or bad The ill successe that followed the young Prodigals journey was no part of his fathers purpose of his will and absolute decree much lesse no nor so much as to be ascribed unto his permission which was but causa sine qua non as the Schooles call it if it were so much Only it gave the Father such an opportunity as Adams fall did GOD in the present case of entertaining him with joy at his coming home and killing the faâ—ted Calfe for his better welcome T is true that God to whose eternal eye all things are present and fore-seen as if done already did perfectly fore-know to what unhappy end this poor man would come how far he would abuse that natural liberty wherewith he had endowed him at his first Creation Praescivit peccaturum sed non praedestinavit ad peccatum said Fulgentius truly And upon this fore-knowledge what would follow on it he did withall provide such a soveraign remedy as should restore collapsed man to his primitive hopes of living in Gods fear departing hence in his favour and coming through faith in Christ unto life eternall if he were not wanting to himself in the Application For this is a faithfull saying and worthy of all acceptation that CHRIST IESVS came into the World to save sinners of whom every man may say as St. Paul once did that he is the chief And it is as worthy of acceptance which came though from the same Spirit from a worthier person that God so loved the World the whole world of mankinde that He sent his only begouten Son into the World to the intent that whosoever did believe in him should live though he dyed and whosoever liveth and believeth in him should not die for ever but have as in another place everlasting life But what it is to believe in him and what a Christian man is bound to believe of him as it is all the subject of the six next Articles so must it be the argument of another book this touching our belief in God the Father Almighty Maker of Heaven and Earth and all things therein with most of the material points which depend upon it beginning now to draw to a final period Chap. VI. What Faith it was which was required for Justification before and under the Law Of the knowledge which the Patriarchs and Prophets had touching Christ to come Touching the Sacrifices of the Jews the Salvation of the Gentiles and the Justifying power of Faith ANd yet before we pass to the following Articles there are some points to be disputed in reference to the several estates of the Church of God as it stood heretofore under the Law and since under the Gospel the influence which Faith had in their justification and the condition of those people which were Aliens to the law of Moses before Christs coming in the flesh For being that the Patriarchs before the time of Moses and those holy men of God that lived after him till the coming of Christ had not so clear and explicite a knowledge of the particulars of the Creed which concern our Saviour or the condition of the holy Catholick Church and the Members of it as hath been since revealed in the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles it cannot be supposed that they should have universally the same object of faith which we Christians have or were bound to believe all those things distinctly touching Christ our Saviour and the benefits by him redounding to the sons of men which all Christians must believe if they will be saved And then considering that there is almost nothing contained in Scripture touching God the Father his Divine Power and Attributes the making and government of the World and all things therein which was to be believed by those of the line of Abraham but what hath been avowed and testified by the learned Gentiles it will not be unworthy of our disquisition to see wherein the differences and advantages lay which the Patriarchs and those of Iudah had above the Nations or whether the same light of truth did not shine on both through divers Mediums for the better fitting and preparing of both people to receive the Gospel In sifting and discussing of which principal points we shall consider what it is in faith it self which is said to justifie of what effect the Sacrifices both before and under the Law were to the satisfying of Gods wrath and expiating of the sins of the people by whom they were offered to the Lord and the relation which they had to the death of Christ the Lamb of God which takes away the sins of the world and finally what is to be conceived of those eminent men amongst the Gentiles who not extinguishing that light of nature which was planted in them but regulating all their actions by the beams thereof came to be very eminent in all kindes of learning and in the exercise of Iustice Temperance Mercy Fortitude and other Acts of Moral vertue Some other things will fall in incidently on the by which need not be presented in this general view And the mature consideration of all these particulars I have reserved unto this place that being situate in the midst between the Faith we have in God the Father Almighty and the belief required of us in his Son Christ Iesus it may either serve for an Appendix to the former part or a Preamble to the second or be in stead of a bond or ligament for knitting all the joints of this body together in the stronger coherence of discourse And first Faith being as appeareth by the definition before delivered a firm assent to supernatural truths revealed we cannot but conceive in reason that the Object of it is to be commensurable to the proportion and degree of the Revelation For as our Saviour said in another case that to whom much is given of him the more shall be required so may we also say in this that to whom more divine supernatural truths have been revealed of him there is a greater measure of belief expected Till the unhappy fall of Adam there was no faith required but in God alone For without faith it is impossible to please God saith the Apostle which Adam by the Law of his Creation was obliged to endeavour Nor could he come before the Lord or seek for the continuance of his grace and favours had he not first been fitted and prepared by faith For he that cometh unto God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him as in the same text saith the same Apostle Which words we may not understand of Faith in Christ at least not primarily with respect to Adam of whom such faith was not required in the state of Innocency for where there was no sin there was no need of a Saviour but only of a faith in Almighty God the stedfast confession and acknowledgement of whose beeing and bounty was to speak
the Apostles Creed it is said expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say I believe in the holy Catholick Church and in the Nicene Creed it was said of old 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Credo in unam Catholicam Ecclesiam as the Translator of Socrates where that Creed occurreth And though the same be not expressed in terminis in the Latine Creed yet in the Grammar of the words it is understood For where the Latine Creeds run thus Credo in Spiritum sanctum sanctam Catholicam Ecclesiam c. that is to say I believe in the holy Ghost the holy Catholick Church c. as the English hath it either the word Credo must be interposed as Credo in Spiritum sanctam credo sanctam Catholicam Ecclesiam i. e. I believe in the holy Ghost I believe the holy Catholick Church or else the Preposition In must relate to both as also to the rest that follow I know indeed that after Credere in Deum or in Iesum Christum was thought to be a different act and degree of faith from Credere Deo or Iesu Christo that men began to think it somewhat inconvenient to say as formerly Credo in sanctam Catholicam Ecclesiam or Credo in Mosen Prophetas I believe in the holy Catholick Church or I believe in Moses and the holy Prophets which have been since the world began And so we are to understand both Ruffin and Paschasius when they speak thereof both fitting their expressions to such forms of words as were then authorized in the Schools of CHRIST The like is to be said of St. Augustine also viz. Credimus Paulo non credimus in Paulum c. We believe Paul saith he we believe not in Paul and we believe Peter we believe not in Peter Where note the Father speaks not of the property but of the use of the phrase according to the language of the times he lived in for ab initio non fuit sic that it was otherwise intended at the first beginning we have shewn already Whether the phrase be so peculiar an expression of the holy Ghost as that it is not to be found in the old Greek Writers I will not meddle at the present though I conceive the holy Ghost did dictate nothing of the Scriptures but the matter only and left the language thereof to the sacred Pen-men But for the Septuagint although they do not use the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preceding an Accusative Case which is the singularity of expression so much insisted on in this business yet use they other words to the same effect For those which stand so highly on singularity cannot choose but grant that many times they