〈◊〉 with Suidas are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad misericordiam propensi such as are very prone to mercy And in Phavorinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Qui non rogatus bona sua largitur citra invidiam Who bestows his goods unaskt without grudging 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Theocritus saith of Menalcas So that Good is a complex word that hath several meanings it signifieth Courteous or kind merciful or liberal and such is a friend in all respects and for such a friend perhaps some would dare to die as some rare examples tell us or perhaps Good may be taken here as personally good to such a man and such a one is properly a friend Let a man be never so just or righteous there 's none will lay down his life for him but for such a one as hath been good to me as my friend hath been perhaps for such a one I shall dare to die and farther reacheth not the love of man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. No man hath Greater love then this that he lay down his life for his friend Joh. c. 15. v. 13. But God commendeth his love to us in that while we were yet sinners that is enemies Christ died for us This is the love which exceedeth knowledge Eph. c. 3. v. 19. V. 12 13 14. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In most Interpreters you have in this place an Anantopodoton that is a deficiency in the reddition of the sense a sicut without a sic which ought by all means to be avoided if without violence to the Text it possibly may Nor can I assent to those who to prevent the inconvenience of an Anantopodosis would have the 18 and 19 verses answer to the 12. which seems to me too constrainedly forc't I rather approve their judgments who Translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by a frequent Metathesis ita quoque so also as the Old Latin Interpreter of Chrysostom the Syriack and Arabick read or etiam ita even so by which version there is no wrong either to the construction or the sense but all is whole taking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only in the redditive and not in the copulative sense as it is in the Lords prayer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ut in coelo etiam in terra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Propterea sicut per unum hominem peccatum in mundum introiit per peccatum mors etiam ita mors in omnes homines pertransiit eo quòd omnes peccaverunt Therefore as by one man sin entred into the world and by sin death even so death passeth upon all men for that all have sinned For until the Law that is before the Law sin was in the world That sin was in the world before the Law seems to be the main thing that the Apostle here laboureth to prove that he might meet with the tacite or implied objection of those who probably did deny that all men were sinners and the enemies of God as he had before affirmed v. 8. and therefore did Sophistically argue that Christ died not for all because sin is the transgression of the Law but they which had no Law could not transgress that which they had not for the Law was from Moses Joh. c. 1. v. 17. To meet therefore with their objection he useth this argument As by one man sin entred into the world and by sin death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For this very reason Even so is death passed upon all men for that all have sinned none excepted So that it appears most certainly true that from the fall of Adam to the Law given by Moses for he speaks of no other Law throughout the whole Epistle sin was in the world But it is farther objected that sin is not imputed where there is no Law for the Law worketh wrath c. 4. v. 5. To which he gives no other answer but an implicit one the same in effect which he gave before Immo for so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I conceive is to be rendred here Regnavit mors ab Adam c. Yea death reigned from Adam to Moses therefore was sin not only in the world before the Law but also imputed before the Law Their dying was an argument not only that they had sinned but that also their sin was imputed for the wages of sin is death and therefore because death hath passed on all men it s necessarily determined that all have sinned and so become obnoxious to the punishment of death even they who had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression for death reigned on very Infants who sinned not actually as Adam did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who is the type of man to come to wit of all mankind For Adam did in his person represent all the Race of men which were to spring from his loyns And in this regard and sense Adam seems to me most fitly to be stiled in this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The type of man which is to come I acknowledge all Interpreters elder and later understand Christ to be him that was to come but I see no cogency in the Text to bind my Faith to that interpretation but rather arguments to disswade it For truly if we speak in a proper sense Adam cannot be said to be the type of Christ For a type is the express Image or Figure of the thing it represents 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 respondet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ut sigillo cera the type answereth to the antitype as the wax unto the seal It is absolutely necessary that the type of that which is good be good it self and the type of that which is evil must be evil otherwise it cannot be a type It is the