the rest of the Apostles but the particular Fates and States of that Kingdom were never known till Christ revealed them to S. Iohn in the Apocalyptical Visions The like I say of the Fourth or Roman Kingdom the general revelation whereof could not but be before the opening of the sealed Book in the Apocalyps since it had then been so long a time in the world as it was grown past the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and had fulfilled what it was to fulfil upon Daniel's people 4. As for the Persecutions of the Church I deny the argument either of the Seals or Trumpets to be the Roman persecutions of Christ's Kingdom or that any of them have reference to persecutions save the Fifth Seal only or that any thing contained in them was made known to Daniel save the Catastrophe only represented in the last Trumpet which the Angelus tonitruum proclaims there to be Consummatio Mysterii Dei prout annunciavit servis suis Prophetis The finishing of the Mystery of God as he hath declared to his servants the Prophets and therefore cannot be denied to have been both foretold and expected for the general although not for the Manner Time and Order in serie rerum gerundarum till now 5. Howsoever my Tenet here be yet your Assertion That the Romans persecution was revealed to none till Christ revealed it to Iohn cannot stand unless you deny the coming of the man of sin who is a limb of that Kingdom to be any part of the Churche's afflictions For this was revealed unto S. Paul both for the quality and the fall thereof viz. That Christ should destroy it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which I make no doubt but S. Paul learned out of the seventh of Daniel where that ruffling Horn also is not destroyed until the Son of man comes in the clouds of heaven to receive that Universal Kingdom which shall never suffer persecution 6. But whereas you say that the ruffling Horn of the Fourth Beast is Antiochus Epiphanes I demonstrate the contrary by this one Argument The ruffling Horn reigns until the Ancient of days comes in fiery flames to destroy him and to give judgment unto the Saints of the most High and until the time comes that the Saints possessed the Kingdom viz. until the Son of man comes in the clouds of heaven to receive a Kingdom wherein all Nations People and Languages should serve and obey him Daniel 7. verses 9 10 11 13 expounded ver 22 26 c. But Antiochus Epiphanes reigned not until this time for he died 160 years and more before the Birth of Christ and almost 200 years before his Ascension the least of which numbers is a longer space of time than was from the death of Alexander unto Antiochus Ergò Antiochus Epiphanes is not that ruffling Horn. The changing of Times and Laws whereby the power of this Horn is described is an Oriental phrase to express potestatem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nor are Times here to be taken in so abstract a notion but concretely for status rerum tempora varianâ—ium or Res quibus variatur status temporum as are mutationes Rerumpub regiminis rerum Times for things done in time whereby the Times are altered such as are the alterations of States and Governments According to which notion Dan. 2. 21. it is said of God that he changeth times and seasons he removeth Kings and setteth up Kings and I Chron. 29. 30. that the Acts of David were written in the Books of Samuel Nathan and Gad the Seers with all his reign and his might and the times that went over him and over Israel and over all the Kingdoms of the Countries And whether the Pope if I say he is that Horn took not upon him a power of changing such Times as these I shall not need to tell you And yet take Times in your own Notion and it would make a shift to fit him as well as Antiochus To your Second Position The proof of your Second Position That the Fourth Beast Dan. 7. is not able sufficiently to express the Roman Empire is in the mainest part Petitio principii wherein that is taken for granted which is in question For you take for granted that the Type of the Roman Empire in the Apocalyps borrows his Ten horns from Daniel's fourth Beast as a distinct Beast from it But I say he borrows them not they are his own proper and native horns Daniel's Beast and he being one and the same Beast I grant that the Apocalyptical Beast for the shape of his body is beholding to Daniel's three first Beasts but that he borroweth any from the fourth I deny Nor do Horns more or fewer distinguish the species of a Beast For in the Apocalyps there is a Lamb with seven horns and a Lamb with two horns and yet for kind a Lamb still So Daniel's He-goat had first one horn and afterward four horns and yet the same Goat still c. The correspondence in number of the several Heads of Daniel's four Beasts put together with the seven heads of the Apocalyptical Beast is but casual Neither can it be proved that the Fourth of Daniel's Beasts had but one head as is here to be supposed for the third Beast hath the four heads and the other three but one a piece For the mentioning of the Head which bore the ten horns in the singular number Verse 20. proves no more it had but one head