the Spirit of GOD That of Jeremy ought not to be here objected who in the midst of his divine expressions doth pass so fâ—r as to curse the Day of his Nativity For the Prophet did record these words onely by way of Narration to shew that they escaped from him and his desultory stile in this expression is far different from Saint Pauls in this place Of a vulgar Book intituled the PRACTICE of PIETY I Have often admired at the folly of the common people yea and of many persons that were conceived to be more judicious who have almost adored this Book and have made more account thereof than of the Bible it self This little vvhich concerning it I have extracted shall serve to disabuse those who will give regard unto it At the beginning the Author very magisterially yea and with terrible threatnings doth advertise all sorts of people yea and the most learned vvithout exception whosoever thou art saith he who dost cast thy eyes on this Book make haste to read it for fear that before thou hast read it over GOD by some suddain Death doth cut the thread of thy life you see then it is very dangerous to dye before this Book be read over which is so necessary to salvation O unhappy those vvho are dead before they can come to the last page What Apostlâ—e hath ever spoken thus concerning his own writings Is it less dangerous to dye without reading over the Bible it self The Prologue of this man â—o shevv the excess of a Spirit vvhich hath a marvailous opinion of it self But his work doth not answer to his boastings I omit that which may be spoken on the generality of the Book In many thing he is defective in many superfluous in some obsâ—ur in others frivolous and ridiculous and which carry with them even a â—â—avâ—n of Popery it self First he describeth to us the torments of Hâ—ll after the manner of the monks very curiously and as it were by parcels so far as to particularize the ill smell of the Brimstone which doth offend the Nostrill And speaking of the Evill Angels he calls them Furies which is the Name that the Pagans give to their Infernall Goddesses Secondly he represents the damned soul who doth accuse the Body and doth impute unto it the sins which she hath committed This Prosopopeia is extracted from the Contemplations of certain Monks who have feigned a Dialogue where the damned soul reproacheth the Body with the faults she hath done And this smells of the Heresy of those who affirm that the soul doth not sin but onely by the inducement of the Body Thirdly According to the same Monasticall stile he describes the diversity of the Crowns in Bliss As the Crown of Martyrdom the Crown of Virginity which hath overcome the temptations of the Flesh The Crown of those who are marryed The Crown of good works for the â—ivers of Almes as if no other works were good but the giving of Almes onely c. He represents the faithfull soul incountring the Body at the Resurrection to whom she makes this joyfull Complement O welcome are you O well met my beloved Sister These Indeerments cannot but carry a great Grace no doubt with them He doth make it remarkable that the Virgin Queen Elizabeth vvas born on the Eve of the Nativity of the Virgin and that she dyed on the Eve of the Annunciation of the Virgin But who told him either the Eve or Day in vvhich the Virgin vvas born For as for that annual Feast which the Church of Rome doth celebrate there is no proof that it is the Day of the Birth of the Virgin It is onely an ungrounded and an uncertain tradition In the same manner the Day of the Annunciation is unknown to us because we know not the Day of the Nativity of Christ And thus the observation of this Author is buildâ—â— in the Ayr And though it should appear unto us that the said Queen was born on the same Day as was the Virgin and dyed on the same Day wherein the Angell appeared to the Virgin could not the same thing happen to divers other persons And would not the same accident be as mysterious in every one of them It is very likely saith he that on the seventh Day which is Sunday the world will end And to this purpose he alleageth a tradition which imports that the second comming of Christ shall be on the Sunday But the same Day is not Sunday throughout all the world In some places of the world it is Sunday when in other places it is hardly Saturday In which Country then shall it be Sunday when our Lord shall come Shall it be in England or rather in the East Indyes Speaking of Fasts he saith that they were instituted in the terrestrial Paradise because GOD did forbid Adam the fruit of the Tree of knowledge On this account First Adam did fast although he did eat of all the other fruits of the Garden The Isaelites also did fast all their lives because many viands were forbidden them although they did eat of others By the same reason it may be said that a man doth fast even when he is eating This is the language of the Church of Rome to say we fast when we abstain from flesh although we then feed upon abundance of fish Secondly the Fasts of which he there speaketh had other ends than had the abstinence from the forbidden fruit For we fast especially either to promote or to testify our repentance which could not be spoken of Adam who had no need of repentance because he