders it untill the time when Messiah shall come Onkilos untill Messiah come whose is the Kingdom The Talmud also reckons Shilo among the Names of the Messiah Hoornbeck writing of the Conversion of the Jews reckons the Concurrence of divers Rabbies to this Interpretation And to the same purpose Morney du Plessis in his Book of the Truth of Christian Religion cap. 27. all which Authorities assure us that the Ancient Jews understood this Prophesy of the Messias and that this was no Imagination according to a Fantastick Cabbala as is wickedly suggested The truth of this exposition is Confirmed by the Words which follow To him shall the gathering of the People be For this is the same Character by which he was declared to Abraham In thy Seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be blessed He was signified also by this Character in the Prophet Isaiah In that day there shall be a Root of Jesse which shall stand for an Ensign of the People to it shall the Gentiles seek and his rest shall be Glorious As also in the Prophet Micah The Mountain of the House of the Lord shall be Established on the top of the Mountains and it shall be Exalted above the Hills and the People shall flow unto it And thus the Blessing of Judah is plainly understood Judah thou art He whom thy Brethren shall praise Thy hand shall be in the Neck of thine Enemies thy Fathers Children shall bow down before thee Now this Blessing was to make way for a greater This Government was not to fail until there came a Son out of Judah's Loyns greater than Him For whereas Judah's Dominion reached only to the Tribes of Israel the Dominion of Him who came out of His Loyns should be over the World all Nations shall serve him Seeing then that this Exposition is not only according to the ancient Jews but according to the Scriptures themselves How greatly hath Mr. Blount erred in affirming that this Exposition was occasioned by the introduction of Sects among the Jews Page 158. As for the Messias being of the line of David this was no general Opinion for how then could any have imagined Herod the great to have been the Messias ANSWER If this way of arguing be good there is no general Opinion concerning any thing Leo Modena in his History of the present Jews p. 249. acquaints us that the 12th Article of their Belief is That the Messias is yet to come And Modena pag. 247. says that this is one of those Articles which are generally believed by all Jews without contradiction Yet Isaac Vossius p. 226. of the Sibilline Oracles tells us Ne nunc quidem inter Judaeos desint qui Herodem pro Messia admittant There are not wanting now some among the Jews who affirm that Herod was the Messias Is there any Opinion more general than that of the Existence of God yet some Philosopers have deny'd it Have there not been some Prodigies in Nature who denied that there was any such thing in the World as Motion yet nothing can be more evident Aristotle in his Metaphysicks disputes against some who deny'd that it imply'd a Contradiction for the same thing to be and not to be at the same time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yet I presume most men think the contrary to be a general Opinion In a word this Method of Argumentation used by our Author is very ridiculous For what Tully in his Books de nat Deorum speaks is very manifest Nihil tam absurdum quod non dixerit aliquis Philosophorum Nothing contained so great an absurdity but some Philosopher or other would contend for it Pag. 158. How could Josephus fix that Character upon Vespasian as Him who should restore the Empire and glory of Israel to whom all Nations should bow and submit unto his Scepter ANSWER Josephus sought the Favour of the Romans and He was kindly used by them so that 't is not so strange He should interpret Oracles in Favour of Vespasian None of the Jews besides Him did so Philostratus says That Apollonius Tianaeus was familiar with Vespasian and He indeed apply'd the Oracles of the Messias or King promiss'd to Vespasian but He was a vain Sycophant a Magician and in this very ridiculous But notwithstanding their Flatteries Vespasian was of another Mind He was perswaded that the Oracle did belong to one of the Jewish Nation and of David's Family wherefore He made it his Business to destroy the whole Race of that Family as Eusebius informs us lib. 3. cap. 11. and 12. Page 158. I do not read that the Jews harboured any such Exposition during their Captivity under Nebuchadnezzar albeit that the Scepter was at that time so departed from the Tribe of Judah that it was never resetled in it more ANSWER I have already made it plain that the authentick Paraphrasts of the Jews understand it in this sense as also God's holy Prophets Our Author takes for granted That there should always be a King of the Tribe of Judah until the Coming of the Messiah which is not affirmed by the Prophesy We readily acknowl'dge that Judah was not a