than the mentioning of mouth likewise in the singular number Apoc. 13. ver 2 5 6. proves the Apocalyptical Beast had buâ— one mouth For indeed the Ten horns were all upon one head as well in the Apocalyptical Beast viz. upon the seventh or uppermost head as in Daniel's Beast and the mouth of the Apocalyptical Beast was the mouth also of the seventh head to act the state of which head S. Iohn saw him rise out of the Sea c. And whereas you speak of an insufficient expression of the Roman Empire by Daniel's Fourth Beast you may perceive by that I have said before that it would well enough agree with my Principles to grant it my Tenet being That the Fourth Beast should not be so distinctly with all accoutrements revealed unto Daniel as it was unto S. Iohn because the specification of the several States and Fates thereof was yet sealed and unrevealed And the third Kingdom was not so distinctly revealed to Daniel in the Leopard Chap. 7. as it was two years after to the same Daniel in the great He-goat Chap. 8. c. The dispensation of God in these Revelations is to be measured according to his pleasure and the use of the Church c. But it is now three a clock and I have no more time I had much rather confer of these things by word of mouth wherein perhaps I could give better satisfaction Conference by writing is wont to multiply it self into so much paper as takes away a great deal of my
most High THE Book of Psalms is a Book of Prophecies witness the frequent citing of them by our Lord and his Apostles witness the Surname of King David who being the penman of no other but this Book is styled the Prophet David I say the Psalms are Prophecies and that both Concerning Christ himself and also the Church which should be after him Concerning Christ himself it needs must be Saith he in the Gospel Luke 24. 24. These are the words which I spake unto you while I was yet with you That all things must be fulfilled which were written of me in the Law of Moses and in the Prophets and in the PSALMS and more especially concerning his Beginning S. Paul quotes the words of the Psalm speaking in the Person of God Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee and again concerning his Office Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek Now for the Church of the Gospel and calling of the Gentiles as many parts of many Psalms do foretel thereof so is this whole Psalm a description of the same 1. What manner of one it should be 2. What worship God would establish therein For the first it should be Catholick and gathered out of all Nations The God of Gods saith the beginning of the Psalm v. 1 2. even the Lord hath spoken and called the Earth from the rising of the Sun to the going down thereof Out of Sion the perfection of beauty hath God shined Agreeable to the words of the Gospel it self That it behooved Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his Name among all Nations beginning at Ierusalem and that it did begin at Ierusalem where Christ himself began where the Holy Ghost came down in cloven tongues So out of Sion God shined our God came and kept not silence for a fire came before him and a tempest moved round about him Now for the Worship and service which Christ would establish in his new reformed Church it concerns either the First or the Second Table For the First Table it tells us What Offerings God would abolish namely all Typical Offerings or all the Offerings of fire and then What Offerings he would accept to wit the Offerings of Praise and Prayer Offer unto God Praise and pay thy Vows unto the most High For the Second Table it commands a right and upright conversation from the 16. verse unto the last and the last is the Summe or a brief summary of both Tables He that offereth Praise shall glorifie me and to him that disposeth his way aright will I shew the Salvation of the Lord. But to return again to the reformation of the First Table whereof my Text is the Affirmative part where as I said we are told both What Offerings God will not have offered and What Offerings he requireth He will no longer have any Typical Offerings any Offerings of fire or bloudy Sacrifices For I will not saith he reprove thee for thy Sacrifices or thy burnt-offerings I will take no bullock out of thine house nor goats out of thy folds For all the beasts of the forrests are mine and the beasts on a thousand hills If I were hungry I would not tell thee for the world is mine and all that therein is Will I eat the flesh of bulls or drink the bloud of goats Nevertheless he still requireth Offerings of Thanksgiving and a Present when we come to pray unto him so faith my Text Offer unto God Praise c. And so here is an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as S. Paul saith in a like case He taketh away the first that he may establish the second But as in Typical Speeches it often comes to pass that the things which are spoken are true both in the Type and Antitype as that in Hosea 11. 1. Out of Egypt have I called my Son was in some sense true both of Christ and Israel and that in Exod. 12. 46. Thou shalt not break a bone thereof was true literally both of Christ and the Paschal lamb and that in Psal. 22. 