properly the fundamental act and radical qualification of the faith of Adam But after he had fallen from his first integrity and that the Lord out of meer pity to his frail perishing creature was pleased to promise him some measure of reparation in the womans seed then did the bruising of the Serpents head by the seed of the woman become a partial object of the faith of Adam and of all those who afterwards descended of him in the line of Grace And yet this was but in a general apprehension of the mercies of God and of his constancy and veracity in fulfilling his word no distinct Revelation being made till the time of Abraham so much as from what branch of the root of Adam this promised blessing was to come A pregnant argument whereof I think is offered to us in the errour of our Grandam Eve who on the birth of Cain her first-born but most wicked son conceived that he should be the man in whom the promise made by God was to be fulfilled and therefore said I have gotten a man from the Lord as our English reads it but rather possedi virum ipsum IEHOVAH I have gotten a man even the Lord IEHOVAH as Paulus Phagius a very learned Hebritian doth correct that reading And as for Abraham himself though it pleased God to tell him more particularly then before was intimated that in his seed should all the families of the Earth be blessed yet so unsatisfied was he as concerning Sarah or that this general blessing was to come of a son by her that when GOD promised such a son from that barren womb by whom she was to be a Mother of Kings and Nations instead of giving thanks to God he returned this answer O that Ishmael might live before thee And though upon the duplicate of this gracious promise that in Isaac should his seed be called he was sufficiently instructed and believed accordingly that the great mercy which God promised to our Father Adam was to descend in time from the loyns of Isaac yet that he should be born of an imaculate Virgin that he should suffer such and so many indignities and at the last a bitter and most shameful death by the hands of those who seemed to boast so much in nothing as that they were the children of this faithful Abraham as it was never that we read of revealed unto him so have we no reason to believe that it was any part or object of his faith at all The like may be affirmed in general of the house of Israel till God was pleased to speak more plainly and significantly to them by the mouth of his Prophets then he had done unto their Fathers in dreams and visions For having nothing further revealed unto them touching Christ to come then what was intimated first in generals to our Father Adam and more particularly specified to their Father Abraham the primary and principal Object of their faith was God alone conceive me still of God the Father Almighty in whom they looked for the performance of those gracious promises which he had made unto their Fathers though of the time when the manner how and other the material points which the Creed contains they were utterly ignorant and consequently could not ground any faith upon them In after times as GOD imparted clearer light to the house of Iacob for the neerer we are to the Sun-rising the more day appeareth so were they bound to give belief to such Revelations or supernatural truths revealed call them which you will which he vouchsafed to make unto them by his holy Prophets Which howsoever they contained in them a sufficient light to guide them to the knowledge of many particular points and circumstances which were to be accomplished in the time and place of Christs Nativity his course of life and sufferings and most shameful death which every one could see when they came to pass that whatsoever had been done by or concerning him did come to pass according as had been sore-signified in the holy Scriptures yet this great light of prophesie which did shine amongst them was but like a Candle in a dark Lanthorn or hid under a bushel and rather served to convince them of incredulity when he was ascended then to prepare them to receive him when he came unto them He came unto his own and his own received him not saith St. Iohn expressely And for the Prophets themselves 't is true that they have in them many positive and plain predictions of the Incarnation Nativity and Circumcision of Christ of his Passion Resurrection and Ascension as also of the most remarkable passages and occurrences in the whole course of his life And yet a question hath been made amongst learned men whether they did always distinctly foresee or explicitely believe whatsoever they did fore-tell or fore-signifie concerning Christ. Nor can I finde but that this question is resolved to this effect that though they had a right apprehension of the truths by them delivered and a foresight of all those future events of which they prophesied according to the accomplishment and sense thereof by themselves intended yet that this foresight of theirs extended not to all branches of divine truth contained in their writings or to that use and application which was after made