had not as yet sinned when this abstinence was enjoyned Adam saith he was overcome by the Serpent for having not observed this Fast But first he ought rather to have said that Adam did not keep this Fast because he was overcome by the Serpent or to speak more properly by Eve already overcome by the Serpent Secondly these words are doubtfull and dangerous to affirm that the Fall of Adam did proceed because he did not keep the Fast As if his sin did arise from gluttony which is a gross error This Book in the end thereof doth represent a Colloquy between the soul and her Saviour concerning which take these parcels Lord wherfore wast thou covered with a Garment of purple R. Because I take away thy sins which are as red as Scarlet Wherefore was a Reed put into thy hand R. I am not come to bruise the broken Reed Wherefore were thy eyes blinded and covered R. That thy eyes may be opened from spirituall blindness Wherefore were thy feet and thy hands nayled to the Cross R. To embrace thee more affectionately Wherefore didst thou suffer thy face to be spitted on R. That I might make thee clean from the ordure of sin Wherefore was thy side opened with the point of a spear R. To the end that thou mightst find an entrance to draw neer unto my heart O gallant Demonstrations In all these answers and
Father which art in the Heavens But not that he ever said The Father which art in Heaven Wherefore then Do we make him to change his stile in the Prayer which he hath prescribed to us But the English Translation doth change also all the other places in which Jesus Christ doth express the Heavens in the Plurall Number when he speaketh of the Father To the same purpose our Lord did never say the Kingdom of Heaven but alwaies the Kingdom of the Heavens One onely of the Evangelists hath this terme of the Kingdom of the Heavens no less then six and thirty times but the Kingdom of Heaven not once which plainly doth demonstrate seeing the multitude of passages in which the Plurall number is alwaies imployed and never the Singular that there is a mystery or an Emphasis in the one which is not in the other But the English Translation to the contrary doth never say the Kingdom of the Heavens but alwaies the Kingdom of Heaven Amongst all the places of the New Testament where the Original nameth the Heavens there are very few where the English do express the Plurall It is in their translation of the 2 Cor. 5. 1. and Heb. 1. 10. Why ought it not to be or could it not be as well in all the other places which the holy Ghost hath dictated And in Ephes. 1. 10. where the Originall mentioneth the Heavens in the Plurall the English Translation doth onely put it in the Margent and placeth the Singular in the text it self Of Lucifer who is mentioned in the English Translation Esay 14. ver. 12. THe School-Boys know that Lucifer is a Latin word and it is the name of the Star which sheweth its self before the rising of the Sun The Hebrew which signifies this Star is indeed expressed it self by the word Lucifer but it is when we speak in Latine not when it is translated into English To what purpose then is this Lucifer in the English translation The translators in the Margent have inserted the true word of the English tongue which is the Day-Star but in the body of the text they had rather imploy the Name of Lucifer as if it were better English or as if there were some great cause which did oblige them to it It is indeed no other thing but the tracing of an antient Allegory which applyeth to the Devill that which is spoken to the King of Babylon and of the Name of a Star hath made it to be the proper Name of the Prince of evill Spirits and give it him in Latin that is to say Lucifer And because proper Names do retain themselves in whatsoever language they are spoken it was beleived that this ought not to be changed for any other But wherefore do we yet retain the relicks of such notorious folly censured a long time since and disavowed by our selves who is he amongst the vulgar that finding in his Bible this word Lucifer doth not immediatly believe that it is the Name of a great Devill whom common ignorance so calleth It is true that the Divines who have published the last annotations on the English Bible have also condemned those who do so understand the name of Lucifer But so long as that word shall remain in the text the error will continue What need is there to retain a word which is not of the English tongue since the English can express the Hebrew without this Latin word which onely serveth to nourish an antient folly The common people of England have a long time thought that the evill Rich man Luke 16. verse 19 c. was called Dives according to his proper Name And for the greatest part they do to this day believe it for they ordinarily say that Dives is in Hell that Dives spoke with Abraham c. As if Dives had been his Christen-name or at least his Sirname Now this ridiculous opinion was conceived and born at that time when the people had not the Bible but in Latin For because that Dives doth signify a rich man in the Latin tongue when mention was made of Dives the ignorant did imagin that it was the name of a man An interpretation as vain as that which is recited in a modern Satyre of