18. They parted my garments among them was true figuratively in David and literally in Christ Even so it comes to pass in Prophecies and namely in this That it so foretells of things to come that it concerned also the time present it foretells the estate of the Church in the Gospel and yet meant something that concerned the present Church of the Law To which purpose we must frame the sense after this manner That God even then did not so much regard the Offerings of fire and Expiatory sacrifices as he did the Offerings of Praise and Thanksgiving because the first were Ceremonial the other Moral the first their End was changeable the other everlasting So that in respect of the Catholick Church the words of my Text are an Antithesis or Aphaeresis with the former I will in no sort have any Typical and Bloudy Offerings but only Offerings of Praise and Prayer But in respect of the Legal Church or the Church of the Law they are a Protimesis or Estimation I require not so much any Typical offerings as I do that you should offer unto me Praise and pay your Vows unto the most High For so when God saith elsewhere I will have mercy and not sacrifice it is no Antithesis but a Protimesis that I had rather have mercy than sacrifice So again Matth. 6. 19. Lay not up for your selves treasures upon earth but lay up for your selves treasures in heaven this is no Antithesis or Aphaeresis as though Christ would not have us at all provide for things of this life but a Protimesis he would not have us take so much care for this life as for the life to come The Scope therefore of my Text is to shew What kind of Offerings God did chiefly accept under the Law and doth only require in the Gospel to wit two sorts of Offerings Eucharistical and Euctical or Votal Eucharistical Offerings are such whose End is Thanksgiving to God for Benefits received which are here termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Offerings of Praise Euctical I call such as are made to God upon occasion of suit we have unto him that is when we come to pray before him that he might accept our supplications and we find favour in his sight And this is performed two manner of ways either by promise if God shall hear us and grant our petition which is called a Vow or by actual exhibition at the time we do pray unto him An example of the first kind is that of Iacob If the Lord shall be with me and bring me back again of all I have the Tenth will I give unto him The second was much used in the first times of the Christian Church and of it in the Law we understand
against superstitious and affected Poverty nor shall I need stay longer upon this part of Agur's Prayer Give me not Poverty There are not many of us willingly guilty on this side I come therefore to the other side whence my second Observation shall be That we ought not to covet nor seek after Abundance and Excess in these outward things but to have our aims and desires stinted at such a Competency only as is convenient to maintain us in that condition and state wherein God hath placed us Whatsoever is more than this is Sin For what we have no pattern in the Word of God to pray for we have no warrant to covet or seek for In the Pattern for all our Prayers The Lord's Prayer our Saviour alloweth us to pray for no more but a competency Give us day by day our daily bread that is not a superfluous and superabounding bread but a sufficient bread we pray thee O Lord to give us this day and every day Agur in my Text Give me neither Poverty nor Riches feed me with food convenient for me Iacob in his vow Gen. 28. 20. If the Lord saith he will give me food to eat and raiment to put on The Lord shall be my God c. Food he desires but food to eat Clothing he desires but clothing to put on so much as was sufficient for him and his to eat so much as was sufficient for him and his to wear this Iacob desires but no more And under these two words Food and Raiment are comprehended all things needful for the maintenance of life as may appear by the following words v. 22. where Iacob promiseth that if God will grant him this his suit of all that he should give him he would pay the Tenth unto him But in the whole Book of God there is no Prayer to be found for Superfluity and Abundance I would not be mistaken I say not it is unlawful to have and enjoy Riches and Abundance if God give them but unlawful to covet and seek after them I know the things of themselves are indifferent and the good creatures of God made for the use of man if man abused them not yea plenty and abundance of them are called the gifts of God and which is more the blessings of God The blessing of God saith Solomon Prov. 10. 12. maketh rich and it is the usual phrase of Scripture to say of those that became rich that God blessed them And they are Blessings indeed when God offers them but no Blessings to such as covetously hunt and gape after them Abraham was rich Iacob was rich Solomon and David were rich I mean they had abundance wherewith God blessed them But which of all these or any oother holy man in God's Book do we find to have long'd for crav'd or labour'd after more than a portion convenient for them which of them made their desires carvers of such abundance No Desire of abundance and superfluity â—ures not with the heart of God's servants Iacob indeed became rich but desired as you heard but meat to eat and raiment to put on Solomon a King for whose estate the greatest measure of these things was most behoveful yet when God 1 Kings 3. 