use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not seldom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and sometimes also though not often 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which whosoever should translate in the English tongue could not translate it otherwise then thus to believe in God So that whether it be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Credo in Deum or Credo in Deo it makes no difference in this case no more then that these words of the Evangelist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Beza are translated Crediderunt in nomen ejus but by the Author of the Vulgar in nomine ejus which come both to one This makes it evident in part that the said distinction between Credere Deo credere Deum stands not upon so sure a ground as was imagined but I must make it yet more evident that in the true intent and meaning of the sacred Pen-men there is no difference at all to be found between them For in the 16. chapter of the Acts the Iaylor did demand of Paul and Silas what it behoved him to do that be might be saved vers 30. to which they made this following answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Crede in Dominum Iesum Christum c. believe on the Lord IESVS CHRIST and thou shalt be saved and thy house It followeth thereupon in the sacred story that being instructed in the Word and baptized with water he rejoyced greatly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credens Deo as both Beza and the Vulgar read it Believing in God with all his house vers 34. where if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the 34. be not the same with that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the 31 verse as to the act of faith which is one in both although the Object of this Act be given us in a different manner the Iaylor had fallen short of that way to Heaven and possibly might have been as far from the hopes of Salvation as when he first proposed the question And if they be the same as no doubt they be then Credere Deo Credere in Deum differ not at all and therefore neither the distinction nor the Explication so generally true and universally to be imbraced as hath been supposed which was the first thing to be proved The second was that howsoever Credere in Deum in some texts of Scripture may possibly admit that explication which is made thereof yet can it not be possisibly admitted in this place of the Creed My reason is because all Novices or Catechumeni which were to be admitted into the Church by the dore of Baptism all children formerly baptized which either came or were brought before the Bishop for Confirmation were first to give an account of their faith to make a publick profession or confession of it in the face of the Church according to the very words and Articles of this common Creed For which see proof sufficient in the former chapter Now if by Credere in Deum in Iesum Christum the Church intended such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such an adhaesion unto God in IESVS CHRIST such an assurance and perswasion of our interest in him as the phrase is pretended to import the Church did very ill to exact it from the hands of Novices or from the mouths of babes in Christ considering how strong the meat was and how agreeable unto the stomach of the strongest faith My second reason is which before was touched at because if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to believe in God the Father Almighty in Iesus Christ his only Son and in the holy Ghost the Lord and giver of life import no less then such a dependence on them as is due from the Creature to his God and that too ex vi Phraseos out of the very prhase or form of speech in Deum credere the same dependence must all Christians have upon the Church the same on the Communion of Saints and the rest that follow Will you have a reason of this reason It is because the very same phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is extant still interminis in tearms exprest in all Greek copies of the Creed and necessarily implyed in the Latine
of the Christian faith drawn up as briefly and as plainly but yet withall as fully as might stand with brevity a constant rule or standard Regula fidei as Tertullian cals it which both the people were to learn and the Priests or Ministers to teach And to this purpose it is said by Austin of the Creed or Symbolum that it was simplex breve plenum plain short and perfect simplicitas ut consulat rusticitati audientium brevitas memoriae plenitudo doctrinae that so the plainnesse of it might comply with the capacities of the hearers the shortnesse with their want of memory the perfection or the fulnesse of it with their edification Had any one of these been wanting had it been plain enough to be understood but too long and copious to be born in memory or short enough to be remembred but obscure and difficult above the reach of ordinary apprehensions or plain and short enough but imperfect maimed and wanting in some points of principal moment it had been no fit rule for the Church of CHRIST produced no benefit at all at least not worthy the divine Apostolical spirit for the use of Christians I know the age we live in hath produced some men and those of special eminence in the wayes of learning who seem to bid defiance unto all antiquity and will have neither Creeds nor Fathers no nor antient Councels to bear a stroke in any thing which concerns Religion It is not long since that the Apostles Creed hath been out of credit as neither theirs nor antiently received by the Christian Church in that forme we have it but none have taken more unhappy pains in this fruitlesse quarrel then one Downe of Devonshire Vossius hath lately writ a book De Tribus Symbolis wherein he hath not only derogated from this of the Apostles which others had quarrelled to his hand but very unfortunately endevours to prove that that ascribed to Athanasius and so long taken to be his by the chief lights for piety and learning in the Church of Christ was not writ by him Nor is he pleased with that form set forth and recommended to the Churches by the Councell of Nice for fear there should be any obligation laid upon mens consciences to believe otherwise then they list And whereas it was thought till these subtiller times that the most certain way to interpret Scripture was by the Catholick consent and commentaries of the antient Fathers so much renowned both in their own times and all ages since they are now made so inconsiderable such poor-spirited men that truth will shortly fare the worse because they delivered it Our Downe and after him one Dalie a French-man had not else beat their brains and consumed their time and stretched their wits unto the utmost to make them of no use or credit either in points of faith or controversie as they both have done The next thing that we have to do is to cry down the Canon of the Scripture also and as we have vilifyed the Creeds Councels and Fathers to make the fairer room for our own right reason which is both Fathers Creeds and Councels to our now great wits so to reject the Scriptures also as some do already to make the clearer way for new revelations which is the Paraclet or the holy Ghost of our present Montanists To meet with this strange pride and predominant humour I have most principally applyed my self at this time of leasure wherein God help it is not lawfull for me to attend that charge in which God had placed me to restore this antient and Apostolick Creed to its former credit and to expound the same as it stands in terminis according to the sense and meaning of those Orthodox and Catholick writers which have successively flowrished in the Christian world and were the greatest ornaments of the age they lived in For being free from prejudice and prepossessions which do too often blind the eyes of the wisest men and no way interessed in the quarrels which are now on foot to the great disturbance of the Church and peace of Christendome what men more fit then they to decide those Controversies which have been raised about the meaning of those Articles of the Christian faith which are comprised in it or deduced from it So doing I shall satisfie my self though I please not others and have good cause to thanke this retreat from businesse for giving me such opportunities to consult Antiquity and thereby to informe my own understanding For my part I have always been one of those qui docendo discunt who never more benefit my self then by teaching others And therefore though these Papers never see the light or perhaps they may not I shall not think I could have spent my time more profitably then in this employment So God speed me in it To goe back therefore where we left exceeding necessary it was as before was said for some short summarie or compendium of the Christian faith to be agreed on and drawn up for the use of Gods people and that for these 3. reasons chiefly First to consult the wants and weaknesses of poor ignorant persons such as were Novices in the faith and but Babes in CHRIST ut incipientibus et