Kingdom till the Coming of the Messiah for there was no kingly Authority in Judah before David nor after Zedekiah Unless you perhaps count the Macchabees of whose Tribe there is some dispute as Du Plessis Morney assures us c. 29. of his book of the truth of the Christian Religion or Herod who was an Idumaean The Meaning therefore of the Prophesy is Not that Judah should have a King till the Messiah came or that it should not cease to be a Kingdom but that it should not cease to be a State a Body Politick having Power of Government within its self until Messiah came Wherefore the Seventy for Sceptrum a Scepter translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Ruler not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a King 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Governour should not fail to be in Judah It should not cease to be a Government altho' it had no King of that Title It cannot be said that the Scepter departs from the Poles whether the Elector of Saxony or Prince of Conti enjoy it And to this purpose Episcopius in his Institutions truly asserts Nec dubitandum quin respublica ista quando ei praecrant Levitae Hasmonâ—i aut Herodes Idumaeus aut quicunque alius eamque ex legibus more populi regebant respublica semper manserit populi Judaici eaque nomenclatura ubique venerit ut ex historia temporum manifestum est 'T is not to be doubted but that it was the Republick of Jewry when the Hasmonean Levites presided or Herod the Idumean or whosomever else govern'd according to the Laws and Customs of the People of Jewry This Republick so long continued and it had that Denomination as is manifest out of History
Deist know this when so many Monuments of Antiquity relating to the first Centuries are lost This Method I remember to be used by Bishop Pearson in the Defence of Ignatius's Epistles It is certain that in the first and second Ages there were some that denied the Book of the Revelations to be Canonical Scripture and that the Author thereof was Cerinthus the Heretick and not St. John and there was no reason that induced them to think so besides this Doctrine of Milleranism Nepos an Egyptian Bishop was a great defender of this Opinion he writ a Book about the Year of our Lord 244. in defence of it he Titles his Book a Reproof of the Allegorists By that Name he called the Antimillenaries so that the Opponents of the Millenaries must have been then considerable their Nickname is sufficient Demonstration thereof 'T is very surprizing to hear our Deist affirm that they who oppose this Opinion never quote any for themselves before Dionysius Alexandrinus Forasmuch as the same Dionysius in Eusebius lib. 7. c. 25. affirms that some who Preceeded him rejected the Book of the Revelations upon that account Besides the Defenders of this Doctrine kept it as secret as they possibly could Non defendere hanc Doctrinam says Lactant. lib. de vit Beat. publice atque asserere solemus We are not wont to defend and assert this Doctrine publickly 'T is no wonder then if the Opponents of this Opinion were not so numerous 'T is also very plain that our Deist is mistaken in the Design and first Contrivance of this Millenary Invention as he calls it Nay Lactantius lib. 7. c. 26. pretends there is a Command from God to keep this Doctrine in silence Now if Lactantius who was himself a Millenary and well acquainted with their Methods hath rightly informed us our Deist's Suggestions must be very weak We read in Eusebius lib. 7. c. 23. how successful Dionysius was in overthrowing Milleranism and that Coracion a principal Man of that Party was so convinced by him as that He promised never to dispute for that Doctrine more never more to teach it nor to make any mention of it If the Books of Dionysius and Nepos two of the greatest and ablest Writers of the respective Parties were now extant we could not fail of having a true Prospect of this Controversie but their Books by the Injury of Times are perished Upon which consideration if we had said nothing else this last Remark had been sufficient to defeat Mr. Blount's Argument drawn from the Silence of the two first Ages The various reading of the much celebrated place in Justin Martyr relating to the Millenaries leaves us in Uncertainties But we are confident after a diligent Examination that Irenaeus no where pretends as our Deist bears us in hand that he did to relate the very Words which Christ used when he delivered this Doctrine Besides that which is a prejudice never to be overcome is the Silence of the Gospel in so important a Matter Our Author is frequent in quoting Councils as well as Fathers for Heterodoxies what reason there should be for his not citing any Councils in this Case no not so much as Gelasius Cyzicenus in reference to the Nicene Council I cannot account for I can only account for my self declare that what general or ancient Prov. Coun. have done in this case whether they have approved it or condemned it I do not know neither am I ashamed so to confess For Scaliger in his Exercit. 