sence of Chrysostom in his Comment on the Epistle to the Hebrews c. 9. v. 23. Neither is there any will say that Adam is a true and proper type of Christ but that he is so only per antithesim or analogiam by opposition of contraries or proportion or by some intricate distinction such as is that of Origen's Juxta genus constare similitudinem juxta speciem repugnantiam esse That there is a similitude as to the Genus a repugnancy as to the species Whereas Adam is properly truly and significantly I may add aptly and appositly to this place said to be the type of his off-spring which was to come from his loins and which he did so virtually represent in his person as that by his sin they all became obnoxious to sin and death And from these words thus expounded is formed as strong an argument for Original sin as from any Text of Scripture Neither do I seem to be altogether without witness I have the Aethiopick Version or Paraphrase for me The words whereof in Latin are these Veruntamen dominata est mors propterea ab Adamo usque ad Mosem tam in
iis qui peccaverunt quem in iis qui non peccaverunt per illud peccatum Adami eo quod unusquisque in similitudine Adami creatus est quia Adamus typus fuit illius qui erat venturus Nevertheless death reigned therefore from Adam to Moses as well in those that sinned as also in those that sinned not by that sin of Adam because that every one is born in the likeness of Adam and because Adam was the type of him that was to come From which words I could make no other construction but that he plainly means that death did reign over all by the sin of Adam for these two causes because every one was born in the likeness of Adam and because Adam was the type of him who was to come Both which reasons seem to me one and the same the one being a reddition or explication only of the other it being all one to say that Adam was a type of his Posterity and that Adam's Posterity was born in his likeness But to say that death reigned over all by the sin of Adam because Adam was the type of Christ is surely an inconsequent argument Whereas to affirm that death reigned over all by the sin of Adam because Adam was a type that represented all his Posterity methinks answers fitly to the place and is very easie for the lowest capacity at first sight to apprehend C. 6. v. 4. Christ is said to be raised from the dead 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By the glory of the Father as it is commonly rendred Beza would have it In gloriam Patris 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the glory of the Father The Translation either way is harsh Why may it not be much better rendred by a familiar trajection Per Patrem gloriae By the Father of glory which is significant and apt as he is elsewhere called Dominus gloriae and Deus gloriae The Lord of glory and the God of glory And so is he expresly called Eph. c. 1. v. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pater gloriae The Father of glory C 7. v. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from the body of this death Or as it is in our margin from this body of death And why not O wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from the death of this body that is thus captivated under the Law of sin which is in its members v. 23. And so the sense without any Metaphor is plain and sutable to the scope of the place There being nothing more familiar then such trajections Examples whereof you may see Heb. c. 7. v. 4. Jam. c. 2. v. 1. c. 3. v. 3. 1 Pet. c. 3. v. 21. 2 Pet. c. 1. v. 19. You have one in the margin of this very place V. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These words are to be supplied out of the former whereto they are a perfect answer The Apostles trembling question was Who shall deliver me from the death of this body that is such a slave to sin to which he forthwith answers I thank God he will deliver me through Jesus Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being to be understood as a reddition to the question C. 8. v. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. I cannot see how there can be construction here but by a Metathesis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Eo enim quod impotentia legis debilis erat propter carnem Deus filium suum mittens c. For in that the weakness of the Law was impotent because of the flesh God sending his own Son c. C. 9. v. 10 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. To reconcile the sense and construction of these words wherein there hath been so much labour you must understand the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by an Hebraism or Graecism frequent in every Page almost in Holy Writ Whereof see note on Mar. c. 12. v. 40. Promissionis enim verbum hoc est secundum tempus hoc veniam erit Sarae filius non solum vero sed Rebecca ex altero erat gravida ex Isaac patre nostro nondum enim natis c. Dictum est ei major serviet minori For this is the word of promise At this time I will come and Sara shall have a son and not only so but Rebecca also by another was with child by our Father Isaac For the children being not yet born c. It was said unto her The elder shall serve the younger As much as to say that Rebecca was with child also by another word of promise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relating to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I conceive to be a more proper phrase then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For if a man be said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Numb