it was Because He was free among the dead Psal 88.5 Moreover concerning the first Father of mankind almost the whole Church agrees that He freed him there which may not be thought that the Church beleeved without cause although the expresse authority of the Canonicall Scripture be not alleadged He saith almost the whole Church because the heretickes called Tacians denyed that Adam was saved De Haeres Cap. 25. Vossius beside all these brings the consent of the Africane and of the Easterne Churches both of the Greekes and of the Nestorians with divers later writers as Zuinglius P. Martyr and others Sect. 4 Obiect 1. But the Fathers agreed not all in one judgement Answer True Neither yet they of later times For concerning the end of His going to hell some thought that He delivered all that He found there both good and bad indifferently 2. Others because they thought that the whole punishment for mans sinne could not otherwise be discharged said that He went to hell that He might there suffer for the soules of men as on His Crosse He had suffered for their bodies Nay as Postel de nat Med. relates the Abissine Church holds that He went thither for His owne soule This last is hereticall the other against the direct authority of the Scripture For our Lord Himselfe when He gave up the Ghost professed That whatsoever was necessary for His suffering and our redemption was then finished And therefore both Saint Peter 1 Epist 2.24 saith That He bare our sinnes in His body on the tree and Saint Paul Colos 1.20 That Hee wrought our peace through the blood of His Crosse And Chapter 2. 15. Hee spoyled the principalities and powers triumphed over them openly in His Crosse Beside His promise to the thiefe This day to bee with Him in paradise doth directly crosse this opinion 3. Others upon that text of 1 Pet. 3.19 He went and preached unto the Spirits in prison which were disobedient in the dayes of Noah thinke that He went to hell to upbraid to them their infidelity But this was not according to the end of His comming which was to seeke and to save that which was lost Luke 19.10 Therefore others and with them Martinus Cellarius de operibus Dei thinke that He preached repentance unto them and that such as beleeved Him to be God were redeemed from hell and saved by Him But because our Church hath rejected this opinion compare the Synod Edw. 6. with the Synod Eliz. therefore I refuse it And that text of Peter may be interpreted of the preaching of Noah while the Arke was preparing 5. Some againe on better ground then the former thinke that that descent of His into Hell was for manifestation or investing of Himselfe in that Lordship which He as the Sonne of man had over all the creature and consequently over the powers of hell That at His Name every knee should bow both of things in Heaven and of things in earth and of things under the earth Phil. 2.10 Thus He that liveth and was dead is alive for evermore and hath the keyes of hell and of death Thus He that descended first into the lower parts of the earth did ascend farre above all heavens that Hee might fulfill all things Ephes 4.9 10. That fluttering distinction That He as God dwelt in the man hood on the earth the lower part of the world and then He as man ascended will not helpe For first euery globe of the Moone the Sun or any star as it hath a centre to which every thing thereon inclines for otherwise it could not hold together in one body so is it a centre to the universe that is about it And so is likewise the lowest in comparison of those globes that have different centres Beside He which descended is even the same that ascended But God and man are not the same Thirdly He descended and ascended that He might fill all things which God did for ever neither ascending nor descending And therefore Augustine said well Totus Filius suit apud Patrem c. The Sonne was whole with the Father whole in the Virgins wombe whole in Heauen whoâ—e in Earth whole on the Crosse whole in Hell 6. But howsoever private opinions might fall in by the way yet by that which was said before it is manifest that the ancient Church did beleeve that Christ did therefore descend into hell that the faithfull by Him might be brought into Paradise which if it were the meaning of them that did compose and of them that did generally receive the Creed then cannot that Article of Christs descent into hell be interpreted according to their meaning which say That it must signifie no other thing but that He suffered the paines of hell in His soule Concerning them that received the Creed and interpreted it you have heard § 3.4 and shall further heare their meaning The Authors meaning you shall heare anone Obiect 2 Obiect 2. But the same Fathers are cited on both sides Answ Every man that writes or speakes may be taken short and hâ—s words wrong to a sence contrary to his meaning But in this question it is not much stood upon even by favourers of this new opinion but that the current of the Fathers beares all the other away insomuch that the learned Bucanus Instit. Theol Loc. 25. though he seeme to allow this later exposition better yet he professes that he dares not condemne the judgement of the Fathers seeing it is neither contrary to the Scripture nor hath any inconvenience in it So others yeelding that the opinion of the Fathers is for the most part for the locall descent of Christ into hell would yet be excused to follow it See Synops Pap Contr. 9. qu. 1. edit 4. pag. 403. which demand truely may seeme to be very just that being put which Augustine said a little before that it is not by the expresse authority of the Canonicall Scriptures which ought to be the ground and rule of our Faith But that clause of Augustine concerning the want of the authority of the Canonicall Scripture is ill referred to Christs descent into Hell which belongs onely to the freeing of Adam there But if their mistaking were indeed Augustines meaning That the descent of Christ into hell had no authority of the Canonicall Scripture yet remembring that it may not be thought that the Church yea the whole Church beleeved it without cause seeing it hath no inconvenience in it seeing it is not contrary to the Scripture and that the holy Scriptures by Anselmes judgement cited in the Preface confirmes all that which it doeth no way contradict being lawfully gathered from manifest reason Let us be bold to looke upon the Reasons which may seeme to have drawne the ancient Church unto this opinion Sect. 5 And because it is necessary first to agree vpon some principles let it be put that these words He descended into Hell are not spoken either of the God-head of Christ