of them by CHRIST himself and his Evangelists and Apostles with this mark of reference that such and such things came to pass that the sayings of the Prophets might be fulfilled For many things are extant in the Prophetical writings either by way of Typical prefigurations or positive and plain predictions applyable to the life and actions of our Lord and Saviour and the success and fortunes of his holy Church which in all probability was never so intended by those sacred Pen-men For who can reasonably conceive that Moses in the story of the commanded offering up of Isaac the only son of his Father intended to typifie or fore-shadow the real offering up of CHRIST the only begotten Son of God neer the self same place or that this Ceremony in the ordering of the Paschal Lamb ye shall not break a bone thereof did look so far in the first institution of it as to the not breaking of our Saviours legs in the time of his passion or that the setting up of the Brazen Serpent was by him meant to signifie and foreshew the lifting up of the Son of God upon the Cross to the end that whosoever believed in him should not perish but have eternal life as himself applyes it in St. Iohn The like may be affirmed of David to whom the Lord had promised that of the fruit of his body there should one sit upon his Throne for evermore Psal. 132. that God would set his King upon his holy hill of Sion Psal. 2. with many other predictions to the same effect And yet it may be questioned upon very good reason whether he understood
to have a speciall place in this short compendium this abstract of the Christian faith of our whole religion and that it had not been enough to have expressed his being crucifyed dead and buryed unlesse his sufferings under Pontius Pilate had been mentioned also Of which three points viz. his crucifying death and burial being the consummation of his sufferings and the last acts of his humiliation for the accomplishing of mans Redemption we are next to speak ARTICVLI 5. Pars 2da 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Crucifixus mortuus sepultus i. e. Was crucified dead and buryed CHAP. VII Of the Crucifying death and burial of the Lord JESUS CHRIST with Disquisition of all particulars incident thereunto HItherto have we spoken of those afflictions which our Redeemer suffered under Pontius Pilate in his soul and body precedent to his Crucifixion We are now come to speak of those which he suffered on the Cross it self together with his death and burial being the last acts of his Humiliation for being dead and buryed once he could fall no lower But being his death upon the Cross was that only all-sufficient Sacrifice made for the satisfaction of Gods justice and the redemption of all mankinde from the powers of darkness typified in so many acts and figures of the Old Testament whereof some relate unto his death and others to the manner of it I shall first speak a word or two of those rites and sacrifices and other figures which might or did relate in Gods secret purpose to the coming of the promised Seed and all the benefits redounding to the world by his death and passion First for those types which might fore-signifie and represent the Messiahs death they did consist especially in those legal sacrifices which God himself had instituted in the Iewish Church for the expiation of the sins of that people and their reconciliation to their God yet so that even before the law there wanted not a type and figure of it every way as proportionable to the substance signified as any of the Legal and commanded sacrifices No sooner had God raised up seed to Adam thereby to give him hopes of the accomplishment of his deliverance and redemption by the seed of the woman but he was taught to represent the same in a solemn sacrifice assoon at least as his sons were come to age to assist him in it And in process of time it came to pass that Cain brought of the fruits of the ground an offering to the Lord and Abel brought of the firstlings of his flocks and the fat thereof An offering from the hands of Cain to shew that even the wicked owe an homage to the Lord God Almighty from whose hands they receive all their temporal blessings and therefore were to pay back something in the way of a quit-rent or acknowledgment Donis suis honorandus est ipse qui dedit as Rupertus hath it A Sacrifice from the hands of Abel of righteous Abel as our Saviour did vouchsafe to call him who not long after was made a Sacrifice himself by his wicked brother As if the Lord intended in this double sacrifice to represent the death and passion of his Son Christ Iesus in that of Abel by his brother the bloudy and most barbarous fact of the wretched Iews upon their countryman their brother of the house of Iacob in that of Abels lamb the sacrifice of the Lamb of God slain from the beginning of the world as the Apostle in the Revelation Now for the Legal sacrifices prescribed the Iews and those which had been offered by Gods faithful servants before the giving of the Law they do so far agree in one as to be comprised in the same general