c. 5. v. 20. then is it rightly said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rebecca retinuit semen patris nostri Isaac that is concepit she was with child by her Father Isaac So that there was not such necessity for the learned Beza to pronounce so positively Est itaque depravatus hic locus a quopiam Graecae linguae prorsus ignaro This place is depraved by some person ignorant of the Greek tongue When as so easie and frequent a remedy is at hand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 According to this time are the words of the LXX whom Paul it seems did follow and they questionless read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so rendred it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this time for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the time of life accoding as it is Gen. c. 18. v. 10. and 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secundum or circa tempus vitae At or about the time of life I will return unto thee And I suspect it is not rightly read in the Hebrew it self Gen. c. 17. v. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at this time which should have been rather written conformably with the other places relating to this story 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at the time of life As for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in our sense it is abundantly familiar The LXX use it for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 altero another Gen. c. 43. v. 13. Psal 108. v. 14. You shall find it likewise in the same sence 1 Cor. c. 4. v. 6. and in Dioscor and Greg. Nazian take but the pains to look in Steph. Thes V. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Here is no necessity for Anantopodosis the coherence of the place is plain and ready distinguish but the words aright Nay but O man who art thou that repliest against God if God being willing to shew his wrath and to make his power known hath endured with much long suffering the vessels of wrath fitted for destruction The intervenient words Shall the thing
And this interpretation seems to be more reasonable then that of their's who interpret it of Judas as if St Luke should mean that he was gone to his own or to his proper place to wit as they would have it unto Hell T is true no man can make other judgment But I cannot for all that think the Evangelist had any such meaning in these words I rather with Chrysostom look upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The prudence of the man how he speaks not contumeliously nor insults c. Which plainly argues that he thought not that it was the meaning of St Luke in these words to adjudge Judas into Hell For what could he have said of Judas more contumelious then that he was gone to his own place meaning Hell Neither was it the business of an Historian or Evangelist to interpose his own opinion but rather to leave Judas to the judgment of God it being enough for him to have related matter of fact as he had promised and professed to do in the beginning of his Gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Even as they had delivered things unto us who were eye-witnesses from the beginning c. But who will you say was an eye-witness of Judas his going to or being in Hell C. 2. v. 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quoniam non derelinques animam meam in Hade neque dabis sanctum tuum videre corruptionem Because thou wilt not leave my soul in Hell nor give thy holy one to see corruption The first branch of this verse seems to concern his Soul which was not left in the state of death as other humane Souls I say left in the state of death for it is not one and the same thing to die or to be dead and to be or to remain in the state of death or if you please as it is v. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in vinculis in the bonds of death as Athanasius and Beza interpret the word and so in the Psalmist in the LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are Synonymous or in those receptacles where the Souls of the Godly are reserved till they receive their crown as St Augustin or in the middle of the shadow of death where the Souls of the dead are as Irenaeus or in Hades or in Hell whither we are taught by the Apostles Creed that he descended or went into Where by the way I cannot but observe that our English Hell comes from the Saxon HELAN celare tegere to hide or cover so as it may be said to have the same signification with Hades 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a place that cannot be seen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 locus sine luce Phavor or else in Paradise with the Soul of the Thief All which several expressions serve but to signifie one and the same thing For I do not see but Paradise may very lawfully be interpreted a receptacle or separated place for departed Souls from the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 separavit locus separatus or septum a close such as for pleasure and delight our Parks and Gardens are from which cause this word hath obtained with the Hebrews the meaning of bliss and pleasure And I cannot but think the Greeks borrowed the word from the Hebrews and that neither of them owe it to the Persian For though perchance which yet is by no means certain Nehemiah might borrow it from the Persian who lived in the Persian Court yet Solomon t is certain which used the same word in Ecclesiastes and in Canticles many ages before Nehemiah's time writ in the