lactantibus quid credendum sit constitueretur as St. Augustine hath it Secondly that there might be some standing rule by which an Orthodox Teacher might be known from a wicked heretick a Christian from an unbeliever and to this end the Creed or Symbolum served exceeding fitly Of which St. Austin gives this note His qui contradicit aut a CRISTI fide alienus est aut est haereticus that whosoever contradicts it is either an Heretick or an Infidel Thirdly that people of all nations finding so punctual and exact an harmonie in points of doctrine to be delivered by the Apostles wheresoeoer they came might be the sooner won to embrace that faith in which they found so universal and divine a consonancie and be united with and amongst themselves in the bonds of peace which is not to be found but where there is the spirit of unity And who were able think you to prescribe a rule so universally to be received over all the world so suddenly to be obeyed by all Christian people but the Lords Apostles Who else but they were of authority to impose a form on the Church of CHRIST to be so uniformly held so consonantly taught in all tongues and languages as we finde this was by Irenaeus to be esteemed so unalterable and unmoveable as this was counted by Tertullian to be illustrated by the notes and Commentaries of the most glorious lights of the Christian firmament St. Cyril Chrysostom Austin and indeed who not â—and finally to continue for so long a time as for 1600. years together not only without such opposition as other Creeds have met with in particular Churches but without any sensible alteration in the words and syllables Assuredly such respects and honour had not
somnum both when they rose when they betook themselves to sleep or put on their cloaths and diligently learning and retaining of it being commended also to all sorts of people omnis aetatis omnis sexus omnisque conditionis by the Councell holden in Friuli Ann. 791. And by a Canon superadded unto those of the last of the three Oecumenical Councels holden in Constantinople it was expresly ordered by the Fathers there not only that no person should be admitted unto Baptisme or to Confirmation or to stand Godfather for any in those sacred Acts except infants only who could not say the Creed and Lords prayer without book but also Catholicum esse non posse that he who was so negligent in the things which did so nearly concern him in the way of his salvation could not be a Catholick And yet this was not all the honour nor were these all the markes of difference which were put upon it to set it high in estimation above other Creeds For whereas that of Nice and Athanasius were ordered to be said or sung but at speciall times according to the usages of particular churches it was decreed by Damasus who sat Pope at Rome A. 370. or thereabouts that the Apostles Creed should be repeated every day in the publick Liturgies on the Canonicall houres of prayer And whereas it was ordered by Pope Anastasius that at the reading of the Gospell not the Priests only and the Ministers but all people present venerabiliter curvi in conspectu Evangelii starent should stand upon their feet and bow down their bodies as in the way of veneration it was not long before the same gesture had been taken up for I finde not that it was imposed by publick Sanction at the reading also of the Creed as being the summe and substance of the holy Gospels Et cum Symbolum est verbum Evangelicum quoad sensum ergo illud stando sicut Evangelium dicitur as Durandus hath it The like authority it had in all generall councels in which it is usuall to be recited as Baronius very well observeth quasi Basis et fundamentum totius Ecclesiae structurae as the foundation and ground-work of the whole Ecclesiasticall edifice and this he proves out of the acts of the Councels of Chalcedon Ephesus and Constantinople whither I refer you Finally as this Creed is sometimes called the Creed without any addition the Creed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or by way of eminence all other being called for distinction sake the Constantinopolitan the Nicene the Creed of Athanasius or the Creed of Damasus so was this antiently esteemed the one and only Creed devised for the generall use of all the Church the rest being only made as Expositions or as Comments on it upon occasion of particular and emergent heresies And so much Perkins doth confesse though he be otherwise perswaded of the Authors of it then had been taught him by the greatest and most eminent Writers of the Primitive times For against this that hath been said many Objections have been studied both by him and others to make the Creed of latter standing and of lesse authority And first they say that if the Creed were indeed framed by the Apostles in that form of words in which it is come unto our hands it must be then a part of the Canonicall Scriptures as the residue of their writings are which also I finde granted and I wonder at it in our learned Bilson The Creed saith he we do not urge as undoubtedly written by all the Apostles for then it must needs be Canonicall Scripture Which being said he answereth himself in the words next following where he affirmeth that it is the best and perfectest forme of faith delivered to the Christians at the first planting of the Gospel by the direction of the Apostles and by their Agreement If so if it was framed by their direction and agreement it is as much to my intent as if it had been written by them all together it being not their pen but their authority and consent which makes it be entituled to them and called Apostolicall St. Pauls Epistle to the Romans were not else Canonical because written by the hand of Tertius as it is said Rom. 16.22 And as to the conclusion which is thence inferred I answer that not every thing which was writ by the Apostles or by any of them was ipso facto to be called canonical Scripture because writ by them but only that which they committed unto writing by the dictamen and direction of the holy Ghost with an intent that it should be Canonical and for such received For otherwise the Epistles of St. Paul to Seneca supposing them for his which I here dispute not and all the letters of intercourse betwixt them and their private friends of which no question need be made but they writ many in their time as occasion was had we the copies of them extant must have been Canonical as well as those upon record in the book of God And this is that which we finde written by St. Austin Quicquid ille de suis dictis factisve nos scire voluit hoc illis scribendum tanquam suis manibus reposuit and in another place to the same effect Deus quantum satis esse judicavit locutus scripturam condidit His meaning in both places doth amount to this that whatsoever God conceived to be fit and necessary for the edification of his Church he did impart to the Apostles and when he had communicated so much as was fit and necessary he closeth the Canon of the Scripture not giving way that any thing should be added to it as the word of God but that which he did so communicate and impart unto them It is objected secondly that in the Primitive times it had not any exact forme at all but that the Fathers varied in the repetition of the heads thereof and to this end Ignatius Irenaeus Tertullian Origen and others of the antients are brought in as witnesses but prove no such thing All that can be collected from those antient writers is no more then this that many times the Fathers as learned men and great discoursers use to do inlarge the words and syllables of the Creed as they saw occasion the better to deliver the true meaning of it and sometimes they contract into fewer words the whole summe thereof as thinking it not pertinent to the present purpose to tie themselves unto the words Which appears plainly by Tertullian who doth acknowledge that there was but one only Creed or set rule of faith affirmed by him to be unalterable and unchangeable yet having three occasions to repeat the heads thereof doth vary every time in the words and phrases And yet it cannot be inferred upon these variations that at the first or rather in the Primitive times the Creed had no exrct forme at all or not the same in which it is retained now in the Christian Church no more then any
