to the washing of the soule Which words are certainly of competent largenesse to contain and so exclude not the doctrine of satisfaction that being of the number of those things which in Gods counsel were appointed and so required to the washing of our souls This being considered it will be no prejudice to that learned man that in the former words he took in Socinus's interpretation of morte suâ certos nos reddidit veritatis eorum quae docuerat quae talia sunt ut nihil sit aptius ad purgandos à vitiis animos For of that there is no question but that Christ by his death did give us assurance of the truth of his doctrine and that this assurance is very apt to purge us from our evil and vitious courses In respect of which purgation Saint Paul himself saith Tit. 2. 4. that Christ gave himself that is surely even to dye for us that he might redeem us from all in quity the power as well as guilt of it and purifie unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works And Gal. 1. 4. he gave himself for our sins and thereby I suppose made a satisfaction for us that he might deliver us from this present evil world from the vices and abominations thereof And Eph. 5. 25. Christ gave himself for the Church that he might sanctifie and cleanse it that he might present it unto himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing From whence I conclude that the Socinians errour consists not herein that they affirm this but that they say this is all that Christ did by his death and so exclude his satisfaction which can by no means be affirmed of Grotius who as he wrote a Book in defence of it so in this very place ascribes to Christ the performing omnia all things indefinitely which were required to the washing of our souls from which number his expiatory sacrifice was never excluded by Grotius 28. And then it may be fit to be remembred that as the denying the satisfaction of Christ is one great errour justly charged on the Socinians so the confining the effects of the death of Christ to that one head of satisfaction is an errour also very carefully to be averted by him that desires to reap benefit by Christs death 29. After his view of this place he is pleased to prevent the Readers farther trouble to refer him to Grotius's Annotation on one place more of the Revelation chap. 13. 9. and I have observed his directions and can assure him there is not there one word to this matter Onely that Arethas rightly applies the phrase from the foundation of the world to the word book not to the word slain evincing it from the parallel place chap. 17. 8. where so it is joyned Whose names are written in the book of life from the foundation of the world the book of life in one place and the book of life of the lamb slain or the slain lambs book of life in the other being perfectly aequipollent 30. The remainder of the Catalogue of Texts that is added is all again out of the Epistles and so hath already more then once been accounted for by denying the Annotations on them to have been perfected by Grotius And this is all that need to be considered in reference to the first branch of the suggestion that concerning the doctrine of the satisfaction of Christ 31. On the second Socinian head of doctrine that concerning the Deity of Christ whereon the Disputer had affirmed that of all the texts of the Old and New Testament whereby the Deity of Christ is usually confirmed Grotius hath not left any more then one if one speaking any thing clearly to this purpose I thought I had given some matter of conviction by referring to that learned man's Annotations on John 1. when both that one signal text is left by him speaking clearly to this purpose and many other places of Scripture are mentioned and interpreted and applied to the same sense as parallel and answerable to that To this he replies that this of John 1. was the one place by him expresly excepted and therefore this instance would not evade the charge And for the other places Prov. 8 c. he is pleased to suppose that on the view of my defence men must needs suppose that in the Annotations on the places repeted Grotius must give their sense as bearing witness to the Deity of Christ Hereupon he will turn to the several places and give the Reader an account of them 32. But before he proceed to that and to save the pains of many of them it may be soon considered that what Grotius doth in the Notes on John 1. is as truly his act as any thing that is done by him in any other place much more so than what is publisht under his name in the Annotations on the Epistles and consequently that as many places as he hath there affirmed to be parallel to John 1. 1. so many places he hath left speaking clearly to this purpose Grotius had not at that time publisht any other Notes on any part of the Bible but those onely on the Gospels On the rest of the New Testament he never lived to publish any yet here on John 1. hath affirmed the words of Saint Paul Col. 1. 16. all things were created by Christ to be agreeable to the words of Saint John that without him was nothing made that was made Is it not now as visible that he hath left that place of Col. 1. 