Hebrew tongue neither is there any reason at all to think that he ever used the Persian dialect Neither is such a termination with the Hebrews so unusual with whom such Anomalous words are frequent that we should so earnestly disown it as their due Neither doth the Rabbins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies death which is a separation differ from our sense Why should we therefore fly from the Hebrew to the Persian and acknowledge him to be the true owner of the word I confess I value the Authority of Julius Pollux but I shall not swear unto it However in summ I conceive it not unreasonable to say that the Godly who are in the state of death are in Paradise in what ever place secluded and finally to conclude that this first branch of the verse concerns only his Soul as the latter plainly concerns his body which saw no corruption as other human bodies do And in this sense doth Peter expressly explain the words v. 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Non relicta est anima ejus in Hade neque caro ejus vidit corruptionem That his Soul was not left in Hell neither did his flesh see corruption Plainly distinguishing between his Soul and Body as if he did it of set purpose to the end that none should think this place concerned the Sepulchre or Grave of Christ alone as some would have that say that Hades signifieth nothing else For Perversissimum est c. as Tertullian saith lib. de Carne Christi It is a most perverse thing that naming the flesh we should understand the Soul or naming the Soul we should understand the flesh The truth of their names is the safety of their properties Neither doth Athanasius speak less plainly to our purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Neither did death prevail to subjugate his human nature so far as to detain it in its bonds neither could corruption by any tyrannical invasion exercise its power to the putrefaction of his body Humanae ista lex necessitatis c. saith Hilary It is a law of humane necessity that the bodies being buried the Souls descend into Hell which descent the Lord himself did not refuse to shew the truth of his manhood or human nature And doubtless this is the scope of Peters words in this place of purpose to prove the Resurrection of Christ and that he was not left in the state of death as other mortals are And this opinion I hold to be pious and consonant to faith I believe the immortality of the Soul I believe the Resurrection of the body and its reunition with the Soul and life everlasting I am no friend to Purgatory nor to any prayer supplication or application to any Saint save only to our sole Mediator Jesus Christ who for that particular end ascended into the holy of holies that is into the highest heavens that there he may commend our prayers to our Father which is in heaven who from hence also conceive may be drawn a cogent argument that prayers ought not to be made to Saints whom Religion hath not yet placed in that holy of holies to wit the highest heavens and so qualified for fitting Mediators But there are not few and those no mean ones neither who positively say there is no receptacle of Souls
but affirm that the Souls of the Godly do immediately after their separation from their bodies go into heaven that is to say as I suppose that heaven which is properly called heaven One of whose great Arguments is from that of Luke c. 23. v. 43. Hodie eris mecum in Paradiso Thou shalt be with me this day in Paradise But that day our Saviour was not in heaven unless they speak and mean aequivocally for he was not yet ascended either in human Soul or Body as far as Scripture doth or reason can inform us Paradise therefore must be some other place namely this Hades or Hell as we Translate it in which for a short time his Soul was held to which he properly went or may be said to have descended and in which the same day together with his Soul was also the Soul of the Thief where together with the rest of the Souls of the Godly that are departed our Saviours only being delivered or loosened from its bonds the Third day this Soul of the Thiefs doth rest till the last day of the Resurrection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in horto Eden qui locus est receptaculum animarum post hanc vitam Drusius ad locum Lucae c. 23. v. 43. He speaks the same lib. praeterit 3o. Paradisum à caelo distingui quod ille sit receptaculum animarum post vitam caelum autem recipiat omnes post judicium extremum They urge another argument from St Ambrose Christum introitu suo aperuisse credentibus regnum caelorum That Christ by his entrance had opened the Kingdom of heaven to all believers Before which time the Fathers were not made partakers of the Promise but that from the death and ascension of Christ they also ascended with him into heaven and were there consummate and made perfect as to their Souls which then were received into heaven which before the Ascension of Christ were not ascended In answer whereunto I do truly acknowledge but not in their sense that Christ by his Entrance or Ascension into heaven did open the Kingdom heaven to all believers which before was shut to all the world save only to the Jews but since the time of his Passion and Ascension open to any one that strives to enter so as it s now lawful for all persons of all Nations to press into it who shall believe in his Name But to meet the argument I beseech you where were the Souls of the Fathers before they Ascended with Christ into heaven For where ever they were reason perswades