infinite Wisdome c. convertible one with another and all of them meaning one being which wee call God have they not all authority in the Holy Scripture And shall not that which is truely affirmed of one bee as truely affirmed of the other And so on the otherside by impossibilities If there bee not an eternall being the beginner and cause of all other beings then that which is begun must bee a beginning to it selfe But this is impossible for so it should bee a cause and yet not bee Therefore there is a God And if any other kinde of argument bee brought either by rule or induction or syllogisme yet seeing superiour causes are not alwayes here to bee found whereby to make analyticall demonstration therefore the reasons for the most part are contayned within this bound onely to prove the Article that it is true Nay I adde yet further that the Theologian or divine is not tyed to the use of naturall reasons onely for proofe of his conclusions For so you should make divinity nothing else but naturall Philosophie except that the one should bee intended to the cause of all being the other to the effect in nature onely But you know that all truth whereinsoever it is being founded in the truth of God reason the searcher thereof must farre exceed the limits of nature or naturall causes Therefore although that conclusion of Tho. Aquin. stand sure that the philosophers could not come to the knowledge of the Trinity by the view of nature because nature was an insufficient meane to bring them thereunto which yet may receive limitation either in respect of the degree of knowledge which nature brings of the Creator as himselfe makes difference Proâ—em in lib. 4. contr gent. or in respect of the manner of concluding inductive onely yet will it not follow from thence that the articles of our Faith are utterly beyond all proofe of reason For as divinitie is of a farre higher straine than naturall Philosophie so are the proofes and reasons thereof from greater lights than all nature can shew Who knowes not that divinity as concerning a great part of the practice holds all morall Philosophie whose conclusions though from reason yet are not the reasons natural but morall Have not Grammar Logick and all other Artes and Sciences either instrumentall or principall certaine rules or principles which are true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is universally necessarily and convertibly or peculiar to that Science and yet not demonstrable by naturall Causes And to this very purpose Saint Augustine saith De Civ Dei lib. 11. Cap. 24. Diligentia rationis est non praesumptionis audacia ut in operibus Dei secreto quodam loquendi modo quo nostra exerceatur intentio intelligatur Trinitas That is the Holy Trinity may bee understood by us in the workes of God by their secret manner of speech in which they speake to our understanding And if this high mystery may bee understood by the creature as the Father shewes in that booke and other Christian writers elsewhere I doubt not but by those honourable titles which the holy Scripture doth give unto God it may much better bee made to appeare And if it were lawfull to prove the first and principall Article of our faith by reason and by reason I say without presumption of perfection in knowledge to prove that God is as it hath beene shewed by the warrant of the Apostle is it not likewise as lawfull in the Articles following And these things may seeme the more strange in Thom. Aquin. because in the 11. chap. of his fourth booke contra Gentiles he doth so clearelie deliver this point of our beleefe both by the authoritie of the holy Scriptures and the evidence of reason yea and that on the same grounds whereon Raymundus doctrine is builded that he may seeme to have lighted his torch at the lampe of Thomas Take the meaning of his words as they lye Seeing that in the Divine nature He that understands the action of his understanding and his intention or object understood are all one and the same being it must needs bee that whatsoever belongs to the perfect being of any of these be most truly in Him Now it is essentiall to the inward word or intention understood that it do proceed from him that understands according to the action of his understanding And seeing that in God all these three are essentially one for in him nothing can be but essentiallie it is necessarie that every one of these be God and that the difference which is betweene them bee not of being but of relation onlie or the manner of being as the intention is referred to him that conceives it as to him from whom it is therefore the Evangelist having said Iohn 1. The word was God lest all distinction might seeme to bee taken away betweene the Father and the Sonne addes immediately That Word was in the beginning with God Thus saith Thomas Oh but say you it is a dangerous case to commit matters of faith to reason I but there is no danger to commit reason to matiers of faith that is to make reason a servant of faith neither is our reason too good to give attendance on faith nor faith so proud as to scorne the service of reason therefore let this jangling and frowardnesse cease If I say any thing to your content accept it if not you are not bound to reade it but God hath not given us the knowledge of himselfe in his word that as parrats in a cage which with much adoe are taught a few words and then can say no more so we should hold our selves content when wee can say the Creed but that by continuall meditation in his word our knowledge and so our faith our love and feare of him might be increased dayly And this is it which S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 2.6 Wee speake wisdome among them that are perfect and againe 1. Cor. 1.22 The Grecians seeke wisdome and wee preach Christ the wisdome of God for in him are all the treasures of wisdome and knowledge hid Now it is apparent that he meanes not the wisdome of this world but that which is in things concerning God whereby we may be able to give a reason of the hope that is in us 1. Pet. 3.15 And this is that perfection whereto we ought to strive whereof the Catechisme doctrine of repentance of faith c. is but onely the foundation as it is manifest Heb. 6.1.2 For although the least degree of faith even as a graine of mustard seed bee sufficient to remove the high mountaines of rebellious and wicked thoughts that rise up against the obedience of the truth and consequently to save the soule through his mediation and mercie that doth not breake the bruised reed nor quench the smoking flaxe yet seeing every man as he hath received ought as a faithfull Steward of the manifold graces of God to profit thereby our
to another lest there should be any defect or imbecillitie in the Beginning and this is the Everlasting Sonne very God of very God begotten of the substance of His Father alone before the worlds neither made nor created Thirdly there is Principium principiatum non principians that is a Beginning which is also begun but is not a beginner unto another lest there should be a processe into Infinitie à parte pòst and this is the Holy-Ghost who proceedeth from the very substance and Being of the Father and the Sonne and is with them one GOD coëternall and coëquall But you will say Is not the Holy-Ghost a Beginner unto any other how is He then the Authour of our consolation and how is He said to lead us into all truth c Vnderstand what I meane He is not a beginner unto any other of the same Infinite Essence or Being with Himselfe For the beginnings which I spake of before are in the Essence of God alone Now our spirituall consolation whereof the Holy-Ghost is said to be the Beginner is but an emanation or effluence from that Being which he himselfe is as the light of the Sun doth illuminate every bright body exposed to His light and yet imparteth not His being thereto You will againe object that Eternitie hath no beginning nor ending how then can Christ be both eternall and begun and how againe can He be equall to the Father whereas He being begotten of the Father the Father hath a prioritie before Him I answere that this beginning is that production or begetting which I before declared to have beene heretofore no other then it is now and shall be eternally as the Sun hath brought forth light since His creation and shall still bring forth light till the