16. speaking clearly to the Deity and creative power of Christ by which all things were at first made as if he had lived to set out Annotations purposely on that place and had therein so interpreted it This certainly is so clear that I cannot yet doubt what ever the Reviewers sarcasme would suggest of being a successful advocate in this matter 33. The same is again as clear of 2 Pet. 3. 5. and of the two places brought by him in concent with it from the Chaldee Paraphrast on Isai. 45. 12. 48. 13. to testifie that by this {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} i. e. by the word of the Lord Christ the whole world was founded which again though he never should mention them again in all his writings are yet solemnly left by him to testifie clearly to the Deity of Christ And so more than that one of John 1. 34. But the place more largely recited by Grotius to this purpose is that of Prov. 8. from verse 23. A seculo habui principatum I was set up from everlasting to verse 27. when he prepared the heavens I was there And this the Reviewer thinks fit to examine by repairing to his Annotations on the Old Testament and there 1. he finds his first note on the Wisdome there spoken of to be Haec de eâ sapientiâ quae in lege apparet exponunt Hebraei sane ei si non soli at
A CONTINUATION OF THE DEFENCE OF HVGO GROTIVS IN AN ANSWER TO The Review of his ANNOTATIONS Whereto is subjoyned a REPLY to some passages of the REVIEWER in his late Book of Schisme concerning his charge of Corruptions in the Primitive Church and some other particulars By H. Hammond D. D. LONDON Printed by J. G. for Richard Royston at the Angel in Ivy. Lane M. DC LVII To the STATIONER Mr Royston I Have been so often called on for the Reply to the Review of Grotius's Annotations that I am at length inclined to change my former purpose and permie those few sheets prepared as soon as the Review came to my hands but then laid aside on a perswasion that they might be safely spared to follow the former on that subject rather then deny to any so easie a request I am Your Friend H. H. Septemb. 4. 1656. A CONTINVATION OF THE DEFENCE OF HVGO GROTIVS In ANSWER to the REVIEW of his Annotations 1. IF he that hath read the Review of the Annotations of Hugo Grotius which is offered as a Reply to the second Defence of that learned man seem from thence to have any new scruples infused into his mind it will not cost him many minutes to deposite them by observing with me this method 2. First by adverting on the first head that of the satisfaction of Christ not onely what fair and large characters of his thoughts lie legible to all men in his Book De satisfactione written on purpose against Sosinus on this subject but also how those have been since back'd with indubitable evidences of a later and fresher date taken from his own express words in his Discussio the last thing he wrote and in a letter under his own hand dated after the time of his surmised change written on purpose to forest all this surmise and to assure us of his constant adhering to that sense which he had delivered in his Book De satisfactione Which two as they are most irresrugable proofs of the matter in hand being testimonies of him that certainly best knew his own thoughts whether he were changed or no so to neither of these is the least word of Reply here offered by the Reviewer and so stand in full force against all that is here suggested 3. Secondly by remembring that from the a beginning of this debate the posthumous Annotations on the Epistles were expresly renounced and reiected by me as departing manifestly from the judgment of that learned man formerly expressed in those writings which he had completed and published in his life time and consequently as unsufficient arguments or testimonies of his change when produced against his own repeted and express declarations to the contrary And yet from these are the proofs now principally brought in this Review and by the contrariety betwixt these and his Book De satisfact his change concluded with what appearance of reason the Reader will soon discern when he hath considered the premisses and what shall now occasionally be added thereto 4. For this manner of dealing two things onely are pleaded in the Review which here must be regarded before I proceed 1. That the Accuser having to deal with that book of Annotations that goes under his name If they are none of his it is neither on the one hand or other of any concernment to him 5. To this I reply first that it is in the Reviewer a manifest diversion a course which is sure to render all debates infinitet In my answer to his Preface of Animadversions on Iguntius's Epistles c. I inserted ex abundanti one and onely one Digression A Defence of the learned H. Grotius And streightwayes the whole stream of the Controversie is diverted into that one narrow chanel removed from the question of Episcopacy to the inquiry into Grotius's his opinions and that is one compitent diversion After this when both in that my Digression and also in my second Defence I had confined my plea to Grotius himself and those writings published by him in his life time and known to be written and perfected by him expresly rejecting this book of posthumous Annotations on the Epistles the Reviewer is now pleased principally to insist and found his charge against Grotius on those his