it and Scripture doth not deny it in the same place was the Soul of Christ and where was the Soul of Christ there was also the Soul of the Thief They were not yet Ascended Neither surely were they in a place of torment for I cannot think it could be any comfort to the Thief as I suppose it was intended if Christ should have told him that he should be that day with him in a place of torment it must therefore be rationally concluded that they were in some third place of rest In which place if we affirm that the Souls of all the Godly departed remain till the last day what danger is there what incommodity If we believe I say and believe no more that there remains to all a Resurrection in the last day both Fathers and us in which day we with them shall be most perfectly consummate and that in the mean while all the Souls of the Godly are in the hands of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In a place due and proper to them as it is in the Epistle of Polycarpus to the Philippians And all this while not a moment of time if compared with Eternity Neither were the old Christians wont as Grotius saith to call this middle state of place and time between this life and the Resurrection by the name of heaven But I contain my self this question requiring a longer and larger disquisition then to be shut up in so narrow limits And yet a question which neither Scripture nor any general Council or Synod had ever yet explicitely determined for an Article of Faith before the Convocation at Dublin 1615. Which did then indeed so define it That after the end of this life the Souls of the Sons of God were immediately received into heaven c. Perhaps of purpose to meet with the Romish Purgatory Neither should I have said thus much but that many persons do so tenaciously maintain this last opinion for an Article of their Faith that they condemn all who hold otherwise of impiety and heresie And that these words seemed to me so plain that as it were they led me by the hand to the sense and meaning which I have here laid down though rarely in that respect observed of any I am very much pleased with the modesty of Calvin in this very argument when speaking of the Souls of the faithful and their place and state after this life he saith Valde se torquent multi c. Many do very much trouble themselves in disputing what place departed Souls possess and whether they enjoy a heavenly glory or not But t is a rash and foolish thing to enquire farther or deeper of or in things unknown then God hath permitted us to know And elsewhere upon that place of the Gospel aforementioned concerning the Thief and Paradise De loco Paradisi curiose argutè disputandum non est c. We must not dispute curiously or subtilly of the place of Paradise let it suffice us who are ingrafted into the body of Christ by faith that we shall be partakers of his life and so after death injoy a blessed and chearful rest till that in the coming of Christ the perfect glory of a heavenly life shall solidly appear unto us In which opinion I do willingly acquiesce conceiving that which I hold to be safe Probable with Peter Martyr agreeable to reason and not disagreeable to Scripture V. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place is to be taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as they say materialiter and denotes the matter of the oath which God sware unto David that is ex fructu lumbi ipsius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 resurgere facturum Christum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in carne ut sederet super solium ejus That out of the fruit of his loyns he would raise up Christ in the flesh to sit upon his Throne And this is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very thing the Apostle seeks to prove to wit that Christ rose in the flesh which out of the Context is most evident and plain For he seeing this before spake of the Resurrection of Christ v. 31. and in the following verse it is positively affirmed That this Jesus hath God raised up whereof we are witnesses So that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 raise up must not be understood de adventu Christi of the coming of Christ into the world as some would
act unless the inward thing be applied by Faith to wit the remission or doing away of sin Affirmatively and positively that it is the stipulation or promise of a good conscience toward God by the virtue of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ And I conceive this sense concerning Baptism to be most consonant and agreeable to the Judgment of the Fathers who if they notwithstanding did apply Baptism to that other notion of washing they did it accidently and by the by because of the Allegorical allusion of the element of water to the bloud of Christ which is said to cleanse us from our sins 1 Joh. c. 1. v. 7. But more surely there is in this word of Baptism according to Athanasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a deeper mystery then that of washing a mystery known and common to the very Heathen as their frequent lustrations do sufficiently witness But as concerning the Resurrection of the body it was a thing to them unknown and incredible if not altogether imperceptible nay some of the Jews themselves did not believe it It was the speech of one of their great Philosophers Seneca by name Hora illa decretoria non est animo suprema sed corpori The determinate hour of death is not the last to the soul but to the body It was no small matter to reach the immortality of the