5 9. gave him his choice to ask what he would and he would give it him he asked neither riches nor honour but a wise and understanding heart wherewith God was so well pleased that he tells him Because he had not asked riches nor honour therefore he would give him both riches and honour in that abundance as no king on earth should be like him When Riches come thus they come then indeed as Blessings For God gives them as well-pleased and accordingly as he sees them good for those to whom he gives them and sends his Grace with them that those who have them may use them to his glory and their own good On the contrary To men whose hearts could never say If God will give me but sufficient and convenient for me I will lay me down and be at rest and crave no further to those whose hearts are restle's and mad after abundance and excess of wealth whose desires are without all bounds in seeking after Riches Experience may tell us that to such as these Riches seldom or never prove a Blessing when they get them but a Curse He that maketh hast to be rich saith Solomon Prov. 28. â—0 shall not be innocent They that will be rich saith S. Paul 1 Tim. 6. 9. speaking of such as could not rest with a Competency fall into temptation and a snare and into many foolish and hurtful lusts which drown men in destruction and perdition We use to say that those who have great losses are undone but here he that getteth much is undone Wouldst thou then be happy and blessed in the enjoyment of these outward things then desire no more in thy heart than thou mayest lawfully ask of God in thy Prayer Follow the counsel of Solomon Prov. 23. 4. Labour not to be rich cease from thine own wisdom viz. to seek to be rich which is humane wisdom but indeed plain folly Let neither thy desires nor thy aims out-bound this of Agur's to have food convenient for thee If God sees it good for thee to have more he will give it thee and offer thee the means and opportunity thereof without thy seeking But if he sees it not good for thee why wouldst thou have it Thou hast enough already if thou hast convenient Howsoever God hates a large and restless desire Therefore be not covetous be not greedy of much lest if thou come by it God give it thee not in mercy but in wrath and displeasure My third Observation is That a Competency or the Middle estate between Want and Superfluity is in choice to be preferred as the best and happiest condition We see Agur preferreth it before the rest and that his choice was a Wise man's choice we cannot doubt when the Scripture records it as a piece of his Wisdom yea even the Wisemen of the Heathen were not ignorant thereof The reason is apparent because it is the most free from such dangers as both Extremes are subject unto which Agur mentioneth in the Reason of his petition to be perils of Irreligion towards God and Injustice towards man Great evils both of them endangering the state of the Soul But I must not speak of them particularly here they belong to the Second part of my Text and we shall not need look so far for not only in that but even in outward respects we shall find this middle estate to be the safest condition The low shrubs Beasts will brouze them and trample upon them the high Trees are most subject to the violence of Tempests when those of a middle size are free from both So a poor estate is subject to contempt and so to be wronged and injured of every one that will The rich and mighty are envied and
it more than the jealousie of God can endure as is manifest by his so strict prohibition and frequent detestation thereof But as for the two other ways of using a creature in the act of God's worship by way of Instrument only or Local circumstance neither of them is impious or unlawful First Not to use it therein as or by way of an Instrument whereby it is performed For then it would be unlawful to use a Table or a Chalice in the celebration of the holy Eucharist or the like to use a Book when we pray sing or give thanks unto God to praise him with Instruments of Musick as David ordained to use a Book to swear upon when we take an oath for to swear is as much an Act or Religious worship and as much appropriated unto God in Scripture as any other worship due unto him Wherefore the Rites used therein as to turn toward lay our hands upon and kiss the Book of the holy Gospels as the Tables of the new Covenant of God with men in Christ if they be well examined will afford much light toward the decision of this Question of posture in our adoration of God in the Church especially if it be considered that the very same Rites for the same purpose have been anciently used upon an Altar But this by the way Secondly Neither is it impious or unlawful in God's worship to use a creature in way of a Local circumstance thereof namely