posthumous Annotations which is a perfect diversion again instead of a reply and to the waving evidently because changing of the whole question 6. Secondly as uneffectual at this plea it it is yet much more unreasonable if circumstances be considered being evidently prevented and superseded by that which hath past in this debate For if there were any truth in those words of his Epistle to the Oxford Heads My Defensative as to my dealing with Grotious's Annotations is suited to what the Doctor pliads in his behalf then certainly he must be concern'd in this which yet he resolves to be none of his concernments For it is sure that my plea was framed in Defence of Grotius himself not of those incomplete if not false images of him those parts of the Annotations which I professed to reject and not to plead for Accordingly my words in the first proposal of this matter to debate were these This very pious learned and judicious man hath of late among many fallen under a very unhappy Fate being most unjustly calumniated sometimes as a Socinian sometimes as a Papist And then how can this Defensative be according to his promise conformed or suited to my plea if it refer not to the same subject viz. to Grotius or those Books of his which are acknowledged to be his completed genuine writings such alone being competent testifications of his sense and so measures to judge of his perswasions whether he were a Socinian or no 7. A second part of his plea is by reflecting again on that evidence which saith he he had formerly offered from the Printers Preface to the volume of Annotations on the Epistles But here in the very entrance is a mistake which for the clearing of my self more then on apprehension of any advantage the Reviewer can gain by it I must first take notice of The Evidence was by him b cited from some words of the Preface to the last part of the Annotations beginning thus Jam vero sciendum est To those words there found I gave answer in my second Defence p. 7. and he now tels me that a slight in spection will serve to manifest how ill it i. e. my answer or the sense I gave of the words produced agrees with the intention and words of the Prefacer who saith he tells us that Grotius had himself published his Annotations on the Gospel five years before and so proceeds reciting the words of the Prefacer for eight lines together and concluding that if the Apologist read this Preface he ought to have desisted from the plea insisted on If he did not he thought assuredly he had much reason to despise them with whom he had to do Who would not think
and these superadded to the former are very sufficient to confirme a divine truth and that is all I said in this matter But then Fourthly as the conciseness of his Notes on the Old Testament and his desire to clear the first and nearest sense of the Prophecies such as pertain'd to the then approching affairs of the Jews are a competent account of his not inlarging to the more remote and ultimate completions in Jesus Christ So his general advertisements more then once given such as hath been produced from his Preface to Isa. 40. and to Isa 53. are sufficient to testifie his acknowledgment of Christ's being predicted in those places of the Prophets where his Annotations on the several verses make no particular mention of him And so when he gives a sense of Isa. 9. 6. which immediately belonged in his opinion to Hezekiah and according to that interprets every part of that verse he yet thus prefaceth it sic tamen ut multò excellentius haec ad Messiam pertinere non Christiani tantum agnoscant sed Chaldaeus hoc loco thus giving onely a lower notion of the words to Hezekiah and reserving the sublimer and more excellent to Christ So again chap. 11. 1. Redit ad Hezechiae laudes sub quibus sensu sublimiore latent laudes Messiae and many passages there are to the same purpose As others also of referring to the Annotations on the Gospels wherein he hath spoken so largely of this sublimer completion of ohe Prophecies that he would not repete them in the places of the Prophets to which they belonged 54. In the next place he comes to the comparison betwixt Calvin's and Grotius's dealing in this matter and makes many offers of answer to which I am concern'd to make particular replies 55. First he denies Mr Calvine equally chargeable or in any degree of proportion with Grotius To which I answer that whether he be or be not truly chargeable in any degree I am not concern'd to examine having not accused him but onely made the parallel betwixt that learned man and Grotius in this that each of them have by some been deemed chargeable 2. The comparison which I made was not of the equality or indeed of the degree of proportion but exprest with such caution as sufficiently prevented that reply my words being these that it will upon inquiry be found in some degree if not equally chargeable on the learnedst and most valued of the Reformers particularly on Mr Calvin himself c. Here I said in some degree but proceeded not to define the equality or to consider what proportion that degree held with that wherein Grotius was chargeable not indeed believing that either Grotius or Calvin had given any reasons for that charge which I see lie heavy on both of them 56. 