345. calls verbum Nescio ingenni candidique animi pignus In the beginning of the Reformation there were some who endeavoured to give Countenance to this Opinion wherefore our Church then passed a severe Censure on such Persons For in a Convocation at London in the Year of our Lord 1552. in the last Article save one the Millenaries are called Hereticks The Article is as followeth They that go about to renew the Fable of the Hereticks called Millenarii be repugnant to Holy Scripture and cast themselves headlong into a Jewish Dotage This Article is to be seen in the Collection of Articles Injunctions c. p. 52. Prefaced by the Learned Bishop Sparrow I say Prefaced because the Author of the Antopology p. 56 informs us that the said Bishop told him That he was not the Collector and that if he had been concerned in the Collection he would have published more Materials The latter part of this Information seems very probable forasmuch as the said excellent Prelat was most accurate in Matters of this nature From what hath been said concerning this Subject we may sufficiently discover Mr. Blount's Vanity when p. 169. he affirms that there was as Universal a Tradition for Milleranism in the Primitive Times as for any Article of our Faith Whereas there is no Article of our Faith but may be tried and proved by that Golden Rule of Vincentius Lyrinensis Quod omnibus quod semper quod ubique the Articles of our Faith have been received by all Orthodox Persons at all Times and in all Places which cannot be said of Milleranism We acknowledge no Articles of Faith but such only as can be proved by Holy Scriptures and to such Articles the Rule of Vincentius is only competent This I conceive to be the Sense of our Convocation in the Year of our Lord 1562. Collect. Artic. p. 92. when they define that all Articles of Faith are grounded on those Canonical Books of Holy Scripture of whose Authority there was never any doubt in the Church I think I may not be importune and unreasonable if I relate the whole Article Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to Salvation So that whatsoever is not Read therein nor may be Proved thereby is not to be required of any Man that it should be believed as an Article of Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to Salvation in the Name of the Holy Scripture we do understand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament of whose Authority there never was any doubt in the Church SECT IX Of Augury Of a God Origin of Good and Evil plurality of Worlds Natural Religion Ocellus Lucanus PAg. 167. Augury is a sort of the ancient heathenish Superstition And Pag. 169. We may see that Superstition like Fire endeavours to resolve all things into it self ANSWER Mr. Blount hath given us some Account of the Pagan Superstition of Augury out of which it appears how insufficient Natural Religion is of it self and how necessary Revealed Religion is to shew the vanity of these Abominations To this purpose very remarkable is that of Alexander ab Alexandro in the end of his last Book Dierum genialium Quantum debemus Christo Domino Regi Doctori nostro quem verum Deum veneramur scimus quo praemonstrante explosa monstrosa ferarum gentium doctrina rituque immani ac barbaro veram religionem edocti humanitatem verum Deum colimus evictisque erroribus infandis ineptiis
quas prisci coluere quid quemque deceat quibus sacris quaque mente Deum colere oporteat noscitamus How much do we owe to Christ our King and Master whom we acknowledge and worship as true God by whose guidance and direction the monstrous Doctrine and barbarous Rites of these savage Nations being chased away and we being taught true Religion imbrace Civility and the true God and the errors and unspeakable follies which the Ancients had in honour and reverence being brought to light we know what our duty is with what Ceremonies and what mind God is to be worshipped Which is in effect the same with that of the Apostle Colos 1. ver 13. Thanks be to God who hath delivered us from the power of darkness and translated us into the Kingdom of his dear Son Now this of Alexander is the more to be remark'd forasmuch as Augury the Art of Divination Astrology Southsaying and the like Superstitions like a universal contagion had insected all Mankind save only where Revealed Religion had obtained as Tully tells us in his first Book de Divinatione Qua est autem gens aut quae civitas quae non aut extis pecudum aut monstra aut fulgura interpretantium aut Augurum aut Astrologorum aut Sortium ea enim fere Artis sunt aut Somniorum aut Vaâ—icinationum haec enim duo naturalia putantur praedictione moveatur There could not be named any Nation or City which abounded not with these Abominations and was not moved with the Predictions of those who pretend to interpret Prodigies and Lightnings