worlds dissolution For this action of God whereby He begetteth His Sonne is not a transient action to cause a passion in the subject and a repassion in the agent for in such the subject of necessitie should have beene existent before the action but this action is immanent and therefore of necessitie of the same nature with the same agent which agent because it is eternall therefore the production is also eternall and consequently the product and so of necessitie very God But you must ever remember what difference I made between the action of God infinite in power and therefore able to actuate the object and the immanent actions of our minde Now for the Prioritie or Posterioritie you may object I grant there is Prioritie among the Persons of the Godhead but of what kind not of Being for their Essence is one therein is none afore or after another neither is any one of the Trinitie more or lesse God then another not of time for they are all one Eternitie not of dignitie for they are all one Infinitie and the Sonne Himselfe being very God thinketh it no robberie to be equall with God But yet there is Prioritie and that of order onely for the Father is in order before the Sonne because the Sonne is begotten of the Father and the Sonne likewise is before the Holy-Ghost because the Holy-Ghost is the mutuall love betweene the Father and the Sonne and so proceeding from them both I will make a comparison unmeet for the matier of which I speak for to whom shall wee liken the Highest but yet meete to helpe your understanding When a man doth dreame and imagine things which are not there is you know the phantasie the phantasme or thing imagined or dreamed and the phansying or working of the phantasie about that object Now these three are all of one nature and are one after another onely in order and not in time For the particular phantasie of such an object is before the object and makes it to have an intentionall being then the object being the discourse of the phantasie followeth in order which neverthelesse was in time as soone as it obseruing ever the cautions that are to be obserued Thus have I very briefly showen not many reasons but rather how many reasons may be showen for this Christian assertion yet have I showen ynough to perswade any reasonable man to yeeld meekely unto the truth of that doctrine which is so evident both in the Booke of God and in every faithfull and true Christian mans confession and according to that discourse which is evident to every mans understanding Now give me leave to speake a little to those arguments which have throwen the most learned of the Iewes headlong to the feete of Christ to make them acknowledge that the Messiah must be both God and man I will not herein doe any thing contrary to that which in the beginning I protested that is not to compell you by authoritie of Scripture but to intreat you by reasonable perswasion to encline your eare to the truth But because I may not without injury to the cause leave altogether out such manifest proofe and without injurie also to your selfe who might thinke that I went about to sophisticate a true seeming untruth which would not abide the touch I will onely intend my finger to some very few of many thousands of axioms of the Scripture for this purpose and leave you to make the conclusion by your selfe hoping that the Iewes example may provoke you to follow them so far forth as they have followed the truth Exo. 13.21 it is said The Lord went before them c. Chap. 14.19 The Angel of God which went before them removed where Christ the Angel of the Covenant is called The Lord Iehovah Againe Exo. 15.3 The Lord is a man of warre His name is Iehovah therfore Christ is God and man who by this conflict upon the Crosse triumphed over Death and Hell as it is written in the Gospel The booke of the warres of the Lord. Againe Esay 9.6 Vnto us a childe is borne there is His Manhood and unto us a Sonne is given and they shall call His Name The mighty God And Esay 35. v. 4. Your God will come and save you Iere. 23.5 c. I will raise up unto David a righteous Branch and a King shall raigne and this is the Name whereby they shall call Him The Lord our righteousnesse And Ier. 33. v. 16. Iudah shall be saved and Hâ— that shall save her is the Lord our Righteousnesse Where the Name used is that great Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iehovah which is never given to any creature Zac. 9.9 proves Him God and man What shall I cite unto you that of the 2. Psalme Thou art my Sonne this day haâ—e I begotten thee which place with many moe is brought in the Epistle to the Hebrewes to this purpose which is your question These authorities the Thalmudists who sticke onely to the killing letter â—â—d ap â—â—ant sense of the law hold sufficient to put this matâ—â—◠〈◊〉 of doubt Now if leaving this outward sence of the Scripture wee should desâ—â—e to know what is the quickening spirit thereof
world Iohn 1. I see no cause why reason that especiall and principall gift of God to mankinde should not be serviceable to the principall and especiall end for which man himselfe is created that is his drawing neere unto God by faith in him for the excellencie of every thing is in the excellencie of the End for which it is And that common sence and reason have their especiall use in things pertaining unto God it is most manifest For all our knowledge proceeds from meere ignorance first knowing words by their meaning then things by sence and experiments from whence the reason ascending by enquirie into the causes comes at last into the knowledge thereof and so unto the chiefest and first cause wherein alone it findes rest And seeing man alone of all the visible creatures is framed and formed of God unto this search by the outward sence and reason to finde the wisdome and power of God in the creature that so honouring him therefore as he ought he might be made happie thereby if it bee no way possible by reason and discourse to come to this end then should God want of his honour by some of those meanes by which it might be given unto him then should the creature bee failing to man in the speciall use which he should make thereof to God then should reason the chiefe facultie of our soule and principall meanes of our knowledge have beene given unto man in vaine that is as sence is to the beasts onely for this life if it were either no helpe at all or an unfit or an insufficient meane to know that which is most necessary and worthy to bee knowne and yet obscure to stirre up our industrie that as faithfull servants we may improve those gifts wherewith God hath intrusted us See Luke 19.1 And so the purpose of God should be frustrate both in the inferiour creature and in man and that in their chiefest and uttermost end See Prov. 16.4 But these things are impossible and therefore wee are commanded Deut. 6.5 to love and serve the Lord our God with all our heart the seat of reason 1 King 3.12 with all our soule the seat of the will and understanding in heavenly things and all our affections there stiled by a word of vehemencie or excesse And thus doe we fulfill the counsell of the wise Pro. 3.9 to honour the Lord with all our substance that is whatsoever is ours without or within as sence reason understanding affections and will But still you say that reason is an unsufficient meane and unable to bring us to the knowledge of those things which we are bound to beleeve for else the Heathen which know not the Scriptures might have known