definition For generally a sacrifice may be defined to be the offering of a creature to Almighty God by the hands of a lawful Minister to be spent or consumed in his service Which definition I desire the Reader to take notice of because we shall relate unto it when we come to speak of the Christian sacrifice or the Commemoration of this sacrifice in the Church of Christ. Bellarmine in more words saith no more then this His words be these Sacrificium est externa oblatio soli deo facta qua per Legitimum ministrum creatura aliqua sensibilis permaneâ—s ad agnitionem Divinae Majestatis infirmitatis humanae ritu mystico consecratur transmutatur Only the last word transmutatur was put in of purpose to countenance the change or transubstantiation of the outward Elements into the natural body and bloud of Câ—rist which notwithstanding he is fain after to expound by the word destruitur i. e. consumed or destroyed to make his Mass as true as proper and as real a Sacrifice of Christ our Saviour on the Altar as that which he himself once offered on the accursed Cross. But all the Sacrifices of Gods people before the Law were principally if not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as were offered unto God by way of thankefulness and due acknowledgement for all his benefits conferred on their souls and bodies Of which kinde also were the peace-offerings Levit. 3. v. 1. the sacrifice of thanksgiving Levit. 7.12 and the free-wil offering vers 16. in use amongst the Iews when the Law was given in celebrating which they were left at liberty to offer either male or female as they would themselves God giving his increase of their flocks and herds by both the sexes male and female and pouring on both sexes man and woman both temporal and spiritual blessings Under the law the case was otherwise For then besides the Eucharistical sacrifices before remembred which for the substance and intent were before in use amongst their Ancestors the holy Patriarchs though not accompanied with so many ceremonies they had sacrifices of another kindâ— which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say expiatory or propitiatory for the taking away of their sins In which as they did signifie by the death of the beast the wages due to their iniquities for the wages of sin is death saith the great Apostle so by the shedding of his bloud did God please to intimate that they should have the pardon and forgiveness of their sins and acceptation of their service by the bloud of Christ. These then and only these were Typi venturae victimae the types and shadows of that great and perfect Sacrifice which Christ our Saviour was to offer for the sins of mankinde and were called expiatorie and propitiatorie non proprie sed relative not properly and in themselves as if there were in them any power or vertue either to expiate our offences or be a Propitiation for our sins for the bloud of Buls and Goats cannot take away sins saith the same Apostle but relatively in relation to the Ordinance of Almighty God by whom they had been instituted to that end and purpose as Baptism after was in the Church
oblationem Deo facere et in omnibus gratos inveniri fabricatori Deo c. It becometh us saith he to make oblations unto God and to be thankefull in all things to our heavenly maker offering to him the first fruits of his own creatures with a right belief and faith without hypocrisie in hope assured and fervencie of brotherly affection which pure oblation the Church alone doth offer to the maker of all things out of his own creatures with praise and thanks-giving And last of all it is called the Sacrament sometimes the Sacrament of the Lords Supper sometimes the Sacrament of the Altar by reaso that the bread and wine thus dedicated to the service of Almighty God and righly consecrated by his Ministers are made unto the faithful receiver the very body and bloud of Christ our Saviour and do exhibit to us all the benefits of his death and passion Of which it is thus said by the old Father Irenaeus that the bread made of the fruits of the earth and sanctifyed according to Christs ordinance jam non communis panis est sed Eucharistia ex duabus rebus constans terrena Coelesti c. is now no longer common bread but the blessed Eucharist consisting of two parts the one earthly and the other heavenly that is to say the outward elemental signe and the inward and spiritual grace In which respect it was affirmed of this bread by Cyprian if at the least the work be his which is somewhat doubted non effigie sed natura mutatum that though it kept the same shape which it had before yet was the nature of it changed not that it ceased to be what before it was as the Patrons of the Romish Masse do pervert his meaning but by being what before it was not just as an iron made red hot retaineth the proportion and dimensions which before it had and is still iron as at the first though somewhat of the nature of fire which is to warme and burn be now added to it And this was antiently the doctrine of the Church of Christ touching the sacrifice of the Lords