or with the Predictions of the Augurs or Astrologers or Oracles in these there was something of Art or with the foreboding of Dreams and Accidents which two last may have something Natural What Mr. Blount could promise himself by his Account of Augury I cannot imagine but I am perswaded he could not think of any thing which would prove more disadvantagious to his Design in general than this Subject Pag. 170. From the Pagan Processions the manner of the Christians going in Procession was thought to be first taken ANSWER Our Author is much mistaken as to the Institution of Processions Gregory Turonensis lib. 11. Hist cap. 37. gives us this Account Refert Avitus in quadam homilia quam de Rogationibus scripsit has ipsas Rogationes quos ante Ascensionis Domini triumphum celebrantus a Mamerto ipsius Viennensis Vrbis cui hic eo tempore praeerat institutas fuisse dum Vrbs illa multis terreretur prodigiis Avitus reports in a certain Homily of his which he writ of Rogations That Mamertus Bishop of Vienna instituted those Rogations or Processions which we celebrate before our Lord's Asoension Out of the said Homily we have this occasion of their Iustitution That it was appointed for diverting God's displeasure forasmuch as in those times there were great Earthquakes Incursions of Wolves and wild Beasts frequent Fires terrible Sounds by night to the extream terrrour of the People Wherefore the said Bishop knowing no better expedient to divert so severe a Chastisement than Fasting and Humiliation ordered those Days for that intent and contrived a Litany apt and suitable for such humble Address This pious course taking good effect succeeding times continued it in their Anniversary practice so that the first Council of Orleans established it by a Decree in their 23. Canon Which Custom having had so long footing in the Church our Reformers were loth to be singular in rescinding of it and the rather because they observed that it fell casually and beyond its first intention upon such a Season as might be very agreeable to the Service of those days For this being the Critical time of the Year when all the Fruits of the Earth are in greatest hazard of miscarrying by Frosts and unseasonable Weather it is therefore exceeding proper to supplicate God for the withholding of his Judgments and to implore his Blessing upon the Labours of the Husbandman And altho' our Liturgy hath no set Office yet our Church hath set Homilies for it And in the Injunctions an 1559. and Advertisements an 7. Elizab. it was ordered That in the Rogation Days of Procession the Curat sing or say in English the two Psalms beginning Benedic anima mea c. with the Litany and Suffrages thereunto belonging So that I conceive the greatest Enemies our Church hath cannot blemish our practice with Paganism or Superstition Polydor Virgil de rerum Inventione lib. 6. c. 11. derives their Original somewhat higher Ejusmodi Processionum usum jam inde a principio apud nostros fuisse testimonio est Tertullianus libro ad Vxorem quem forte intermissum Mamertus renovavit illos a Judaeis mutuatos esse satis constat These Processions were in use among Christians from the very beginning of Christianity as Tertulian delivers in one of the Books which he writ for his Wife which custom being long omitted was at last brought into use again by Mamertus and 't is manifest that the Christians borrowed it from the Jews The only Authors that I have read that can give any countenance to this Imputation of Mr. Blount's are Fromondus in his Meteors Book 5. ch 4. Artic. second where we are told That in the place of the Robigalia and Floralia the Catholick Church instituted the Day of Rogation and the Supplications and Processions before Ascension day The other Author is Mr. Gregory in his Notes on Ridley's View of the Civil and Canon Law p. 76. The old Romans instituted three yearly Solemnities in the honour of their Gods for the Fruits of the Earth These also the Romish Church observed having first moderated their Superstition and directed them to a more sacred end How malicious then is this Suggestion of Mr. Blount's His Argument is no more than this That the Christians who appointed Processions and Seasons to pray to God for his Blessing on the Fruits of the Earth are guilty of Paganism because the Gentiles were wont also to pray to their Idols for the like Blessing This I say is the strength of his Argument upon supposition that Mr. Gregory and Fromondus are not mistaken which they certainly are with respect to their original Institution Pag. 178. I must beg Mr. Lock 's Pardon if I very much question those Authorities he quotes from the Travels of some Men who affirm some Nations to have no notions of a Deity since the same has been said of the Inhabitants of the Cape of Good Hope which the last Account of that place proves to be false ANSWER I must confess 't is very difficult to perswade a Mans self That the Idea of God is not innate And if we respect Authority with relation to some Nations having no notion of a Deity My Lord Bishop Stillingfleet is enough to stagger any Man's Belief to the contrary who in his Origines Sacrae p. â—94 positively asserts That of any whole Nation which hath consented in the denial