man can say that there was never any exact forme of the Nicene Creed commended by that Councell to the use of the Church because that in the Councell of Chalcedon and in the works of Athanasius and St. Basil it is presented to us with some difference of the words and phrases Of which the most that can be said must be that of Binius idem est plane sensus sed sermo discrepans i. e. that the sense is every where the same though the words do differ In the third place it is objected that the Creed could not be written by the Apostles because there are therein certain words and phrases which were not used in their times and for the proof of this they instance in these two particulars first in our Saviours descent into hell which words they say are not to be found in all the Apostolical Scriptures and secondly in that of the Catholick Church which was a word or phrase not used till the Apostles had dispersed the Gospell over all the world And first in answer to the first we need say but this that though these words of Christ descended into hell be not in terminis in the Scriptures yet the Doctrine is which we shall very evidently evince and prove when we are come unto the handling of that Article And if we finde the doctrine in the book of God I hope it will conclude no more against the authority and antiquity of the Creed we speak of then that the word Homousion in the Nicene Creed did or might do against the authority of that Creed or Symbole because that word could not be found in all the Scriptures as was objected by the Arians in the former times And for the second instance in the word Catholica there is less ground of truth therein then in that before But yet because it hath a little shew of learning and doth pretend unto antiquity we will take some more pains then needed to manifest and discover the condition of it Know then that the Apostles might bestow upon the Church the adjunct of Catholick before they went abroad into several Countries to preach the Gospel not in regard that it was actually diffused over all the world according as it hath bin since in these later Ages but in regard that so it was potentially according to the will and pleasure of their Lord and Saviour by whom the bar was broken down which formerly had made a separation between Iew and Gentile and the Commission given of Ite praedicate to go and preach the Gospel unto every creature Catholick is no more then universal The smallest smatterer in the Greek can assure us that And universal questionless the Church was then at least intentionaliter potentialiter when the Apostles knew from the Lords own mouth that it should no longer be imprisoned within the narrow limits of the land of Iewry but that the Gentiles should be called to eternal life Without this limitation of the word I can hardly see how the Church should be called Catholick in her largest circuit there being many Nations and large Dominions which are not actually comprehended within the Pale of the Church to this very day I hope their meaning is not this that there was no such word as Catholick when the Apostles lived and composed the body of the New Testament If so they mean although they put us for the present to a needless search yet they betray therein a gross peece of ignorance For the discovery whereof we may please to know that the word Catholick is derived from the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth in universum as that from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is totum all as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. that I may sum up all in brief And so the word is used by Isocrates that famous Oratour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say generally or in a word I shall endeavour to declare what studies it were fittest for you to incline unto But the proper signification of it is in that of Aristotle where he opposeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a general or universal demonstration to that which he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is partial only or particular Hence comes the adjective 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. universal and so the word is taken by Quintilian saying Propter quae mihi semper moris fuit quam minimum me alligare ad praecepta quae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocant i. e. ut dicamus quomodo possumus universalia vel perpetualia Thus read we in Hermogenes an old Rhetorician 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of usual and general forms of speech and thus in Philo speaking of the laws of Moses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he ordained a general perpetual law for succession into mens inheritances Take which of these three senses they best like themselves and they will finde at last it comes all to one If the word Catholick do signifie the same with universal it also signified the same in and before the times the Apostles lived in and how the Church might then be called universal we have shewn already If they desire rather to translate it general Pope Iulius will tell us how the Church might be called General in the first days and hours thereof Quia sc. generalis est in eadem doctrina ad instructionem because it generally proposeth the same doctrine for edification or if by that of perpetual rather there is no question to be made but that our Saviours promise to be with them to the end of the world did most sufficiently declare unto them that the Church which they were to plant was to be perpetual There is another meaning of the word Catholicus as it denotes an Orthodox and right believer which whether it were used in the Apostles times may be doubted of it being half granted by Pacianus an antient writer sub Apostolis CHRISTIANOS non vocari Catholicos that Christians were not then called Catholicks But this at best being not the natural but an adventitious meaning of the word according to a borrowed metaphorical sense it neither helps nor hinders in the present business and in this sense we shall speak more of it hereafter when we are come unto the Article of the Catholick Church One more objection there remains and but one more which is worth the answering and is that which is much pressed by Downes namely that to affirm as Ruffinus doth that the Apostles did compose the Creed to be the rule or square of their true preaching lest being separated from one another there should be any difference amongst them in matters which pertain to eternal life were to suppose them to be guided by a fallible spirit and consequently subject unto Errour For answer whereunto we need say but this that the difference which Ruffinns speaks of and which he saith the Apostles laboured to avoid by their agreement on this sum or abstract of the Christian
affirme that We are justifyed only by faith in Christ we understand not saith the Book that this our own act to believe in Christ or this faith in Christ which is within us doth justifie us and deserve our justification unto us for that were to count our selves to be justifyed by â—ome act or vertue that is within our selves but that we must renounce the merit of faith hope charity and all other vertues as things that be far too weak imperfect and insufficient to deserve remission of sins and our justification and must trust only on Gods mercy in the bloud of Christ. Where plainly it is not the intent of the Book of Homilies to exclude the act of faith from being an externall and impulsive cause of our justification but from being the meritorious cause thereof in the sight of God from having any thing to do therein in the way of merit Or if they do relate to the act of faith it is not to the act of faith as the gift of God but as to somewhat which we call and accompt our own without acknowledging the same to be given by him And in that sense to say that we are justifyed by any thing within our selves which is so properly our own as not given by God is evidently opposite to that of the holy Scripture viz. By grace ye are saved through faith and not of your selves it is the gift of God that is to say that faith by which ye are saved is the gift of God And certainly it is no wonder if faith in Christ should be acknowledged and esteemed the gift of God considering that we have Christ himself no otherwise which is the object of our faith then by gift from God who did so love the world as our Saviour telleth us that he gave his only begotten Son to the end that whosoever believed in him should not perish but have life everlasting Of which great mercy of the Lord in giving his beloved Son and of the sufferings of that Son for our redemption I am next to speake THE SUMME OF Christian Theologie Positive Philological and Polemical CONTAINED IN THE Apostles CREED Or reducible to it The Second Part. By PETER HEYLYN 1 Tim. 3.16 Without controversie great is the Mysterie of godliness God manifested in the flesh justified in the Spirit seen of Angels preached unto the Gentiles believed on in the world received up into glorie LONDON Printed by E. Cotes for Henry Seile 1654. ARTICLE III. Of the Third ARTICLE OF THE CREED Ascribed to St. IAMES 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Credo et in Jesum Christum filium ejus unicum Dominum nostrum i. e. And in IESUS CHRIST his only Son our Lord. CHAP. VIII Nothing revealed to the Gentiles touching Christ to come The name of JESUS what it signifyeth and of bowing at it Of the name CHRIST and the offices therein included The name of Christians how given unto his Disciples THUS are we come to that part of the Christian Creed which doth concern the Worlds Redemption by our Lord and Saviour IESVS CHRIST A part to which we are not like to finde much credit from the stubborn and untractable Iews except it be to so much of it as concernes his sufferings under Pontius Pilate of which they made themselves the unhappy