the truth of Religion as well as we Ans There be divers kinds of questions about every subject as I shewed Log Chap 3. Now the conclusion or Article of our faith by the Atheist or Infidell or weake Beleever being made a question the reasons brought are to prove onely that the conclusion is true not alwayes why it is true for there be many conclusions in our faith which cannot be knowne and proved prioristicè as they speake that is by their immediate and necessarie causes seene and understood in the effects necessarily following thereon for then that humilitie which ought to be joyned with our faith should bee without reward but yet the foundation of our faith is sure because the Spirit of God which understands the things which are of God hath revealed in the Scriptures whatsoever is necessary for us to know or beleeve concerning God thus posterioristicè or by way of induction are all the Articles of our faith approved by reason so that our faith and hope are not of things impossible but such as are true and necessarie to be Moreover if there bee but one God one Lord of all one faith the onelie way to come unto God Ephes 4.6 as it is plaine there is but one Mediatour 1. Tim. 2.5 without whom none can come to the Father Iohn 14.6 It cannot be denied but that the same glorious faith which we are taught in the holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament excepting onely the historicall circumstances thereof as names and times as that the Mediatour Iesus was to bee borne of a Virgine Mary and to suffer death under Pontius Pilate c. must be that very same faith by which all the Saints of God were saved for above two hundred and fifty yeers before there were any Scriptures written And therefore that although this faith was delivered and reverently embraced by the faithfull before the Law of Moses who also so delivered it as that they could not looke unto the â—nd of the law 2 Cor. 3.13 Yet they who either received it not by tradition as most of the Gentiles or understood it not in the Law as few among the Iewes did beside the Prophets must of necessity through the light of reason alone hold with us some maine and fundamentall points according to which if they lived in obedience they might finde mercy for that whereof they were ignorant as it is said Act. 17.30 that God oversaw or neglected the ignorance of the time before Christ For if the representative Priest by forein bloud found forgivenesse for himselfe and the ignorances of the people concerning all punishment in this life how much more might the everlasting high-priest by his owne offering of himselfe finde eternall redempâ—ion for their ignorances who sought mercy of God although they knew him not by whom they did obtaine it yet might they therefore assure themselves to obtaine it because they could not seek forgivenesse but by his Spirit who framed their hearts to seeke it and therby gave them an earnest or pledge that they should finde it Compare herewith Rom. 10.18.20 Ioh 14 6. Now those maine points of which I spake which by the light of reason they might know are these First that ther is a God infinite in goodnesse in glory in wisdome in power as it is manifest Psal 19. Rom. 1.19.20 and elsewhere Secondly that this God the maker of all things according to that goodnes made every thing to an end infinitly good â—s farre as the creature could bee capable thereof And that therefore the happinesse of man could not bee in this life short and miserable but that his hope must bee for hereafter And therefore thirdly that hee must needs perswade himselfe that hee was immortall and that there was an immortall life at least as appertaining to his soule Fourthly because a mans wretchednesse is for the most part from him selfe in the unlawfulnesse of his owne ill deeds which proceed from the bitter fountaine of his affections and ill desires tormenting himselfe therefore hee must needes confesse his sinne against himselfe and know that hee that finds himselfe so displeasing to himselfe can no way hope that for his owne worthinesse hee can any way bee acceptable unto God and that therefore he
subordination of causes infinitely then seeing every effect is brought to perfection in a finite time it must follow that c infinite causes may worke in a time finite and so infinite may be in that which is limited and finite But this is impossible therefore there cannot be a subordination of causes infinitely Moreover seeing every effect doth naturally answer the cause thereof and seeing the effects are of so different kinds it must follow that there is not onely an infinite subordination of causes but also that there be infinite subordinations of causes of kinds infinitely different according to the different effects brought forth But this is impossible for the causes being ordained for the effect and the effect being the end of those causes that which is finite should be more noble and excellent than that which is infinite Thirdly if there be a subordination of causes infinitely of which one is moved orderly by another it must needs follow that there is no moving and consequently no causing at all for every cause being moued by that which is before or above it if there be no first cause given there can be no moving But it is apparent that in infinitie of causes there can be no first nor last and so there should be no moving nor no immediate cause of the effect Therefore there is one cause of all which is infinite and eternall 3 If God be not eternall then either the world was a beginning unto it selfe or else it was eternally and so shall continue eternally But neither was the world a beginning unto it selfe as is proved Cap. 1 Re. 1. neither is the world eternall as shall be proved Cap. 13. Therefore God is eternall 4. And this truth of Gods everlasting being the holy Scripture teacheth every where as Gen. 21.33 And Abraham called on the â—ame of the everlasting God Exod. 15.18 The Lord shall reigne for ever and ever Deut. 32.40 I live for ever Psal 90.2 Before the mountaines were brought forth or ever the earth and the world were made thou art God from everlasting to everlasting So Psal 41.13 106.48 and Rev. 11.17 We give thee thanks Lord God Almighty which art which wast and which art to come Psal 145.13 Thy kingdome is of all eternity and thy dominion in every generation Notes a HAth power to continue infinitely the Schoolemen say Thom. contra Gentes lib. 1. cap 16. and often elsewhere Quod potest esse potest etiam non esse which you may construe That which hath power to be hath also power not to be or that which may be may also not be which seemes directly to crosse this argument But you must understand the Doctor there to speake of a thing which is in the power of being whereto it hath not yet attayned as a kernell is in power to become a tree in which the power of being is passive importing a privation of the being to come But in this place power to be meanes an actuall power not privative but positive whereby the thing which hath the power shewes by the actions the power which it hath as of the understanding to applie it selfe to this or that The passive power can no way be in God The second is a power of absolute perfection without which he could not be God b Impossible necessarily See the rule of this consequence Logono Cap. 18. n. 7. Cap. 26. n. 1. c Infinite causes Re. 2. That which is infinite in power may worke in a time finite not that which is infinite in number onely which is here meant That God