supper or the blessed Eucharist before that monstrous Paradox of Transubstantiation was hammered in the brains of capricious Schoolmen or any such thing as a Propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and dead affabulated to the same by the Popes of Rome Now such a sacrifice as this with all the several kinds and adjuncts of it we finde asserted and maintained by the Church of England though it condemn the sacrifices of the Masses in which it was commonly said that the Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead to have remission of pain or guilt as dangerous deceits and blasphemous fables and censureth Transubstantiation as repugnant to the plain words of Scripture destructive of the true nature of a Sacrament and to have given occasion to much superstition For if a true and proper sacrifice be defined to be the offering of a creature to Almighty God to be consecrated by a lawfull Minister to be spent and consumed to his service as Bellarmine and the most learned men of both sides do affirme it is then is the offering of the bread and wine in the Church of England a true proper sacrifice for it is usually provided by the Church-wardens at the charge of the people and being by them presented in the name of the people and placed on the Altar or holy table before the Lord is now no longer theirs but his and grant that we receiving these thy creatures of bread and wine and being consecrated by the Priest is consumed and eaten by such as come prepared to partake thereof The whole prayer used at the consecration doth it not plainly manifest that it is commemorative and celebrated in memorial of that full perfect and sufficient sacrifice oblation and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world which our Saviour made upon the Crosse for our Redemption And when the Priest or Minister doth call upon us in the Exhortation above all things to give most humble and hearty thanks to God the Father the Son and the holy Ghost for the redemption of the world by the death and passion of our Saviour Christ and that we do accordingly entirely desire his fatherly goodness mercifully to accept that our sacrifice of praise and thanks-giving and therewith offer and present unto him our selves souls and bodies to be a reasonable holy and lively sacrifice unto him do we not thereby signifie as plainly as may be that it is an Eucharistical and spiritual sacrifice Finally that it is a Sacrament I think none denies and that thereby we are partakers of the body and bloud of CHRIST I think all will grant the people giving thanks to Almighty God for that he hath vouchsafed to feed them with the spiritual food of the most precious body and bloud of his Son our Saviour Jesus Christ and calling upon him to grant that by the merits and death of his Son Christ Jesus and through faith in his bloud both they and all his whole Church may obtain remission of their sins and all other benefits of his passion Nor doth the Church of England differ from the Antients as concerning the change made in the bread and wine on the consecration which being blessed and received according to Christs holy institution become the very body and bloud of Christ by that name are delivered with the usual prayer into the hands of the people and are verily and indeed saith the publick authorized Catechisme taken and received of the faithfull in the Lords Supper The bread and wine though still the same in substance which before they were are changed in nature being made what before they were not according to the uncorrupted doctrine of the purest times and the opinion of the soundest and most learned Protestants I add no more but that if question should be asked with which of all the legal sacrifices this of the Church of Christ doth hold best proportion I answer that it it best agreeth with those Eucharisticall sacrifices of the Law which were called peace-offerings made unto God upon their reconciliation and atonement with him In which as the creature offered a sacrifice to the Lord their God might be indifferently either male or female to shew that both sexes might participate of it so being offered to the Lord the one part of it did belong to the Priest towards his maintenance and support as the skin the belly the right shoulder and the brest c. the rest was eaten in the way of a solemn feast by those who brought it for an offering before the Lord. And in the feast as Mollerus very probably conjectureth the man that brought this offering did use to take a cup of wine and give thanks over it to the Lord for all his benefits which was the Calix salutis whereof the Psalmist speaketh saying I will take the