3. The comparison of equality which I made between these two learned men referred onely to the bitterness and injustice of the accusations and contumelies that fell upon them on that account in these words Calvin himself hath been as bitterly and unjustly accused and reviled on this account as ever Erasmus was by Bellarmine or Beza or is probably Grotius can b. And there will be no way to disprove my comparison in this but by heaping far more unjust reproches on Grotius then yet this Reviewer hath done which if others are resolved to do yet shall I not thereby be refutable who as justice and charity obliged me affirmed it onely not probable that they would 57. In the next place he requires me to prove of Mr Calvin that he hath in all his Commentaries on the Scripture corrupted the sense of any text giving expresse testimonies to the Deity of Christ and commonly pleaded to that end and purpose although he deny not but that he differs from the common judgment of most in the interpretation of some few prophetical passages judged by them to relate to Christ 58. To this I answer 1. That the latter part of this his not denying c. is in effect the confessing all that I had said of Mr Calvin which was but this that he was by some charged of disarming the Church of her defences against adversaries by diverting those places of Scripture which had formerly been used to assert the great mysteries to other inferior ends And then I need undertake no farther tasks of supererogation such as the proving Mr Calvin to have corrupted the sense of any text c. which he knows I never affirmed of him Yet remembring him that I am not now to speak my own sense but onely to justifie the truth of my report that Mr Calvin and some of the first Reformers have been severely accused and reviled on this account I shall now 2. instead of g many refer the Reader to Schlussetburgius a Lutheran superintendent in his Second Book De Calvinist Theolog. and 6. Article or to Fr. Fevardentius a Doctor of Paris either in his Comment on Saint Paul to Philemon or in his Excerpta out of that Lutheran Not in Iren Var Fragm p. 508 509. In the latter of these he will find a Catologue of twenty passages affixt to those eminent first Reformers especially to Mr Calvin as 1. that the enmity betwixt the serpent and the seed of the Woman Gen. 3. is simply to be interpreted of the hostility of Men and Serpents that the prophecies of the Scepters not departing from Judah till Shiloh comes Gen. 49. expounded of Christ gives the Jews occasion to scoff that the words of Balaam Num. 24. A star shall rise out of Jacob must not properly be expounded of Christ nor that of the Lord by Moses Deut. 18. 18. I will raise them up a Prophet which yet Saint Peter Acts 3. 22 and Saint Stephen Acts 7. 37 affirmed to belong to Christ that Mich. 5. 2. Out of thee Bethleem shall he come forth to me that is to be a ruler in Israel must not be expounded precisely and properly of the divinity of Christ That Zach. 9. 9. Behold thy King cometh lowly is by interpreters triflingly and in a false manner expounded of his entrance into Jerusalem which yet Saint Matthew and Saint John have applied to it These are a few essayes whereby to judge of many others And the less Mr Calvin and the Reformers are guilty of these as truly in many that I have had the convenience to examin I cannot but think him guiltless the more evident is the parallel betwixt Grotius and them in this matter 59. Thirdly he affirmes that what the Papists raved against Mr Calvin was chiefly from some expressions in the Institutions about the Trinity wherein he is acquitted by the most learned of themselves and not from the expositions of Scripture But 1. the truth of this will be judged by what was last said for all those twenty passages are fetcht from the expositions of Calvin c. on those so many places of Scripture And 2. 't is certain I specified not the Book wherein
he had written what was thus chargeable and so had not been reproveable if they had been all out of the Institutions those being as acknowledgedly his as the Commentaries and both much more then the Annotations on the Epistles are Grotius's and 3. if he stand by learned men acquitted of the charge then as I said that may make the parallel more exact betwixt him and Grotius though I undertake not that every learned man hath been thus just to acquit him 60. But then fourthly for Calvino-Turcismus by me mentioned in a parenthesis he tels me I have forgotten the design of it and that Calvin is no more concerned in it than others of the first Reformers nor is it from any doctrine about the Deity of Christ in particular but from the whole of the Reformed Religion with the Apostacies of some that they compare it with Turcisme adding that something indeed in a chapter or two they speak about the Trinity from some expressions of Luther Melanchthon Calvin and others 61. To all this I answer 1. that 't is visible I speak not of Mr Calvin alone but of the learnedst and most valued of the Reformers and of Mr Calvin onely as one of them 2. That although the forgetting the design of Reynolds and Giffords Book would be far from a crime in me had I been guilty of it the subject matter of it is not so much worth remembring much lesse any indication that Grotius were insufficiontly vindicated yet when the Reviewer confesses that in a chapter or two it speaks about the Trinity from some expressions of Luther Melanchthon and Calvin and others this clearly evidences that these Reformers were there thus accused in the matter of the Trinity as now it seems Grotius is And 3. if Hunnius's Calvinus Judaizans which is home to the business be answered by Pareus and an account of the calumny given by him this still renders the parallel more complete An account of the calumny and the first author and grounds of it against Grotius being happily rendred by himself also in the Discussio p. 17. 