instruments and very little help for the proof thereof from any of the learned Gentiles who being taken up with high speculations would not vouchsafe to look so low as a crucifyed IESVS The preaching of Christ crucifyed as St. Paul hath told us as to the Iews who were a proud high-minded people it became a stumbling block so to the Greeks who boasted in the pride of learning and humane wisdome it was counted foolishness And if it were so counted a parte post when he that was the light to lighten the Gentiles had shined so visibly amongst them and countenanced the preaching of his holy Gospel by such signes and wonders as did in fine gain credit to it over all the world it is not to be thought that they had any clearer knowledge of salvation by him or by the preaching of his Gospel a parte ante The Iews indeed had many notable advantages which the Gentiles had not For unto them pertained the Adoption and the glory and the Covenants and the giving of the Law and the service of God and the promises They had moreover amongst them the Prophetical writings or as St. Peter cals it the sure word of Prophesie which like a light shining in a darke place might well have served to guide them in the way of truth to keep them in a constant expectation of their Saviours coming and when he came to entertain him with all joy and cheerfulness Yet when he came unto his own they received him not that miserable obduration being fallen upon them that seeing they did see and not perceive that hearing they did hear but not understand But on the other side the Gentiles wanted all those helpes to bring them to the knowledge of their promised Saviour which were so plentifully communicated to the house of Israel For though the Lord had signifyed by the prophet Isaiah saying There shall be a root of Jesse and he that shall rise to reigne over the Gentiles in him shall the Gentiles trust yet this was more then God had pleased to manifest to the Gentiles themselves till they were actually called to the knowledge of CHRIST by the ministery of St. Peter and the accomplishment of this prophesie made known unto them by the application of St. Paul The light of natural reason could instruct them in this general principle that there was a God for nulla gens tam barbara said the Latine Oratour never was man so brutish or nation so barbarous which in the works of nature could not read a Deity And the same light of natural reason could instruct them also that that God whosoever he was was to be served and worshipped by them with their best devotions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the first place to serve and reverence the Gods was one of the most special Rules which the Greek Oratour commended to his dear Demonicus But that it should please God in the fulnesse of time to send his son made of a woman made under the Law to redeem such as were under the Law that they might receive the Adoption of sons that CHRIST should come into the world to save sinners and breaking down the partition wall between Jew and Gentile make one Church of both neither the light of nature nor the rule of reason nor any industry in their studies could acquaint them with This St. Paul calleth a mystery not made known in other ages to the sons of men a mysterie hidden from the generations of preceding times and if a mystery a secret and an hidden mystery we should but lose time did we
least some secret influence in the work if not a publick and Oracular admonition And that it was not done but upon serious consultation had amongst themselves and a devout invocation of the name of God the greatness of the business the piety of the first Professors and other good authorities do most strongly assure For if upon the naming of Iohn the Baptist there was not only a consultation held by the friends and mother but the dumb father called to advise about it and if we use not to admit the poorest childe of the parish into the Congregation of Christs Church by the dore of Baptism but by joint invocation of the Name of God for his blessings in it with how much more regard of ceremony and solemnity may we conceive that the whole body of Christs people were baptized into the name of Christians But besides this we have an evidence or record sufficient to confirm the truth of our affirmation For Suidas and before him Iohannes Antiochenus an old Cosmographer first tels us that in the reign of Claudius Caesar ten years after the Ascension of our Lord into Heaven Euodius received Episcopal consecration and was made Patriarch of Antioch the great in Syria succeeding immediately to St. Peter the Apostle And then he addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. i. e. And at this time the Disciples were first called Christians Euodius calling them to a solemn conference and putting this new name upon them For before they were called Nazarites and Galileans Some of the Heathens not knowing the Etymon of the name called them Chrestiant and our most blessed Saviour by the name of Chrestos For thus Tertullian of the Christians perperam a vobis Christianus appellatur and thus Lactantius for our Saviour qui eum immutata litera 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 solent dicere But this was only on mistake not on studyed malice Et propter ignorantium errorem as Lactantius hath it the very name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Chrestianus intimating nothing else but meekness and sweetness as Tertullian very well observeth And though Suetonius following the errours of the times calleth our Saviour CHRIST by the name of Chrestos yet Tacitus who lived in the same age with him hits right as well on Christus as on Christianus Quos vulgo Chrestianos appellabat And then he addeth Auctor nominis ejus Christus qui Tiberio imperitante per Procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supplicio affectus erat Having thus rectified the name and asserted it to its true Original we may do well to have a care that we disgrace not the dignity of so high a calling by the unworthiness and uncleanness of our lives and actions In nobis patitur Christus opprobrium in nobis patitur lex Christiana maledictum that Christ and Christianity were ill spoken of by reason of the wicked lives of Christian people was the complaint of Salvians time God grant it be not so in ours And God grant too that as we take our name from CHRIST so the like minde may be in us as was also in him that is to say that we be as willing to lay down our lives for the brethren especially in giving testimony to his Faith and Gospel as he was willing to lay down his life for us and that as his Fathers love to him brought forth in him the like affections towards us and to his Commandements so his affection unto us may work in us the like love towards our brethren and to all his precepts For hereby shall men know we are his Disciples if we abide in his love and keep his Commandements as he hath kept his Fathers Commandements and abide in his love But see how I am carried to these practical matters if not against my will yet besides my purpose I proceed now to that which followeth ARTICVLI 3. Pars 2da 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Filium ejus unicum Dominum nostrum i. e. His only Son our Lord. CHAP. II. That JESUS CHRIST is the Son of God why called his only or his only begotten Son Proofs for the God-head of our Saviour Of the title of Lord. THat which next followeth is the first of those two Relations in which we do behold our Saviour in this present Article his only Son i. e. the only Son of God the Father Almighty whom we found spoken of before That God had other sons in another sense there is no question to be made All mankinde in some sense may be called his sons The workmanship of his creation Have we not all one Father hath not one God created us saith the Prophet Malachi in the Old Testament Our Father which art in Heaven saith Christ our Saviour for the New The Saints and holy men of God are called his sons also in the more peculiar title of adoption For who else were the sons of God in the 6. of Genesis who are said to take them wives of the daughters of men but the posterity of Seth the righteous seed by and amongst whom hitherto the true worship of the Lord had been preserved More clearly the Evangelist in the holy Gospel To as many as received him gave he power to become the sons of God even to them which believed in his Name Most plainly the Apostle saying As many as are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God having received the Spirit of Adoption whereby they cry to him Abba Father And in this sense must we understand those passages of holy Scripture where such as are regenerate and made the children of God by adoption of grace are said to be born of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Iohns phrase is both in his Gospel and Epistle Not that they have the Lord God for their natural Father for so he is the Father only of our Lord Iesus Christ but because being begotten by immortal seed the seed of his most holy Word they are regenerate and born again unto life eternal This is the seed of God spoken of by St. Iohn which remaineth in us by which we are begotten to an inheritance immortal undefiled and that fadeth not away reserved for us in the Heavens as St. Peter tels us In neither of these two respects can we consider Christ as the Son of God For if he were the Son of God in no other respect then either in regard of Creation or Adoption only he could not possibly be called Gods only Son or his only begotten Son but at the best multis e millibus unus one of the many thousands of the sons of God There is a more particular title by which some more selected vessels both of grace and glory have gained the honourable appellation of the sons of God that is to say by being admitted to a clearer participation and fruition of eternal blisse or made more intimately acquainted with his secret will In the