Soul the top of their knowledge but of the Resurrection of the body Philosophers scarce ever dreamed of Mornaeus tells us of Zoroastres who is of some reported to have held this opinion Quod animae immortales sunt quod corporum Resurrectio universalis futura That Souls are immortal and that there shall be a universal Resurrection of bodies But this but à plerisque profertur many say so but no certainty thereof And Lactantius tells us of Chrysippus who had an imperfect notion of it the summ whereof was this That after death within some period of time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we should be restored into the same form wherein we now are But who knows whether he meant the same Numerical body or whether by this same form he mean not the Soul as the rest of the Philosophers did or whether he meant not rather the Pythagorean Metempsychosis But this I say was a greater mystery then that Allegorical washing of the Soul by which it s said to be cleansed by the bloud of Christ The notion of Resurrection was far higher the very life and mystery of Christian Religion as Zonaras calls it It is indeed the stupendious mystery of mysteries wherein to believe consists the foundation of eternal happiness That Christ the Mediatour should become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God and man to be declared man in that he died and to be declared God in that he rose again from the dead Rom. c. 1. v. 4. This I say again was a mystery beyond all Philosophical Speculation and therefore there was need of some significant type or figure which might make so impenetrable a notion familiar and perceptable to the sense of man to which purpose nothing seemed more fit and easie in the wisdom of God then the burying of our bodies in water by Baptism from whence they receive an immediate Resurrection So that in conclusion we may positively affirm that Baptism is properly and solely a type of the Resurrection And to this truth do give their suffrage The Apostles Fathers Schoolmen allmost all Interpreters Ancient and Modern and even our English Church it self its Judgment being manifest in the Rubrick of the Common Prayer which injoyns the dipping of Infants in Baptism allowing only in some cases the liberty of sprinkling or perfusion The thing of it self is so manifest that there is no need of Testimonies to confirm it but because there be not few who teach otherwise led thereunto by example and vulgar errour it will not be amiss if but to free my self from the imputation of too much confidence out of innumerable Testimonies to cite some few And we first begin from the Apostle Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Know ye not that so many as were Baptised into Jesus Christ were Baptised into his death Therefore we are buried with him by Baptism into death that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the Father of Glory even so we also should walk in newness of life c. Rom. c. 6. v. 3 4. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Being buried with him in Baptism wherein you are also risen with him through Faith of the working of God who hath raised him from the dead Col. c. 2. v. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Else what shall they do who are Baptised for dead bodies if the dead rise not 1 Cor. c. 15. v. 29. As much as if he had said In vain doth the Church use the sign of Baptism if there be no Resurrection You have it abundantly proved also in the Primitive and later Writers For example That believing on his death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By his Baptism ye may be made partakers of his Resurrection Ignat. Ep. ad Trall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptism was given to set forth the death of the Lord Ep. ad Philadel in the name of Ignatius The death of Christ Const Apost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Baptism we perform the signs of his Passion and Resurrection Just Mar. We know one saving Baptism since there is but one death for the world and one Resurrection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof Baptism is the type c. Basil Mag. Hear what St Paul saith They were all Baptised in the cloud and in the sea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He calleth their passage through the sea Baptism for it was an escape from death c. Basil Seleuc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When we go about to Baptize we bid to say I believe in the Resurrection of the dead and in this Faith are we Baptized Chrysost Baptismus Resurrectionis pignus imago Baptism is a pledge and figure of the Resurrection Ambr. Baptismus arrhabo Resurrectionis Baptism is an earnest of the Resurrection Lactant. Aquarum elemento sepelimur We are buried in the element of water Anselm Mersio mortis sepulturae formam gerit Immersion bears the form of death and burial Bernard Laudabilius tutius communius c. Baptism is performed more laudably more safely and more commonly by dipping for by dipping the figure of Christ his burial is represented Tho. Aquin. Ipsum Baptizandi verbum mergere significat c. The word Baptism doth signifie dipping under the water and it is evident the Ancient Church used the Ceremony of dipping Calv. Baptismus Graeca vox est c. Baptism is a Greek word and signifies properly immersion into the water and this signification doth properly agree with our Baptism and hath Analogy to the thing signified for by Baptism we are buried together and as it were drowned with Christ being dead to sin