of Canaan on the Priests and Levites being his in his own right Originally by the law of Nature and by him challenged and appropriated as his own domaine All the Tithe of the land whether of the seed of the land or of the fruit of the tree is the Lords Here 's the Lords claim and title to them as his own propriety Behold I have given the children of Levi all the Tenth or Tithes in Israel for an inheritance for the service which they serve even the service of the Tabernacle of the Congregation There 's the collation of his right on the Tribe of Levi whom he made choyce of to attend in his holy Tabernacle and to do service at his Altar And they continued the inheritance of the Tribe of Levi until the Priesthood was translated unto Christ our Saviour who being made by God the true owner of Tithes a Priest for ever after the Order of Melchisedech became invested ipso facto with that right of Tithing which God had formerly conferred on the Priests and Levites and consequently with a power of disposing of them to them that minister in his Name to the Congregation The second argument which the Apostle doth afford us in this case of Tithes is the Prerogative which Melchisedech haâ— iâ— that particular above Aaron and the sons of Levi. Levi also saith he which received Tithes paid Tithes in Abraham for he was yet in the loyns of his Father when Melchisedech met him Heb. 7.9 10. Then which there cannot be a stronger and more pregnant argument to prove that Tithes are no Mosaical institution or the peculiar maintenance of the Levites but that they are derived from an higher Author and are to be continued to the Ministers of a better Testament For the Apostle taking on him to prove this point that the Priesthood after the Ordâ—â— of Melchisedech was better and more perfect then that which was according to the Order of Aaron useth this argument to evince it and it is a weighty one indeed that Levi himself though he received Tithes of his brethren by the Lords appointment yet he and all his Tribe paid their Tithes to Melchisedech being all vertually and potentially in the loyns of Abraham at such time as Melchisedech met him and consequently being as effectually tithed in Abraham as all mankinde have sinned in Adam from whose loyns they sprung Nay we may work this argument to an higher pitch and make the full scope of it to amount to this That if the Tribe of Levi had been in full possession of the Tithes of their Brethren when Melchisedech met with Abraham and blessed him as became the High Priest of God to do or if Melchisedech had lived in Canaan till their setling in it they must and ought to have done as their Father did and paid their Tithes unto Melchisedâ—eh as the Type of Christ in reference to his everlasting and eternal Priesthood But seeing that this common place hath been so much beaten on I shall only alter some few words of that Noble Gentleman and great Antiquarie Sir Henry Spelman to make his argument more suitable to my present purpose and so close this point Insomuch saith he as Abraham did not pay his Tithes to a Priest that offered a Levitical Sacrifice of Bullocks and Goats but unto him that presented him with Bread and Wine which are the Elements of the Sacrament ordained by Christ this may serve well to intimate thus much unto us that we are to pay our Tithes unto that High Priest an High Priest of Melchisedechs Order who did ordain the Sacrament of Bread and Wine and unto them in his behalf who by his Ordinance and appointment in the Word Hoc facite administer the same unto us And so much for the Sacerdotal Office of our Lord and Saviour which he doth execute for our good at the right hand of God we now proceed unto the Regal which though it is most eminent in his coming to Iudgement and so more properly to be handled in the following Article yet for so much thereof as is exercised at the right hand of God we shall reduce it under this in the following chapter CHAP. XIV Of the Regal or Kingly Office of our Lord as far as it is executed before his coming unto Iudgement Of his Vice-gerents on the Earth and of the several Vice-roys put upon him by the Papists and the Presbyterians WE have not yet done with this branch of the Article that of our Saviours sitting at the right hand of God For of the three Offices allotted to him that of the Priest the Prince and the Prophet all which are comprehended in the name of CHRIST that of the Priest is wholly executed as he sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty And so is so much also of the King or the Regal Office as doth concern the preservation of his Church from the hands of her enemies the Regulating of the same by his holy laws and indeed every act and branch thereof except 〈◊〉 of Iudicature which is most visibly discharged in the day of judgement Of all the rest we shall now speak and for our better method and proceeding in it must recall to minde that we told you in our former Chapter how both the Kingdome and the Priesthood of our Saviour Christ did take beginning at the time of his Resurrection He was before a King Elect designed by God to this great Office from before all worlds but not invested with the Crown nor put into the possession of the Throne 〈◊〉 David till he had conquered Death and swallowed up the grave in victory That he was King Elect and in designation is evident by that of the Royal Psalmist where he brings in God Almighty speaking of his only Son and saying I have set my King upon my holy hill of Sion