never any of the Angels was thought worthy of For unto which of the Angels said he at any time Sit thou on my right hand untill I make thine enemies thy footstool But this man being the brightness of the glory and the very Image of the substance of God upholding all things with the Word of his power and having by himself purged away our sins hath sate down on the right hand of the Majesty on high saith the same Apostle And this is that which the same Apostle meaneth in another place saying that God hath set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places far above all principalities and powers and might and dominion and every name that is named Where plainly he relates to the holy Angels whom he distinguisheth there as elsewhere by their several Orders but makes all subject and subordinate to the Son of man Nor hath he only the advantage of those blessed spirits in place and title and no more but also the greatness of that power and authority which sitting at the right hand doth present unto us He doth not only sit there and no more but so but sits there till his enemies be made his footstool as before was said all things what ever being put in subjection under his feet Which as it is one of the effects or consequents of sitting at the right hand of God the Father Almighty so is it such an height of honour such a point of Soveraignty as never any of the Angels could attain unto For unto the Angels saith St. Paul hath he not put in subjection the world to come nor made them to have dominion over the works of his hands And all this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no not in any wise not at any hand These priviledges and preheminences are for none but Christ reserved for him from the beginning before the foundations of the world were laid These then are the Preheminences and Prerogatives Royal which Christ our Saviour doth enjoy above Angels and Men at the right hand of God the Father where he sits crowned with honor and eternal glory And why this sitting at the right hand of God may not be taken in the literal and Grammatical sense according to the plain meaning of the words without tropes and figures and all these several Preheminences and Prerogatives Royal for the effects or consequents of his exaltation I must confess I know no reason to convince me Some things there are which very much incline me to be so perswaded which I shall briefly offer unto consideration and offer them no otherwise then considerations and so leave them there First I consider with my self and desire all learned men and Orthodox believers to consider with me why all the other Articles of the Christian faith even that of the descent into Hell as before was proved should be delivered in plain words and generally received in all times and Ages according to the literal sense this only being of such moment for our Consolation should be wrapt up in Tropes and figures and have another meaning then the words import or why the Apostles when they made this Creed to be the summary or abstract of the Christian faith and therefore to be fitted to the capacity of the weakest Christians who must be fed with milk as St. Peter tels us and he was one of those that composed this Symbol should use a phrase of such a dark and doubtful interpretation as doth distract the greatest Clerks to finde out the meaning Assuredly they had but ill provided for the vulgar Christian who must be fed with milk and not with stronger meats as St. Paul adviseth should they have set before them meats of hard digestion and feasted them with figurative and Metaphorical speeches which none of them did understand or could hope to do it In which respect I am not of the Doctors minde though I much reverence the man for his parts and learning who telleth us that we are bound to believe distinctly and explicitely all other Articles of the Creed concerning Christ according the plain literal and Grammatical sense of the words wherein the Evangelists and Apostles have expressed them without the vail of any Rhetorical Trope or Allegorie but for the place whither he Ascended and for the manner of his sitting at the right hand of God these cannot so distinctly he conceived by us because they are not in such proper tearms exprest by the holy Ghost but are wrapt up in a vail of Legal shadows and Representations I say I cannot be in this of that Doctors judgement because me thinks the reason which he giveth to confirm his opinion doth incline me very strongly to the contrary For if our belief or knowledg of the other Articles be literally required as he saith it is seeing the matter contained in them is sensible and comprehensible to reason sanctified by Grace I cannot see but that his sitting at the right hand of God in the literal sense may be as sensible and comprehensible to a sanctified reason as his Conception by the power of the holy Ghost or being born into the World of the Virgin Mary To make this probable and comprehensible I shall consider in the next place that though Almighty God in his own Divine Nature be infinite immensurable and incomprehensible not circumscribed in any place or confined unto it but equally in all places by his Omnipresence according to that of the Prophet Ieremie Do not I fill Heaven and Earth saith the Lord Almighty Yet we are to behold him in another notion when we speak of our Redeemers sitting at the right hand of God though we abstract him not from that Omnipresence nor that from him For look on God in his infinite nature equally present in all places and contained in none and then place CHRIST our Saviour upon Gods right hand it must needs follow thereupon that Christs natural body in which he sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty must have a local being in all places also which is a thing not possible to a Body natural And what can follow after that but that we either fall into the errour of the Vbiquitarians who under colour of the personal union and communication of the properties of either nature in CHRIST have utterly destroyed the beeing of his natural body by making it present in all places by an Omnipresence or salve it by a miracle as the Papists doe in giving him a multipresence a thing as utterly inconsistent with a body natural making him to be present in as many places at once as all the Popish Priests in the world can say several Masses And therefore I consider in the third place that though God the Lord be present in al places at once If I climbe up into heaven thou art there if I go down into Hell thou art there also as the Psalmist hath it
the Gospel as by no means to let it be accommodated to the times of the Law That by a name distinct they have called the Synagogue Synagoga Iudaeorum Ecclesia Christianorum est as St. Augustine hath it And the distinction may sort well enough with the state of the Church as it stood heretofore in the time of the Law and now under the Gospel though otherwise the names may be used promiscuously For properly Synagogue is no other than a Congregation derived from the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to congregate or gather together into one and the other in one word may be rendred a Convocation from calling the same men together to some certain end Both words of Ecclesiastical use and notion and both import the same thing though in divers words For both the Patriarks and other holy Men of God which lived under the Law may be called a Church that is to say a Convocation a Body Collective of men called by their God unto a participation of his Word and Ordinances And we which have the happiness to live under the Gospel may without any reproach or dishonor to us be called by the name of the Congregation Certain I am St. Augustine though much affected with the foresaid distinction doth yet allow the one to be called a Church Tamen illam dictam invenimus ecclesâ—am as his words there are and no less sure that the meetings of Christs faithful Servants are by St. Paul called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. A Congregation or gathering of themselves together as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word of the same Root and Origination is used by him to the same purpose in another