as that whereby the place of our worship is determined for then it would be unlawful to use Temples or Churches to worship God in or to have any designed place there accommodated for the Priest to minister or officiate at But this our practice shews we esteem and acknowledge lawful Now if it be lawful to make use of a creature for the Vbi or place where of the worship we give unto God why not as well for the place WHICH-WARD or which-way we worship him VBI QVO Where and Which-way being both alike differences and relations of Place and the worship of God no more communicated thereby with the Creature whereby we determine the one than whereby we determine the other Indeed the Creature by this means is honoured and dignified but that honour the Creature receiveth lies only in this in being chosen and preferred before any other for such sacred use Which honour I trow is of no other or higher nature than what any Sacred thing according to the fitness and propriety it hath may be respected with Moreover if it should not be lawful in Divine worship to direct our posture towards a Creature and that too in great regard of some special relation it hath to God-ward it would be unlawful to set our faces and lift up our hands and eyes to Heaven in our prayers and invocations tendered unto the Divine Majesty which I know not any that makes scruple of And yet if the determination of our posture only by a creature in Divine worship be Idolatry why might we not justly scruple lest this posture of our hands and faces to Heaven-ward at such a time might make us guilty of worshipping the Host of Heaven that is the Sun Moon Starrs and Planets as the Gentiles and Israelitish Idolaters did But for our warrant herein our Blessed Saviour in that Prayer he hath left unto his Church hath taught us to say Our Father which art in heaven For without doubt if we may without impiety determine the Divine presence thus in our speech we may also yea fit I think we should do the like at the same time with our posture which is no more but to express that visibly by our gesture which we utter vocally wâ—th our mouths For not that which is before us only in our posture but that which is the terminus of our Act is the Object of our Worship Nor to determine our posture only by a creature but to communicate the Worship we give unto God therewith is that which the Divine Law forbiddeth And that this difference must be admitted is evinced by the severe and peremptory prohibition of the one and the frequent examples of the other practised by holy men in Scripture Besides that the admission thereof openeth the true way how to answer our adversaries when they alledge the aforementioned places of Scripture in patronage of their Idolatrous worship Now then to apply all this to the Hypothesis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the HOLY TABLE or ALTAR for the difference is but verbal in our Christian Churches answers unto the Ark or Mercy-seat in the Iewish Temple being Solium Christi and in the language of Antiquity the Christian Sanctum Sanctorum where the Book of the Gospels by ancient custom laid thereon parallels the two Tables the holy Eucharist the golden Pot of Manna that is the sacred Monuments and Symbols of the new Covenant those of the old Why may not then a like respect be had to it in the posture of our Christian adoration which the Iews in their worship had not only to the Ark of the Testimony but to the Altars which stood before it yea even to the Temple it self when they could not come to perform their devotions therein and that too as I have already observed when that Ark which Moses made by Godâ—s appointment with those two sacred Symbols the two Tables and Pot of Manna were no more there as in the Second Temple they were not but only the place ordained for them or at the most if that some imitative Ark only with a Roll of the Law put therein such as the Iews at this day are known to have in their Synagogues and to direct their posture toward it when they worship as formerly they did to that in the Temple See Buxtorf Synagog Iudaic. cap. 5. Lastly all Nations and Religions have been wont to use some reverential gesture when they enter into their Temples And our Blessed Saviour in the Gospel would not have his Disciples to enter into a man's house without some salutation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when ye enter into an house salute it Why should we not think it to be a part of Religious manners to do as much when we come into the house of God Now of all Gestures Adoration or bowing of the Body seems to be the most comely and ready for that purpose and of all postures in the doing thereof and some posture there must needs be that which is directed towards that which is the most sacred and of most preeminent relation to God in the Church that namely where he is commemorated and the blessed Symbols of his Body and Bloud reached forth unto us who is our Propitiatory through faith in his Bloud and by whom alone and whose Sacrifice we have access unto his Father the HOLY TABLE or ALTAR What place then so fit to be both in our eye and mind when we make our addresses