one who maintained that the name of Tobyes Dog was Canis because it is said that Canis followed his Master But it is to be admired how this ignorance hath been fomented even by the Orthodox themselves since the Reformation when they published the Scriptures in the English tongue for in the Contents of the Chapter which they have prefixed to the 16. of Luke we do yet read as if that Chapter did speak of Dives and Lazarus The last translation hath not this word Dives No more ought Lucifer to be any more especially in the text it self Of Mary Magdalen who falsly is said to be a Woman of a bad life The injuries which Divines for the most part aâ— her in their Sermons and their Books And especially the English Bible in the Argument of the seventh Chapter of St. Luke THe injury which the Roman Church doth to another Mary who was the Sister of Lazarus hath been sufficiently confuted by the Orthodox Ignorance hath caused to believe that this Mary and another who was of Magdala and the Sinner mentioned in the 7th of Saint Luke were but one and the same person confounding these three in one now we have truly and already vindicated one of the three who is Mary of Bethany who was the Sister of Lazarus but we do still defame her of Magdala as if this Magdalen were the Sinner of whom Saint Luke speaketh There is nothing more common in the mouth of the vulgar then the wicked life of Magdalen The Preachers willing to comfort Souls afflicted with the horror of their sins do represent unto them this Woman as one of the most unchast and most dissolute that ever was to whom nevertheless GOD hath been mercifull On the same prejudice which is but imaginary the reason is builded wherefore the Son of God being raised from the dead did appear first to Mary Magdalen before he appeared to any other for it is alleged it was because she had more need of comfort having been a greater finner than others The common places the Indexes even that of Marlâ—rat himself and other Books which serve for an Address to Students do give them betimes this impression which alwaies afterwards they retain He who hath wrote the Practise of Piety of whom I shall speak more hereafter doth rank this Magdalen with the most enormous sinners yea with Manasse himself one of the most wicked that ever was And yet more to atuhorize this error it is inserted into the Bible it self For the Contents of the 7th Chapter of Saint Luke in the English translation doth tell us that the Woman whose sins were in a greater number then the sins of others the Woman who untill then had led a wicked life and full
great miracle was wrought It was seated in Galile the less in a champian place it was round on the ridge thereof it was equall on all sides fourteen furlongs in height according to the levell I do therefore willingly yeild to the vulgar opinion provided it be said to be an opinion onely and not a certainty This transfiguration is recited four times in the new Testament to wit by three Evangelists and by the Apostle Saint Peter who with his eyes did behold it But none of them hath given us the Name of that Mountain Their silence in this particular should also shut up our mouths concerning this No doubt it was not without a speciall cause that the Holy Ghost abstained from naming that place seeing other places are named which seem to be less considerable Nevertheless if we say that it was Mount Thabor we ought not to pronounce it as an assured truth as ordinarily it is done even in Sermons and in our Books also of devotion For they who say so do speak it as if it were most true and not to be doubted without thinking that it is an uncertain fore-judgement Of the Son of God whom the English Bible saith is mentioned by Nebuchadnezar Dan. 3. 5. IN this translation Nebuchadnezzar speaketh that of the four men whom he saw in the fornace one of them resembled the Son of GOD This would make us to believe that Nebuchadnezzar did understand the mystery of the Trinity which nevertheless was obscure in the old Testament When we do say the Son of GOD it is presently understood that wee do speak of him who is the onely Son of the Father But there is no appearance that this Heathen Prince did speak in this sense The Prophets themselves when they touched on this point have never expressed the name of the Son of GOD but in a figure as in the persons of David and of Solomon or of the entire Body of Israel Mat. 3. 15. Nay Daniel from whom Nebuchadnezzar received all that he did know concerning the true GOD did never in express terms name the Son of GOD Nay speaking of him he reciteth that he saw him like unto the Son of man Dan. 7. The French Bible doth otherwise render the words of Nebuchadnezzar The fourth saith it is like unto a Son of GOD to a man divine excellent extraordinary So spoke the Pagans themselves when they would represent a man of rare qualities whether of Body or of Mind So the best Interpreters have observed And so this place ought to be translated Between these two the Son of GOD and a Son of GOD there is an infinite distance Of the Name of Children which was given to the three Companions of Daniel IN our vulgar tongues the Name of Child when it is understood without any correlative is taken for one of a very tender age It is commonly said that the three Children were cast into the Furnace And the Song which is attributed to them is called the Song of the three Children But certainly they were not Children then when they chose rather to be cast into the flame than to adore the Image Before that time they were reputed amongst the wise men of Babylon and they should have dyed amongst those who could not interpret the dream of Nebuchadnezar And before they were cast into the Furnace they managed all the great affairs of the Province of Babylon of which they were Governours And were they yet but Children The History also which recites the Martyrdom from whence they were miraculously delivered doth make mention of them as of men of age and not as of Children Daniel 3. ver. 12. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27. Of the first words of the French Bible IN the Originall the first words of the Book of Genesis are couched in this order In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth The Scripture begins with the same word of beginning so do all the Translations which I have seen the French onely excepted which saith God created in the beginning c. It may be said that I stand here upon too nice a punctilio For what â—oth it import if we read it God created in the beginning Or In the beginning GOD created It is true It is the same sense indeed nevertheless besides the generall reason which doth oblige us to follow the order of the originall words as neer as the propriety of our vulgar languages will permit there is a more particular consideration on this place Saint John doth in the same manner begin his Gospel In the beginning was the word c. The first Syllables of the Evangelist do represent those which are first in the Bible And that this was his design is evident by that which followeth For immediatly afterwards he doth mention that word by which all things were made and doth make use of those terms which do manifestly reflect on the words of Moses when he describeth the Creation of the world And as this term in the beginning is the first in Moses and in the Scripture so it is first of all expressed by this Evangelist This Concurrence which is so considerable doth not so plainly appear when we read it God created in the beginning I 〈◊〉 most clear when we hear Moses who saith In the beginning GOD created And the Evangelist who saith In the beginning was the word The Tabernacles of the Israelites being in the Wilderness ill represented in the pictures inserted in the Bible THese Tabernacles were Cabbins made of the branches of certain trees Such were the lodgings of the Hebrews after their departure out of Egypt untill they entred into the Land of Canaan In memory whereof they were enjoyned to celebrate every year a Feast of seven days during which they lodged in Tabernacies made of the branches of divers trees Le. 23. Nâ—h. 8. But the Painters do make them of materials very different For representing the Israelites on the foot of Mount Sinai or in some other place of the Wilderness they do lodge them in tents which according to the painting were made of Linnen or of the skins of Beasts So that the Figure doth not answer either to the matter or to the form of those tabernacles of which we speak now in the pictures of many of our Bibles we may see pourtrayed the Camp of Israel and a certain number of Pavilions such as at this day are used when our Armies lye in the field but they do in no wise resemble the tents of the Israelites Such a portraict doth disguise the History and the Jews have a cause to taxe us for it of ignorance Of the Name of Beelzebub which is imposea on the Prince of the Devils IT is known that the Jews gave him this Name which is the Name of an Idol And the Pharises when they blasphemed the Son of GOD did call him after that Name But when Christ did answer them concerning Beelzebb he did not say as they that Beelzebub
two Commandements of the Law or two Petitions of the Lords Prayer in one Section onely when every Commandement and every Petition do demand one entire action it mingles sometimes in one section divers Articles of Faith every one of which doth require a Section by its self There are also some transpositions and articles not so commodious as could be desired It would be convenient to change the form in divers respects for we ought not be so superstitious towards those who have drawn up this Caâ—echism as to take it for a perfect Draught We may retain it still but in some places reform it I do rather wish that our Churches had an Historicall Caâ—echism which by Questions and Answers might re-Present all the History of the Bible at least the generalities of it and the most illustrious particulars Some English men have travailed in it And if the work had been compleat it would produce a great benefit to the Common people But amongst so many Caâ—echisms that are written it were to be desired that we had one where the Doctrine of the Sacraments were better grounded than it hath accustomed to have been For although a Caâ—echism ought to be popular yet we should not omit that which gives intelligence of the true ground of the matter Of this I shall speak more largely in a particular treatise if GOD permit Of the