of this Treatise was is not agreed among the Criticks He seems to be an Author of some Antiquity for Bellarmine De Scrip oribus Ecclesiasticis p. 72. in his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers gives this account of this Question De reprehensione dogmatum Aristotelis meminit Photius in Bibliotheca neque extat evidens judicium falsitatis ideo nihil habeo quod dicam Photius in his Bibliothec makes mention of the Book entituled A Refutation of the Opinions of Aristotle of which there is no Proof of its being supposititious wherefore I will determine nothing thereof Which Author having written something very material to our present purpose I have thought fit not to pass it over in silence The design of the Treatise as he tells Paul the Presbyter was to gratifie him in writing some Collections and Annotations of the Opinions of the Greek Philosophers concerning God and his Creatures Not as he saith that Paul should learn any truth from them but to make it plain to him that the Proofs of those Philosophers were not grounded on Science and Demonstration as they vainly boasted but on uncertain Conjectures According to those who have received their Doctrines from God and know the difference between the Creator and the Creature there is only one God unbegotten according to any Notion of that Word who had no God nor Gods before him nor any Coeternal with him who had no Subject on which to Operate nor any to repugn or oppose his Pleasure having an incorruptible Nature and Essence and no Impediment in his manner of operating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He hath nothing coeval with him he needs no Materials to work on no Adversary to withstand him And then having laid down Aristotle's Opinion as to the necessary Existence of Matter out of his first Book of natural Auscultations thus reasons against him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If Matter be as necessarily existent and as unbegotten as God himself and if God out of this eternal Matter can make any thing 't is manifest that the same God can make something out of nothing for the same Contradiction if there be any will be as much in the oneas the other This Observation is of great Value and pulls up by the very Root all the Hypothesis of Aristotle Ocellus Lucanus and all other Abettors and Fautors of this wicked Assertion of the World's Eternity For if Matter have its Original from it self how can it be subject to the Power of another Whatsoever hath infinite Power in it self hath a Power upon something beyond it self but if God and Matter have it both they can never have a Power upon each other or without themselves Besides if God's Power be infinite it cannot be confined to Matter for then we conceive the Bounds of infinite Power which is a greater Absurdity then to assert a Power which is able to produce something out of nothing It is commonly said in the Schools that modus operandi sequitur modum essendi such as the thing is such are its Operations And this I conceive to be an Axiom received by all Men. For if some real and Material Being must be presupposed by indispensable Necessity without which God could not cause any thing to be then God is not independent in his Actions nor of infinite Power and absolute Activity which is contradictory to the Divine Perfection Vain therefore is this Oracle of our Author's of the World's Eternity or which is all one the Opinion of a real Matter coaeval with God Pag. 216. Now it is very much that this Author Ocellus Lucanus who for his Antiquity is held almost a Cotemporary with Moses if not before him should have so different a Sentiment of the World's Beginning from that which Moses had methinks if Moses 's History of the Creation and of Adam's being the first Man had been a general received Opinion at that time Ocellus Lucanus who was so ancient and so eminent a Philosopher should not have been altogether ignorant thereof ANSWER What Origen observes of Celsus lib. 4. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That he objected Ignorance and Illiterature to Christians whereas he himself was a great Ignoramus in History in making Hesiod ancienter than Moses who was much ancienter than the Trojan War The same I have observed of Mr. Blount who in his Oracles hath objected the same to a Learned Clergy and yet is far more absurd in his Chronology relating to Ocellus Lucanus than Celsus was in the case of Hesiod Hornius in his Historia Philosophica lib. 3. c. 11. makes Ocellus one of Pythagoras his Scholars Ex ejus discipulis qui ante Platonem floruerunt Architas Philolaus Ocellus Lucanus Among his Scholars who were before Plato are Architas Philolaus Parmenides Mr. Selden in his Book de Jure Naturae Gentium lib. 5. c 11. Ex Pythagoreorum Schola vetustissimus Autor Ocellus Lucanus In the School of the Pythagoreans was that most ancient Author Ocellus Lucanus And to the same purpose our most Famous Men Bishop Pearson and Bishop Stillingfleet The eldest account I can find of Him in Diogenes Laertius is in the Life of Archytas Tarentinus who in his Epistle to Plato says That when he came to Lucania he met with some of the Posterity of Ocellus and that what Commentaries he had met with of Empire Laws Sanctity and the Generation of all things he sent to him This then is the greatest Antiquity that can be pretended for Ocellus which if granted to be true yet he comes several Centuries short of Moses Yet with all due submission to so great Authority I have some reason to think this may be a mistake for the Writings of Ocellus savour nothing of Pythagorism He Philophizes without regard of numbers and after the manner of the Peripateticks he useth the word Antiperistasis which is not to be found in any of the Ancient Philosophers no not in Plato and some accurate Persons assure us that Aristotle was the Inventor thereof Neither can I think what Scaliger in his 28. Exercit. affirms concerning Plato's Antiperistasis can invalidate this Presumption As to the Dialect in which it was first written I can affirm nothing for certain it is extant both in the Attic and Doric in the latter those of the Italic Family always writ as Architas Tarentinus Timaeus Locrus and others and 't is Suspicious that this Book was first written in the polite Attic and afterward to conciliate some Authority it was changed into the obsolete Doric But I leave this to the Criticks and make use of better Arguments altho' I cannot deny but that this Method is frequently made use of by Gerhard Vossius and particularly in the 12. and 13. chap. of his Book de Philosophia in the case of that great Physician Aretaeus the Cappadocian Plutarch lib. 2. of the Opinion of Philosophers says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the World was made by God and if we respect its Nature it was corruptible
he allows it to no Historian but Moses whom alone he makes to be divinely inspired As to the point of Antiquity we appeal to our Author himself who notwithstanding what he hath here written of this matter page 224. confesses That we have no Writer extant at this time more ancient than Moses unless it be Ocellus His exception of Ocellus is of no moment as we have proved in the foregoing Discourse After all my Search I can no where find Josephus absolutely affirming That the Egyptians Chaldeans and Phenicians had any certain Records of their Original but only Comparatively with the Greeks He no where affirms directly or indirectly that the forenamed Nation had more ancient Records of their Country to refute him and that therefore he thinks more convenient to yield to them in Antiquity and therefore our Deist is forc'd to use this Device This is the secret meaning of what Josephus says What Josephus says is clear and perspicuous there is no colour for so slanderous an Insinuation and I think I may affirm witout any Calumny or Controversy That not Josephus but our Deist had a Secret meaning to impose on credulous Readers by abusing good Authors We may bid Farewell to all Evidence in Matters of Fact if Secret meanings be allow'd of but perhaps our Deist had herein a regard to Himself hoping that at a dead lift This Secret meaning might gloss and varnish over some of his monstrous and incredible Tenents I am sure that by this Hocus-pocus Trick he might have cited The Hind and Panther which he quotes pag. 150. for the Antiquities of his Chaldeans Egyptians Phenicians and have quoted Josephus for the Frauds and Imposings of the Priest And now I am making towards a Conclusion I hope I may do a thing grateful to the Reader and be not thought to deviate from my Subject if I here present him with the great Aversion that our Church hath for Deism The Church of England Article 18. declares in these words They are also to be had accursed that presume to say that every Man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth so that he be diligent to frame his Life according to that Law and the Light of Nature for Holy Scripture doth set out unto us only in the Name of Jesus Christ whereby Men must be saved This Article plainly declares as Mr. Rogers on the Articles p. 87. collects that the Profession of every Religion cannot save a Man live he never so vertuously It also follows from this Article That no Man ever was or shall be saved but only by the Faith and Name of JESVS CHRIST The Opinion of the Deist is diametrically opposite hereunto For pag. 199. and 200. he affirms That Natural and Unrevealed Religion is sufficient to make us happy in a future State And he affirms p. 201. That this his