as evident by that of the Prophet Daniel where he telleth us that in those days those days which the Apostle calleth the fulness of time the God of Heaven shall set up a Kingdome which shall never be destroyed which can be meant of none but the Kingdome of Christ. And that we may not have the testimony only of Kings and Prophets which were mortall men but also of the blessed Angels those immortal Spirits we have the Angel Gabriel saying of him to his Virgin-Mother that the Lord would give unto him the Throne of his Father David and of his Kingdome there should be no end But yet he was but King Elect and in designation born to the Crown of the Celestial land of Canaan as the Heir apparent and by that name enquired for by the Wise men saying Vbi est ille qui natus est Rex Iudaeorum i. e. where is he that is born King of the Iews as our Englâ—sh reads it And so do all translations else which I have seen except Bezas and the French which doth follow him And he indeed doth
hath it that if he would he might continue in Gods grace and favour and attain all the blessedness which he could desire or otherwise might fall from both and so deprive himself of that sweet contentment which is not any where to be found but in God alone A greater liberty then this he had not given unto the Angels a more glorious creature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Iustin Martyr And he as some of them before abused this liberty so given to his own destruction For being placed by God in the garden of Eden in Paradiso voluptatis as the vulgar reades it he had free power to eat of every tree but one in that glorious place and that tree only interdicted that God might have some tryall of his free obedience the interdiction being seconded with this commination that whensoever he did eat of it he should surely die What lesse could God have laid upon him unlesse he had discharged him of all obedience to his will and pleasure and left him independent of his supreme Power Father said the wise servant unto Naaman if the Prophet had commanded thee a great thing wouldst thou not have done it how much more then when all he saith unto thee is no more then this that thou shouldest wash and be clean Had God commanded Adam some impossible matter he might have been excused from the undertaking because it was a matter of impossibility Or had God bound him to the fruit of one tree alone and debarred him from the tast of all the rest he might have had some more excusable pretence for his flying out and giving satisfaction to a straitned appetite But the commandement being small makes his fault the greater the easiness of the one much aggravating the offence of the other For so it was that either out of unbelief as if God did not mean to sue him for so small a trespasse or that he had a proud ambition to be like to God or yeelded to the lusts of intemperate appetite or that he was not willing to offend his wife by whom he was invited to that deadly banquet he took the forbidden fruit into his mouth and greedily devoured his own destruction and so destroyed himself and his race for ever Not himselfe only but his race even his whole posterity For being the root and stock of mankinde in general which is descended from the loynes of this wretched man what he received of God in his first creation he received both for himself and them who descended from him and what he lost he lost like an unthrifty Father for the childe unborn And as the Scriptures say of Levi that he payed tithes in Abraham to Melchisedech because he was in the loynes of his father Abraham when Melchisedech met him so may we say of the posterity of this prodigal father that they were all undone by his great unthriftiness because they were all of them in his loynes when he lost Gods favour when he drew sin upon them all and consequently death the just wages of it And so saith Gregory Nazianzen surnamed the Divine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. We were so made saith he that we might be happy and such we were being made when first placed in Paradise in which we might have had the fruition of all kinds of happiness but forfeited the same by our own transgression If any aske St. Augustine makes the question and the answer too what death God threatned unto man on his disobedience whether the death of the body or of the soul or of the wholeman which is called the second death we must answer All For if saith he we understand that death only by which the soul is forsaken of God surely in that all other kinde of deaths were meant which without question were to follow For in that a disobedient motion rose in the flesh for which they covered their privy parts one death was perceived in which God did forsake the soul. And when the soul forsook the body now corrupted with time and wasted by the decaies of age another death was found by experience to ensue upon it that by these two deaths that first death of the whole man might be accomplished which the second death at last doth follow except Man be delivered by the grace of God And by the grace of God