place And yet I can by no means like the zeal of our first Translators who were it seems so out of love with the name of Church that wheresoever they found the word Ecclesia in Greek or Latine for I know not which of the two they consulted with they would not render it the Church but the Congregation And so it stands still in the Epistles and Gospels and several other passages of our Publick Liturgy which were taken out of that Translation A thing which Gregory Martin justly doth except against though he be out himself in saying That the Apostles never called the Church by the name of the Congregation But that Error is corrected in our late Translations and we are now no more afraid of the name of the Church than the Romanists are afraid of the name of Pope Audito Ecclesiae nomine hostis expalluit was a vain brag in Campians mouth when the times were queasiest more ayt to strain at Gnats than they have been since Much less can I approve of that false Collection which those of Rome have made from St. Augustines words For whereas he appropriating the name of Synagogue to the state of the Iews and that of the Church unto the Christians inserts I know not why this Grammatical note Congregatio magis pecorum convocatio magis hominum intelligi solet That to be convocated or called together doth belong to Men but to be congregated or gathered together appertains to Beasts the Authors of the Roman Catechism have from thence collected That the people under the Law were called a Synagogue because like brute Beasts they sought after nothing but temporal and earthly pleasures not being nourished in the hopes of eternal life The vanity of this Collection we have shewn before by bringing in St. Paul to witness how properly the word Congregation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek may be applied and understood of the Church of Christ. The falshood of the Tenet we shall shew hereafter when we are come to speak of the last Article that of Life Everlasting In the mean time the scornful Papist may be pleased to be put in minde that there is nothing more frequent in the Acts of the Council of Constance than Synodus in Spiritu Sancto congregata and yet I know they neither have the confidence nor the heart to say That the Bishops which were there assembled were gathered together like brute Beasts which Congregari doth import in the Tridentine Criticism Of the Quid nominis the name or notion of the Church as it is called Ecclesia both in Greek and Latine we have said enough Our English word Church hath another Root and is derived from the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the proper signification of it doth signifie Gods house the material Church the place appointed for the Meetings of Christian people to celebrate the Name of the Lord their God So witnesseth Eusebius saying That in as much as the Holy Houses and Temples of that time were dedicated unto God the chief Lord of all therefore they did receive his Name and were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dominicae in the Latine Tongue that is the Houses of the Lord A name saith he imposed upon them not by the will of man but the Lord himself In correspondence to the Greek they were called Dominica in the Latin and called so very early too in St. Cyprians time as appears by his reproof of a wealthy widow of whom he saith In Dominicum sine sacrificio Venis That she used to come into the Church without her Offering Of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as that famous Antiquaâ—y Sir Henry Spelman hath right well observed came the Saxon Cyric or Kirk which still the Scots retain without alteration which we by adding thereunto a double Aspirate have changed or mollified into Church A name which though at first it signified the Material Temple I mean the place of meeting for Gods Publick Worship yet came it easily to be applied to the Body Mystical to the Spiritual Temple built on the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles IESUS CHRIST himself being the chief corner stone As on the otherside the word Ecclesia which first the Christians used to signifie the Spiritual Temple the Collective Body of Gods people became in little time to denote the building the material edifice appointed for the meeting of the Congregation Tertullian hath it in this sense for the African Churches Conveniunt in ecclesiam confugiunt in ecclesiam They met together in the Church and they fled to the Church So hath St. Ierome for the Roman Aedificate ecclesias expensis publicis Let Churches be erected at the Publick charge And for the Eastern thus the Synod of Laodicea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. In the Church of the most holy Martyr Euphemia Many more instances of which kinde might be here alleged but that St. Paul is generally supposed by all sorts of Writers to speak of the Material Church when he charged those of Corinth for despising the Church of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Greek Original Concerning which consult St. August quaest 57. super Levit. St. Basil. in Moral Reg.
the East the Donatist in the South and the Novatians in the West who made one Faction onely though of several names were antiently of this opinion and set up Churches of their own of the New Edition For flattering themselves with a conceit of their own dear sanctity they thought themselves too pure and pious to joyn in any act of worship with more sober Christians and presently confined the Church which before was Catholick to their own private Conventicles and to them alone or intra partem Donati as they pleased to phrase it Who have succeeded them of late both in their factions and their follies too we all know full well The present ruptures in this State do declare most evidently that here is Pars Donati now as before in Africa A frenzy which gave great offence to the Antient Fathers who labored both by Speech and Pen to correct their insolencies and of such scandal to the Churches of the Reformation that Calvin though a ridged man and one inclinable enough unto new opinions did confute their dotages and publickly expose them to contempt and scorn The Antients and the Moderns both have agreed on this That though the Church of Christ be imperfect always and may be sometimes faulty also yet are not men to separate themselves so rashly from her Communion or make a rupture for poor trifles in the Body Mystical It argueth little Faith and less Charity saith renowned Cyprian if when we see some Errors in the Church of God De ecclesia ipsi recedamus we presently withdraw our selves and forsake her fellowship And here we might bring in St. Augustine and almost all the Fathers to confirm this point but that they are of no authority with the captious Schismatick and now of late disclaimed by our neater wits Therefore for further satisfaction of the stubborn Donatist we will behold the Constitution of the Church in the Book of God and take a view of the chief Types and Fortunes of it to see if we can finde there such a spotless Church as they vainly dream of In Adams family which was the first both Type and Seminary of the Church of God there was a Cain a murderer that slew his brother Amongst the Sons of God in the time of Noah how many that betook themselves to the daughters of men and in Noahs Ark the next and perhaps the greatest a Cham which wretchedly betrayed the nakedness of his aged father In Abraham's house there was an Ishmael that mocked at Isaac though the heir and the heir of promise in Isaac's a prophane Esau that made his belly his God and sold Heaven for a break-fast in Iacob's there were Simeon and Levi Brethren in evil besides a Reuben who defiled his old Fathers Bed And in the Church of Israel when more large and populous how many were mad upon the worship of the Golden Calf more mad in offering up their sons to the Idol Moloch Thousands which bowed the knee to Baal Ten thousands which did sacrifice in the Groves and prohibited places yet all this while a Church a true Visible Church with which the Saints and Prophets joyned in Gods publick worship Let us next look upon the Gospel and we shall finde that when the bounds thereof were so strait and narrow that there were few more visible Members of it than the Twelve Apostles yet amongst them there was a Iudas that betrayed his Master When it began to spread and enlarge it self to the number of One hundred and twenty there were among them some half Christians such as Nicodemus who durst not openly profess the Gospel but came unto the Lord by night and some false Christians such as Demas who out of an affection to the present world forsook both the Apostle and the Gospel too She then increased to such a multitude that they were fain to choose seven subordinate Ministers the better to advance the work and one of them will be that Nicholas the founder of the Nicolaitan Hereticks whom the Lord abhorred Follow it out of Iewry into Samaria and there we finde a Simon Magus as formal a Professor as the best amongst them and yet so full of the gall of bitterness within that