Common opinion that in the death of a man the soul comes out of the mouth WHen a man dyeth It is said that he hath his soul already on the brink of his lips So speak the Divines and so Antiquity hath spoken This language proceeds from a popular opinion that when the soul dislodgeth from the body it goes out at the mouth I will not undertake to answer the curious Questions which may be moved touching the coming forth of the soul I onely affirm that this prejudging of the vulgar is not solid If the soul be universally dilated in every part of the body as many Philosophers do affirm wherefore is it locked up in a particular place at the departure If it lodgeth properly and particularly in the heart or in the Brain what need hath it to come out at an open passage seeing it is a Spirit which can pass away at the traverse of the Skull or any other Bone Now who hath told us that it comes forth rather at the mouth than at the ear or eyes which are as the windows of the soul If I were at leisure to affirm something in a point the decision whereof is neither certain nor necessary I should say that it is rather to be beleived that as the soul of the first man did enter into him by the Nostriâ—ls so it goes forth that way Gen. 2. 7. And certainly when the Scripture would express that man is alwaies neer unto Death it saith that the Spirit or the breath of him is in his nostrill as being ready there to come out Esay 2. 22. To this the words of Job have reference Job 27. 3. So long as the breath of the mighty God shall be in his nostrills which is to say when this soul it self which God hath breathed into me shall be upon the point of its departure having no more hold of it but in my nostrills onely Of the testimony which Josephus the Historian of the Jews did render of Jesus Christ THis testimony is found in the eighteenth Book of the Jewish antiquities This Author making mention there of Jesus doth doubt if it be lawfull to call him a man seeing the great miracles which he wrought He also saith that this Jesus is the Christ That at the third day after his death he shewed himself to be alive That such things and other miracles were forespoken of him by the Prophets It is a long time since the Christians employed this testimony of Josephus to convince the Jews But not to displease so many learned men antient and modern I cannot perswade my self that this Jew which gives not the least apparence to be inclined to Christianism hath written so much to the advantage of our Religion Would he so highly have published in his Book a belief of which he never made profession And he is so far from acknowledging Jesus to be the Christ to whom the Prophets did attribute the Segniory of the whole world that on the contrary he gives it to Vespasian a Pagan Prince and applyes to him the Oracle which belongs onely to the Son of God This is far off from acknowledging Jesus to be the Christ It may be objected that if these words above mentioned were not the words of Josephus it would follow that this Author made no mention of Jesus Christ in any place of his History for he speaks not of him but in this place onely which is in question Now it is not believed that having undertaken to write of the memorable things of those times he should in silence pass by the miracles performed by Jesus Christ which were known to all the world But this is not the onely Omission that is to be noted in Josephus The Massacre of the Infants at Bethlehem of which Herod was the Author was so famous that the Heathens themselves did write of it and nevertheless Josephus who hath recorded many other cruelties of this Herod doth make no mention of it And he is noâ— the onely Historian who by contrivement or otherwise hath surpassed some part of that which was most memorable in his time And shall we wonder that a Jew who never adhered to Christianism should purposely omit the miracles of Jesus Christ Was not his Resurrection contradicted by the Priests although they were convinced of the truth thereof Nevertheless I do beleive that this passage was Josephus his own but withall that some have changed some words therein and this is not the onely writing to which by the irregular zeal of some such a thing hath happened But for this in this place Saint Jerom who translated this Author into Latine and who forgot not â—o value the testimonies which the Jews and the Pagans rendred to the Christian Religion doth make Josephus to speak otherwise For he â—akes him not to say that Jesus was the Christ but that it was beleived he was the Christ Josephus then onely reciteth that it was the belief of others to wit the Christians but not his own for he was not a Christian and being not one nor making profession of Christianity much less could he say that Jesus was the Christ Now if one word in this place be changed it is not incredible but the contexture also of other terms is altered in which this Author speaks of Jesus Christ Let us not think the Christian Religion to be less assured because a Jew doth not confess Jesus to be the Christ Truth needs not the suffrage of her adversaries Nevertheless this passage of Josephus is advantagious to us in one respect The Jews maintained that the Death of Christ was not under Pilate