62. The Reviewer concludes this matter with a signification of his constant adhering to his proposition formerly asserted with one limitation expressed of his own observation But I that first gave the occasion of the debate in my Digression concerning Grotius did never propose it with reference to that limitation not being able to foresee how much this Reviewer had read or observed of Grotius's writings nor can I yet pass judgment whether what hath now been offered to him by another will be yielded to come within the compass of that limitation or no And so I must be content to leave it at this time 63. On the second sort of suggestion the Reviewer hath chosen to be brief and hath well prepared for it by expressing dislike and aversation to any such undertaking that seemed incumbent on him viz. to prove that Grotius was a Papist But to this I reply as before that this task is sure incumbent on him if as he said his defensative be suited to what I pleaded in his behalf For 't is certain that in the Digression I had so proposed the debate and undertaken to vindicate him from this suggestion viz. that he was a Papist 64. That he closed with the Roman interest he is now willing to infer from his observation on Rev. 12. 5. To that therefore I have turned and there find no other premisses toward this conclusion than onely these 1. that Dispersi ex Judaeis instrumenta Ecclesiae Catholicae multos de populo Romano Christo genuere that those that were dispersed from Judaea begat to Christ many of the people of Rome and that these are there called partus masculinus the man-childe or masculine birth in respect of the great constancy which appeared in the Church of Rome of those times then 2. that the Church of Rome hath this above other Churches that no Church subjected more people to the word of God so that her victories by the weapons of Christ were not inferior to the Martial successes of Old Rome 3. that the regiment of other Churches after the Apostles death belonged to that Now this being clearly applied by him to the infancy or first ages of the Church that which is first said of the constancy is indeed much for the honour of the Primitive Roman Church but no way for the interest of the present which having much departed from the Primitive cannot in any reason partake of those elogies which he there bestows on that masculine birth at the first appearing of it in the world So likewise 2. of the ancient Roman Church it is that he saith it converted so many to the faith which is a truth known and acknowledged in History but is not at this day assumed witness S. W. to be the foundation on which their Supremacy is built 3. that after the Apostles death Rome being a chief Metropolis and as the Imperial See the most eminent of all others had the dominion aliarum of other it is not omnium of all Churches is not denied by any either ancient or modern that I know of All the suburbicarian Region and the Churches in that were under the Primate of Rome and that Primate was within a while lookt on as the Patriarch of the West and the First Patriarch And the words of Grotius are not by any circumstance of the place inclined to any other sense The aliae Ecclesiae other Churches being in no reason interpretable any farther than those which Rome had converted to the faith nor necessarily to all them but to the oppida minora and Provinciae the lesser Cities and Provinces unto which as he interprets the woman is said to flie and so Christianity to be propagated when Simon Magus by the favour of the Emperour had opposed and much oppressed it at Rome and drave the profession out of it by which means those aliae Ecclesiae were planted And it may be worthy to be observed that when the text before him was general for {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} all the nations he is not thereby moved to interpret it in that latitude of all simply but in a more restrained sence wherein all in Scripture-style oft signifies but a great many onely by the nulla plures and aliarum others and none more then that 65. Here before he concludes he is pleased to look back on a passage which he had used that if men be drunkards proud boasters c. hypocrites haters of good men persecutors and revilers of them yea and if they be not regenerate and born of God united to the head Christ Jesus by the same spirit that is in him they shall never see God for which he now saith he fears not what conclusion can regularly in reference to any person living or dead be deduced To this I reply by acknowledging the certain truth of the general Aphorisme and onely remembring him that