is Infinite CHAP. III. INfinitie cannot here be meant of multitude for the more that multitude is increased in any kind the more the dignities of one are abated Neither yet can this infinitie be of quantitie for infinity cannot be in quantity no more than eternity can be in time a Neither is God a body which onely is capable of quantity yet is not infinity of extension denyed in as much as he fils all places infinitely beyond all place as the Prophet Esay speaks Chap. 40.12 That he measures the waters in his fist and the heavens in his span Neither is God infinite privatively in regard of any defect or want of being because he hath the complement of all perfections in himselfe But he is infinite negatively because there is no limit or bound to be set to his being to his perfection or superabundance in goodnesse wisdome power truth and glorie The reasons are these 1. Whatsoever is supersupreme or highest in all degrees of perfection must needs be infinite because there is nothing above it which may limit or restraine it But such is the being of God above which it is confessed that nothing can be thought more excellent Therefore God is infinite 2. Being taken absolutely that is simply by it selfe without any limitation must needs be infinite because infinite things by infinite meanes may be partakers thereof But such is the being of God that is absolute and simple for neither is his being from another as the cause thereof seeing he is eternall neither yet in another as a forme in the matter for so something should be more excellent than he as every totall is more excellent than any part thereof or as the accident in the subject for so something should be before him and also be more worthy than he as every subject in regard of the accidents Neither yet is he for any other as the end thereof for as all things are from him and by him as the first cause so are they for him as for their first and chiefest end and secondly for themselves to finde themselves happy in him as farre as they are capable as the Apostle concludes Rom. 11.36 Of him through him and for him are all things to him be glory for ever Amen Therefore God is infinite 3. If the being of God be not actually infinite then should it be inferiour to the possibilities of the creature for mans understanding though actually finite yet admits the possibility of an infinite actuall being as was shewed in space and in numbers Chap. 1. Re. 6. But it is impossible that the being of God should be inferiour to those possibilities which the creature can reasonably give unto him for so the activitie of the understanding should be created in vaine if there were no being actually infinite to be apprehended thereby So also the effect that is the understanding should be extended beyond the being of the cause that is God if it could conceiue any excellency of being goodnesse wisdome c. greater than his Therefore it is necessarie that God be infinite You may see more Reasons Chap. 10. and there also the ground of this discourse 4. The authorities of Scripture are these Psal 143.3 Great is the Lord and most worthy to be praised and his greatnesse is incomprehensible Psal 93.3 The Lord is a great God a great king above all Gods Psal 104.1 O Lord my God
of Herods reigne was Iesus borne After sixe yeeres lawfull reigne Herod died miserably After whom his Kingdome by Augustus was divided to his foure sonnes of their number called Tetrarchs so that Arâ—helaus had Idumea Iudea and Samaria Herod called Antipas had Galilee Philip had Iturea and Trachonitis And Lysanias had Abylenâ— But Archelaus for his wicked government being by Augustuss thrust from his dignitie and banished in Gallia Romane Presidents Coponius Ambivius and Rufus were sent thither to order that Tetrarchy each two yeeres under Augustus Then by the appointment of Tiberius the succeeding Emperour Valerius Gracus held that government 11. yeeres and after him Pontius Pilate the other sonnes of Herod still holding their dignitie as you reade Luke 3.1 Now to the arguments Such was the mercy of God to man that although the Gospel which was preached in Paradise ought to have beene that chiefe thing which man should remember yet because his way was corrupted and he become abominable by his crueltie in the earth his whole race except eight persons were swept away by the flood This great Iudgement might have taught all posterities to know what that was which God required of men and to desire the fulfilling of that promise of Him that was to come But this being neglected of all men except some few among the least of all nations which God had chosen for his people and they now in captivitie in Babylon God did againe call vpon the World to turne unto Him because His Kingdome is an everlasting Kingdome and deliverance and salvation is by him alone Read Dan. Chap. 2. v. 44. and Chap. 3. v. 29. and the Kings Proclamation at large in the 4. Chapter Not long after the World was summoned againe by the like Preaching and Proclamation of Darius in the second Monarchy of the Medes Dan. 6.25 and later histories testifie abundantly how Alexander marching with fury against Ierusalem at the sight of Iaddua the High-priest as Paul before Damascus of an Enemie became a Convert adored the Priest sacrificed and offered gifts unto the true God His successors sonne in Egypt Philadelphus had the old Testament translated into Greeke and not long after Ionathan Ben Vziel translated it in Chalde that all the world might be prepared to receive that Saviour that was shortly after to bee manifested in that time when the greatest and most powerfull Empire did flourish most that is in the dayes of Augustus and his Successor Tiberius The argument in briefe is this 1. That seeing the satisfaction for the sinne of man was to bee made by the death of Christ beleeved on in the world it was necessary that as in every age and Empire of the world Hee had beene preached So He should die by the power of the greatest Empire then in the worlde that all the world might take knowledge thereof Therefore in the greatest and most solemne feast of the Passeover whither the Iewes and Proselytes from all Countreys resorted for He was first to be preached to them Luke 24. 47 and by the deputy of the greatest Emperor was this thing done and after published in that Senate which ruled all that as the salvation was wrought for all so all might know it For by this meanes the preaching of His Apostles and Ministers afterward was more easilie beleeved that He was the Saviour of the world whom after so much good done and so great miracles shewed by Him they did unjustly cause to die when they found no cause of death in Him 2 The second argument is this The holy Scripture is the declaration of the will of God Therefore it is necessary that as all the will of God so the holy Scriptures also bee fulfilled Among these that of Gen. 49.10 is directly to this purpose The Scepter shall not depart from Iudah c. till Shiloh come This Shiloh all the best Interpreters both Iewes and Christians agree to bee Christ the King from whence it followes necessarily that when Christ came the Scepter or authority had departed And therefore that the Messiah being to bee slaine the execution of that death must be by that forraine authority that ruled over them And this the Iewes themselves professed Iohn 18.31 It is not lawfull for us to put any man to death you may put hereto Esay 7.16 with those texts cited in the 24. Chapter Reason 10. But you may object that