Ignatius in plain terms calleth him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first-born of the Devil Trace it in all the progress of it thorow Greece and Asia and we shall see the factiousness of the Corinthians the foolishness of the Galatians and six of the seven Asian Churches taxed with deadly sin Good God into what corner of the Earth will the Donatist run to finde a Church without corruption free from sin and error It must be sure into the old Utopias or the new Atlantis or some Fools Paradise of their own in terra incognita unless as Constantine once said unto Acesius a Novatian Bishop b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they can erect a Ladder of their own devising and so climb up into the Heavens Whilest they are here upon the Earth they have no such hopes and do but fool themselves in the expectation The chief occasion of these Errors which the two opposite Factions in the Church of Christ have thus faln into is a mistake of the right constitution of the members of it For those of Rome condemning all the Protestant party for Hereticks and the Eastern Churches for Schismatical and then excluding Hereticks and Schismaticks from being any members of the Church at all not onely appropriate to themselves the name of Catholick but consequently confine the Church within their Communion And on the other side the Donatist and their Modern followers out of the dear affection which they bear themselves first make the Church to consist of none but the Elect and none to be Elect but those who joyn fellowship with them and so by the same necessary consequence have confined the Church within the Walls or Curtains of their private Conventicles Both faulty and both grounding their unsound Conclusions upon as false and faulty principles For taking it for granted first which will never be yeilded by us nor made good by them that both the Christians of the East are Schismaticks and the Protestants of the North are no better then Hereticks yet are they not presently to be cut off from being any Members of the Church at all as Bellarmine and others of the Church of Rome have been pleased to say A Schismatick in the true meaning of the word is he Who holding an entire profession of the truth of God and joyning with the Church in all points of doctrine do break the peace thereof and disturb the order by refusing to submit themselves to their lawful Pastors and yeild obedience to her power in external matters If he stay there and withal fall not into manifest Heresie and set on foot some new Opinion as most Schismaticks have used to do the better to justifie themselves in their separation so
Of the Eleventh Article OF THE CREED Ascribed to St. IVDE the Brother of IAMES 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Carnis Resurrectionem i. e. The Resurrection of the Body CHAP. VII Of the Resurrection of the Body and the Proofs thereof The Objections against it answered Touching the circumstances and manner of it The History and grounds of the Millenarians WE are now come unto that Article of the Christian Faith which hath received most opposition both at home and abroad Abroad amongst the Gentiles of the Primitive times who used all their wit and learning to cry down this Doctrine at home within the pale of the Church it self by some who had the name of Christians but did adulterate the prime Articles of Christian belief by their wicked Heresies First for the Gentiles it was a thing much quarrelled and opposed amongst them that Christ himself should be affirmed to have risen again insomuch that St. Paul was counted mad by Festus and but a babler at the best by the great wits of Athens for venturing to Preach before them of IESUS and the Resurrection i.e. of Iesus and his resurrection for of that onely he did speak when they so judged of him but of this quarrel they grew soon weary and so gave it off For being it was a matter of fact confirmed at the first by so many witnesses who had seen him and converted with him after his raising from the dead and thereupon received in the Church with such unanimity that the faithful rather chose to lay down their lives than to alter their Beleef in that particular the world became the sooner satisfied in the truth thereof But for the Resurrection of the dead which was grounded on it and that his Resurrection was of so great efficacy as that by vertue of it all the dead should rise which had deceased from the beginning of the world to the end thereof that they accounted such a monstrous and ridiculous paradox as could not find admittance amongst men of reason For this it was which was so scoffed at by Cecilius in that witty Dialogue Reâ—ase ferunt post mortem post favillas they give it out saith he that they shall live again after death and that they shall resume those very bodies which now they have though burnt to ashes or devoured by wilde beasts or howsoever putrified and brought to nothing Putes eos jam revixisse And this saith he they speak with so great a confidence as if they were already raised from the dust of the grave and spake as of a matter past not of things to come And it did stomack them the worse in that the Christians did not onely promise a Resurrection and new life to the bodies of men which all Philosophers and men of ordinary sense knew to be subject to corruption but threaten and foretel of the destruction of the Heavenly Bodies the Sun the Moon and all the glorious Lights in the starry Firmament which most Philosophers did hold to be incorruptible as the same Cecilius doth object in the aforesaid Dialogue That Christ was raised from the dead besides the many witnesses which gave credit to it the Gentiles could not well deny especially as to the possibility of such a thing without calling some of their own gods in question For not onely the deity of Romulus did depend on the bare testimony of one Proculus who made Oath in the Senate that he had seen him ascend up into heaven augustiore forma quam fuisset in a more glorious shape than before he had but that of Drusilla and Augustus and Tiberius Caesar which were all Roman gods of the last Edition must fall unto the ground also for lack of evidence if either it were impossible for a dead man to be raised to life again or taken up into the Heavens as our Saviour was But that from this particular instance supposing it for true as it might be possibly they should infer a general Doctrine that all the dead should rise again at the Day of Judgement this would not sink into their heads unless it might be made apparent as they thought it could not that any of that sect had been raised again to confirm all the rest in that opinion Without some such Protesilaus no credit to be given to the resurrection preach it they that would It seems the Gentiles in this point were like the rich man mentioned in our Saviours Parable Except one rise up from the dead they will not beleeve It was not Moses and the Prophets nor Christ and his Apostles that could do the deed Leaving these therefore for a while and keeping those who did assume the name of Christians and yet denied this Article of the Christian Faith unto the close of this discourse Let us for our parts rest our selves on the Word of God and see what Moses and the Prophets what CHRIST and his Apostles have delivered to us in affirmation of this Doctrine For Moses first it is the general opinion of most learned men that he was the Author of the Book of Iob and that he wrote it purposely for a Cordial to the house of Israel whom he found very apt to despair of Gods mercies towards them and easily out of comfort in all times of trouble Which granted we shall have from Moses a most ample testimony where he reports these words of that Myrror of patience I know that my Redeemer liveth and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth And though after my skin worms destroy this body yet in my flesh shall I see God Whom I shall see for my self and mine eyes shall behold and not another though my reins be consumed within me St. Hierom notes upon these words that no man since Christs time did ever speak so clearly of Christs resurrection and his own as Iob doth here before Christs coming Nullum tam apertè post Christum quam ipse hic ante Christum de Christi resurrectione loquitur sua as the Father hath it And on the same a Reverend Father of our own makes this glosse or descant It is affirmed saith he by Iob that his Redeemer liveth and shall rise again which is as much as to say He is the resurrection and the life St. Iohn could say no more It is his hope He is by it regenerate to a lively hope St. Peter could say no more than that He enters into such particulars this flesh and these eyes which is as much as was or could be said by St. Paul himself There is not in all the Old there is not in all the New Testament a more pregnant and direct proof for the resurrection St. Hierom as we saw before was of this opinion St. Gregory comes not much behind who on these words of Iob gives us this short Paraphrase Victurum me certa fide credo libera voce profiteor quia Redemptor mens