Opinion is Charitable forasmuch as it doth not exclude any Dissenters from Eternal Happiness and that God may be pleased with different Worships St. Austin in his Book of Heresies cap. 72. reckons that of the Rhetorians to be one Forasmuch as they believe that all hereticks hold the Truth and walk uprightly Which Heresy St. Austin calls a Heresy of wonderful vanity and such as seems to him incredible my own part I cannot perceive any great difference between the Rhetorians and the Deists And whereas our Deist seems to value his Opinion upon the pretended Charitableness thereof and thinks that a Recommendation He is much mistaken for this Opinion is rather Turkish than Charitable We read in Busbequius Epist 3. that Rustan the Prime Vizier perswaded that excellent Embassadour to turn Musselman and that if he would do so he should receive great Honours and Rewards from Solyman his Lord and Emperour To whom Busbequins makes this Reply Mihi certum est manere in ea Religione in qua natus essem quamque Dominus meus profitetur Pulchre inquit Rustanus sed tamen de anima quid fiet Et de Anima inquam bene spero Tum ille cum paulisper intercogitasset ita est profecto neque ego ab hac absum sententia aternae beatitudinis consortes fore qui sancte innocenterque hanc vitam traduxerint quamcunque illi Religionem secuti sunt I am resolved says Busbequius to continue in that Religion in which I were born and which my Lord professes Very well says Rustan but what will become of your Soul in another World I am says Busbequius very confident of its welfare Then Rustan after some pause makes this Answer I am of your Mind this is my Opinion That all Persons shall be eternally happy that lead an innocent life notwithstanding their differences in Religion The Prime Vizier's Opinion seems to me to be the same with Mr. Blount's it is altogether so charitable And if our Deist had been present at that Interview 't is apparent enough with whom he would have sided And if the same Offers had been made to him which were made to that incomparable Embassadour 't is plain enough what he would have done So that if I should assert That Deism is a direct Road to Turcism I think I should not be mistaken Our Deist must have more Confidence and all things considered better luck than Polus had in Erasmus his Exorcisms if he can perswade any Persons who seriously consult their own Salvation To behold any Happiness in his Heaven It 's worth our observation in what detestation and abhorrence our Church of England hath the Opinion of the Deists for it affixes an Accurse to it which I think is not very usual for Provincial Councils Mr. Pool indeed in his Appendix to the Nullity of the Romish Faith pag. 240. 〈◊〉 these words If we look into the Records of Councils we shall find That this Practice of Anathematizing was not only in use in general but also in particular and Provincial Councils I doubt not but this Learned Man had good grounds for his Assertion Yet I must confess for my own part I have not observed this Method in Particular Councils if we except that Orthodox Council held at Gangra in Paphlagonia about the Year of our Lord 324. in every one of whose Canons about twenty in number we find an Accurse affix'd a sufficient Instance In Antiquity to justify our Church 's Method And since we have had an occasion to mention this Synod and that we live in an Age in which Atheism and Deism abounds to that degree that the Churches set apart for GOD's Service and our Religious Assemblies are slighted and contemned I shall conclude with the Judment of that Pious Synod Can. 5 Si quis docet domum Dei contemptibilem esse ut conventus qui in ea celebrantur Anathema sit How nearly this concerns our Deists and other despisers of GOD's Publick Worship who frequently abuse GOD's Ministers and make no Religion of traducing and ridiculing them is very plain and palpable and there is here NO SECRET MEANING EXEQUIAS DEISTAE QUIBUS IRE COMMODUM EST JAM TEMPUS EST. FINIS Books Printed for and Sold by Charles Yeo John Pearce and Philip Bishop Booksellers in Exon. SElect Hymns each fitted to two Tunes to be sung in Churches The Beauty of Holiness or a short Defence and Vindication of the pious Decency Regularity and Order of Reading the Communion-Service at the Communion-Table offered to a dissatisfied Neighbour from his Minister A Form of Prayer for Married Persons for the most part taken out of the Liturgy In the PRESS A Practical Treatise concerning Evil Thoughts wherein are some Things more especially useful for Melancholy Persons By William Chiloot M. A. Danmonii Orientales Illustres or the Worthies of Devon Printed by way of Subscription Price in Sheets Sixteen Shillings and Six Pence the first Payment Eight Shillings All Gentlemen that are willing to take the Advantage by Subscribing are desired to send in their first Payment with all speed to the Undertakers Charles Yeo John Pearce and Philip Bishop