in the captivity that Scepter was utterly broken yea so that after their returne they had no Governours but by the appointment of the Kings of Persia as it is manifest by the Bookes of Ezra and Nehemiah especially Chapter 9. vers 36.37 I answere That as the Iewes in that captivity knew the time of their returne by the Prophet Iere. 29.10 so they ever held the hope of their libertie from that subjection and therefore after Alexander defended it against his successors in Syria and Egypt especially when they had the favour and countenance of the Romans See 1. of Macch. Chap. 15. verse 16. and Iust. Hist lib. 36. But in their subjection to Herod they gave the government of themselves and their posterity unto him and his And although Archelaus his sonne for his mis-government lost it yet it returned to the Romanes of whom hee received it and therfore in this case betweene Christ and Caesar they vtterly disclaime Christ for their King and professe they have no King but Caesar Iohn 19.5 So then it being cleere that our Lord was to suffer under the Lieutenant of the Romans which at that time was Pontius Pilate let us see what He suffered under him It is not likely that a Prophet having beene condemned by the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction and suffering most unjustly such reproaches as you heard before should be better intreated before a civill Magistrate Yet Pilate hath more patience to examine the cause What accusation bring ye against him The points of His accusation were three First He is a malefactor How prooue you that If He were not so wee would not have delivered Him unto thee Iohn 18.30 A very substantiall proofe we malicious lyars say so therefore it is so The second point He is a blasphemer for Hee said I am the Sonne of God Iohn 19.7 Hee said true and prooved it Mark 2. verse 7. and 10. and Iohn 10. verse 35 36 37 38. Thirdly Treason He makes Himselfe a King He speakes against Caesar calcemus Caesaris hostem Iohn 19.12 But He explained Himselfe That His Kingdome was not of this world Iohn 18.36 And by the rule of your owne teachers All they shall bee cut off that watch for iniquity That make a man an offendor for a word and lay a snare for him that reprooveth openly Esay 29.20 21. So that for these crimes falsely objected He was three times pronounced Not guilty I find no fault at all in Him Iohn 18.38 and 19.4 and 6. No nor yet Herod Luke 23.15 and therefore I will bee free of the blood of this just man and
spoken of in that text of Iohn 16.14 is not of grace but by nature neither is it any other thing than this That as the Father from all eternity had decreed to reconcile the world unto Himselfe by the death of His Sonne and that the Sonne accordingly performed this in due time by His death upon the Crosse So the Father and the Sonne by that Holy Spirit which proceedeth from them both doth sanctifie the hearts of the elect and assure them that this reconciliation with all the fruits and effects thereof was for their eternall comfort and salvation For that peculiar manner of subsistence in the Divine nature which He taketh from the Father and the Sonne whereby it is most necessarily concluded that He is God is not heere spoken of 4. Objection The Holy-Ghost is no where called God in the Scripture Therefore He is a creature Answere 1. He is no where in the Scripture called a creature or mentioned among the creatures in Psal 148. or else-where Therefore He is God Answer 2. The proposition is false as it appeared by the texts cited out of Actes 5.3 4. and Matth. 28.19 where He is equalled with the Father and the Sonne and 2. Cor. 13.14 And Iohn 5.7 Moreover no sinne doth make a man lyable to an infinite punishment but that which is against an infinite being But the sinne against the Holy-Ghost shall not bee pardoned neither in this world nor yet in that which is to come Matth. 12.32 Therefore the Holy-Ghost is God Take hereto Actes 28. verse 25. and 27. with Rom. 11.8 and 1. Cor. 3.16 And as these texts of Scripture are sufficient to shew the falshood of this last objection So doe they manifest the vanitie of all the rest and confirme abundantly the trueth of this Article that the Holy-Ghost is God To bring the consent of Fathers and Councells to these Scriptures were as to encrease the light of the Sun by a burning candle yet because it was so plainely declared in the first generall Councell held at Nice by 318. Fathers in the yeere of Christ 325. you may remember it if you will In that Councell this Article was thus declared in that forme of confession which was framed by Hosius Bishop of Corduba As the Father and the Sonne so also the Holy-Ghost subsisteth with them of the same being of the same power of which they are And a little after Wee ought to confesse one God-head one being of the Father of the Sonne and of the Holy-Ghost not teaching any confusion or division of the Persons of the unspeakeable and blessed Trinitie But according to the integritie of that faith and doctrine which was heretofore delivered by the Lord Himselfe to His Apostles and hath beene sincerely taught to us by our holy Fathers who kept it pure and intire as they received it from the Apostles wee beleeve and confesse the undivideable Trinitie which cannot sufficiently either be conceived in the understanding or expressed in wordes that is the Father eternally and truely subsisting a true Father of a true Sonne and the Sonne eternally and truely subsisting a true Sonne of a true Father and the Holy-Ghost verily and eternally subsisting with them And wee are ever ready by the power of the Holy-Ghost to proove that this is the trueth by the manifold testimony of the holy Scripture Histor Gelasij Cyzic Act. Conc. Nic. lib. 2. cap. 12. This faith was approved of all but because the present businesse with Arius was especially about the Sonne For he held that the Son was not of the subsistence of the Father nor yet very God That they might meet fully with that errour they agreed to that forme wherein it is confessed that the Sonne is light of light very God of very God begotten not made being of one substance with the Father c. Thus having ended the controversie about the God-head of the Sonne they come to the question of the Holy-Ghost against whom Phaedon a Philosopher and patron of Arius his cause objected thus It is no where written in the Scripture that the Holy-Ghost is a Creator and therefore Hee is not God To which the Councell opposed that which is in Iob 33.4 The Spirit of God hath made mee and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life And that in Psal 33.6 By the word of the Lord were the heavens made and all the hosts of them by the Spirit of His mouth To which they added that of Saint Paul 1. Cor. 12. verse 4 5 6. where the Holy-Ghost is called both Lord and God And so concluded that all the three Persons that is the Father the Sonne and the Holy-Ghost were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consubstantiall or of the same substance Lib. Cit. Cap. 25. Likewise when this heresie of Arius concerning the Holy-Ghost was againe revived by Macedonius the second generall Councell held at Constantinople in the yeere 381. condemned the heresies of all Arians Apollinarists and Macedonians confirmed the faith professed in the Nicene Creed and for further explanation of the trueth in this point to that clause Wee believe in the Holy-Ghost they added the Lord and giver of life who proceedeth from the Father who with the Father and the Sonne together is worshipped and glorified c. And this is sufficient for the declaration of the trueth in this point by the authority of generall Councells All the orthodox Fathers consent hereunto Among whom if you desire to bee further acquainted with the arguments and objections on both sides you may reade the writings of that most noble Champion of the trueth of the holy Trinitie Athanasius and in speciall that sermon of the humane nature taken by the Word the oration against the ging of Sabellius and the first and second Epistle to Serapion and his first dialogue against Macedonius with him Macedonianus See also Greg. Nyss vol. 2. pag. 439. edit Paris 1615. you may also if you will take these objections and their answeres brought by Epiphanius to this question Haer. 74. and with them those in Thomas Aquinas Contra gentes Liber 4. Cap. 16. and their answeres Cap. 23. Another errour against the being of the Holy-Ghost is that which they call of the later Greekes and yet is not onely of the Grecians themselves but of all those Nations and Peoples that are of the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople which if you leave out the Countreys of the poore Painims in the East and West Indies is far greater than the pretended universality of the Bishop of Rome both in Europe and in Asia See Brerew Enq. Chap. 15. and besides them the Melchites or Christians of Syria the Armenians and Maronites hold the same heresie All these though they confesse that the Holy-Ghost is God the third Person in the Trinitie yet they say that He proceedeth onely from the Father not from the Sonne But although they account this but a later errour among the Greekes perhaps because the stirres thereabout after the
any booke which went under the name of Henoch if nothing in the booke were Henoch's beside this prophecie Saint Iudes citing doth not make the booke Canonicall Scripture no more than S. Pauls citing the heathen Poets or if S. Iude had it onely by tradition that Henoch had so prophecied how doth it make for the question For it is not said that all things are false which are delivered by tradition but that in the matiers of the faith and doctrine of the Church those traditions have no force or credit which are contrary to the truth of God revealed in His Word 5. But it is yeelded that though some part of Scripture be lost yet that which remains is sufficient and containes all things necessary Answere Our Lord saith Luk. 10.42 That one thing is necessary which in Iohn 17.3 he confesseth to bee this To know the Father the onely true God and Iesus Christ whom he hath sent and according to the necessitie of this one thing the 3. Chapter of Gen. with the 53. of Esay and any one of the Gospels might seeme sufficient And in this sufficiencie onely wee dwell hither-unto But because S. Peter saith 1. Epistle 1.11 that the inquest of the Prophets was not onely concerning the saluation of the soule but likewise what times and what manner of times they should be wherein the sufferings of Christ should bee fulfilled and the glories which should follow thereupon and because both the sufferings of Christ and his glories are to be accomplished not onely in Himselfe but also in His Church as they were prefigured in all the types that were of Him in the Church under the Law and that God the Lord doth nothing but He revealeth His secret unto His seruants the Prophets Amos 3.7 when wee shall grow past milke and be able to digest stronger meat when wee shall understand how the Law and the Prophets are to be fulfilled to every jod and title contained in them Matth. 5.17.18 when wee shall be able to apply every text to the proper time and meaning according to the perfection of the uttermost understanding thereof then shall we see that the Law of the Lord is a perfect Law and His Statutes and judgements are sweeter then honey and the honey combe then shall the Church see and know that nothing in the whole body of the Holy Scripture is either superfluous or that any word letter or prick therein might bee missing Sect. 5 § 5. That the Scriptures are come unto us as they were at first delivered to the Church by the Prophets and Apostles that were the Pen-men thereof it may be manifest by those reasons which are brought for proofe of the former question 1. For if God who is praysed for His trueth in that Hee hath magnified His Word above all His Name Psal 138.2 hath not preserved His Scripture intyer from the corruption of man from the alteration addition or taking away that they might make what comfort or certaine instruction can wee have thereby What assurance of hope by those promises of which wee are not sure whether they be the promises of God or the imaginations of men Thus the end for which God of His goodns gave those Scriptures should be frustrate and man in that incertainty nothing furthered toward eternall life Thus the Church should fayle in the duty and faithfull performance of that trust which she owes unto God in preserving that treasure which was committed to her charge and safe keeping But these things are not to be granted And therefore the Scriptures are come unto us in that integrity or purity in which they were at first delivered to the Church they of the old Testament in the Hebrew tongue they of the new in Greeke 2. The constant consent of all the doctrines and promises contained in the Scriptures the efficacie and power of that Spirit which is manifest in the deliverie thereof are evident proofes that the Scripture is still in that purity in which God gave it unto the Church And although God in those Scriptures have vouchsafed to apply Himselfe to our understanding and as a nurse to lisp with her infant yet so much is the foolishnesse of God wiser than man and the weaknesse of God stronger than men 1. Cor. 1.25 as that it is still manifest in the whole body of the holy writ that nothing of humane drosse is mixt there-with but that His Word is still as before pure as silver that hath beene tryed seven times in the fire 3. This fire is that dampish smother-fire of heresies which the devill did kindle among his brands among whom though some rejected the authority of sundry bookes of Holy Scripture as Marcion and others some corrupted the sence thereof by Allegories and forraine interpretations as the Origenists See Augustin de Gen. ad literam others by wresting it from the native sence to the supportance of their owne heresies yet the Church which continued faithfull in the doctrine of God constantly with-stood all these attempts and ever maintained the sincerity as of the doctrine so of the Holy Scripture on which it was founded And because the Scripture is either of the old or of the new Testament it is fit to speake to each of them in particular 4. And first concerning the old Testament it is manifest that the Church of Israel whose hope was set on that Messiah that was to come had no cause to corrupt the text of the holy writ but according to the promises which they had in the Law and in the Prophets the expositors thereof so to hope that He should be such a deliverer and Saviour as was promised by which hope they were bound to preserue the Scripture in all integrity that they might see the full accomplishment thereof when He was come 5. Beside the Priests whose lips should preserue knowledge and at whose mouth they should seeke the Law Mal. 2.7 there was from Samuel unto the dayes of Ezra a perpetuall succession of Prophets who could not in any wayes have endured so great a corruption uncontrouled as that the Word of the Lord should be changed or depraved And although the Scriptures before the time of Ezra had beene corrupted yet he being a Prophet a Priest and a perfect scribe of the Law of the Lord and of the Statutes of Israel that had prepared his heart to teach the Law of God and His statutes and judgements Ezra 7. who changed the forme of their Chaldean or Samaritane letters for those which are now in use hee I say would have taken away all such corruptions or changes as had come to the Holy Scripture if it might bee imagined that any could come in the time of the Prophets that were before as far as the diversitie of Copies gave them light Of the Israelites care in writing the Scriptures and of the Masôreth 6. MOreover that exceeding care and diligence which the Scribes were to use in writing is sufficient proofe that the bookes of the
of Proclus taken out of Plato as you may reade in Stenchus de perenni phi lib. 2. c. 16. These two saith hee unity and Being consisting in the Trinity the first begetting the second begotten the one perfecting the other perfected it must needs be that there is a certaine power by the which and with the which that unity gives subsistence and perfection unto that being For both the procession from that unity to being and the returne from that being unto unity must be by a middle power betweene them both For how can unity bee Being or Being bee one but by that power which is in both And this Trinity is the excellency of all understanding unity power Being the one bringing forth the other brought forth and power proceeding from unity ioyned with being And this is the first Trinitie that can bee understood or conceived to bee unity being and the power of them both by which divinity is the Father of being being is of unity The Father is the father of wisdome and wisdome the Son of the Father and between these a most high power hidden in the one of producing in the other of being produced as Plato hath shewed it wonderfully Thus Proclus The argument of Pythagoras is not of lesse weight That which is unchangeable must needs be eternal and alwayes one And as al change in every body is by reason of inequality of the parts so that which is absolutely and ever one must be ever in equality so verity and equalitie must be eternall and multiplicity and inequality must necessarily bee after unity and equalitie And as unity is the cause of connexion or being one so inequality is of division And the effect of the first cause must have priority before the effects of the second cause Therefore connexion also must be before division and change and if before change then also eternall And because there can bee but one eternall therefore unity equality and connexion must bee one thing And this is that threefold unity which Pythagoras taught was to bee adored Pet. Blondus de Trenario pag. 106. 107. And Cusa de Docta ignorantia lib. 1. cap. 7. Neither is that reason which Cusa Exerercit lib. 7. pag. 134 brings from Aristotle to bee slighted especially by Thomas that great Aristotelian Aristotle saith that the first cause of all must needs be both efficient formall and the end And three firsts there cannot be because before all plurality there must needs be unity Therefore it being one first it must bee a threefold cause efficient formall and finall The efficient cause is neither Formall nor Finall and the formall is neither finall nor efficient Therefore they are three distinct causes considered in their severall subsistences but considered in their firstnesse they are in being one alone many such reasons and authorities to this purpose you may reade in Struchus De perenni Phi. lib. 1. 2. But how much yet more fitly and more fully hath the illuminated Raimund shewed both this point and all those other which Tho. Aqu. hath given over as past all proofe For Raimund taking all those conditions of the divine being which the holy Scripture gives to God and without which that being could not be perfect and supposing and proving them to be infinite with all the conditions of infinity both in being and working hath taught the way to shew the Trinity of Persons in unity of being by every one of those conditions see Art mag Part. 9. And though his words seeme borrel and rude as bonificant bonificabile Bonificare in una bonitatis essentia Possificans possificabile and possificare in the being of power yet they are full of excellent meaning The learned and witty Cusa de visione Dei cap. 17. gives instance in the unity which is either unity uniting unity united or the union or knot of them both yet all these in the most simple being of unity And againe in love which is either in the Person loving or in the Person loved or in the knot of the Love betweene them all according in the nature of Love and without any of these Love cannot be perfect and compleate yet may every one of these be understood apart inasmuch as a man may love and not be loved loved and not love againe But where that which is Lovely is also loving there the bond of love is firmely tyed and love in every part entire yet is this love but in shadowes among us but perfect in the endlesse and perfect being of love 1 Ioh. 4.8.16 And thus in other conditions of the divine nature have other learned and devout men endevoured to shew their understanding and firme consent unto this high article of the christian Faith one in the power of God another in his wisdome c. according to the proofes you read before And therefore not to goe about to overthrow the reasons brought by Thomas because the authority of so great a Doctor may cut deeper than his reasons and so cut off if not the strength of the reasons in the articles following yet that comfort which the faithfull soule might have thereby I say that all the reasons which are brought to this article and so for the most part in all the rest are onely of two kindes First and chiefely from the impossibilities which would follow upon the contradiction of the thing in question which kinde of discourse I have taught as I can log cap. 8. n. 7. and chap. 26. more at large Secondly by that kinde of demonstration which I call by conversion of termes as I shewed log cap. 18. n. 3. in the syllogisticall handling of such arguments as in effect are all one with them which log cap. 13. n. 5. I shewed to bee by rule in the second kinde of equivalence Now both these kindes of argument prove the question onely that it is that is to say shew onely that the proposition is true and neither prove nor enquire how or for what superiour cause which in this and in many of the other questions here handled cannot be given And there is no proposition how true how universall or manifest soever but it may be proved by these meanes both in the affirmative For in things of the same nature and being whatsoever agrees to one most needs agree to the other and in the negative the ground of impossibilities and all negative discourse whatsoever is denied to the predicate must also bee denyed to the subject Now I thinke it is no more derogation from the truth to bee thus confirmed than it is simplie to bee affirmed as it is in the article of the Creed As if I say there is an eternall being the cause of all Beings there is an infinite wisdome the disposer of all an infinite power that governes all and thereupon conclude that there is a God What dishonour is here offered to God or his truth are not all these termes an eternall Being the cause of all beings An