was poor man delivered from this body of death For as there is no deep valley but near so me high hill so near this vale of misery this valley of the shadow of death as the Psalmist calleth it was an hill of mercy a remedy proposed in the promised seed to Adam and the sons of Adam if with unfained faith they lay hold upon it God looketh upon them all at once in that wofull plight and when he saw them in their bloud had compassion on them and out of his meer love and mercy without other motives offered them all deliverance in a Mediator in the man CHRIST IESVS and that too on conditions far more easie then that of workes the condition and reward being this in brief that whosoever did believe in him should not perish but have life everlasting And this I take to be the method of Election unto life eternal through CHRIST IESVS our Lord. For although there be neither Prius or Posterius in the will of God who sees all things at once together and willeth at the first sight without more delay yet to apply his acts unto our capacities as were the acts of God in their right production so were they primitively in his intention But Creation without peradventure did foregoe the fall and the disease or death which ensued upon it was of necessity to be before there could a course be taken to prescribe the cure and the prescribing of the cure must first be finished before it could be fitted to particular persons And for the Fall which was the medium as it were between life and death the great occasion of mans misery and Gods infinite mercy God neither did decree it as a meanes or method of which he might make use to set forth his power in the immortal misery of a mortal creature nor did he so much as permit it in the strict sense of the word in which it differeth little from a plain command Quam longe quaeso est a jubente permittens How little differeth permitting from commanding saith devout Salvian considering he that which doth permit having power to hinder is guilty of the evill which doth follow on it God did not then permit the fall of unwary man as Moses did permit the Israelites a bill of divorce which manner of permission carryeth an allowance with it or a toleration at the least but so permit it only as the father in our Saviours parable permitted his younger Son to see strange Countries and having furnished him with a stock on which to traffick suffered him to depart and make up his fortunes whether good
said that in Isaac shall thy seed be called Abraham was ready to obey him upon this belief that God was able to raise him again from death to life and that Gods Word concerning him would not fall to ground What saith St. Iames to this great trial of the Patriarchs faith Abraham saith he believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousness In all those Texts where the Apostles speak of his Iustification or where the principal acts of his Faith are recited severally there is no intimation of his Faith in Christ nothing that seems to look that way more then that Gods first promise which was made in general to the Womans seed may seem to be restrained unto his particularly Whether these several imputations of the faith of Abraham do necessarily infer such an access of Iustification as is defended and maintained in the Schools of Rome I will not meddle for the present But in my minde Origen never spake more pertinently then where he gives this resolution of that doubt though not then proposed Quum multae fides Abrahae praecesserint in hoc nunc universa fides ejus collecta esse videtur ita in justitiam ei reputatur Whereas saith he many faiths of Abraham that is to say may acts of Abrahams faith had gone before now all his faith was recollected and summed up together and so accounted unto him for righteousness And if no other faith but a faith in God without any explicite relation to the death of CHRIST concurred unto the justification of the faithful Abraham the like may be concluded of the house of Israel that they were only bound to believe in God the Father Almighty till by Christs coming in the flesh and suffering death upon the Cross for the sins of man all that concerns his death and passions with all the other specialties in the present Creed made up together with our faith in God the Father the full and entire object of a Christian faith For this is life eternal saith our Lord and Saviour to know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent Not God alone but God and Iesus Christ together are since the Preaching of the Gospel made the object of faith So that it is not now sufficient to believe in God unless we also do believe in the Son of God whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins as St. Paul hath told us But here perhaps it will be said that though we do not read expressely in the holy Scriptures that the Patriarchs before Moses and the Fathers afterwards did believe in Christ yet that the same may be inferred by good and undeniable consequence out of the frequent Sacrifices before the Law and the Mosaical offerings which continued after it all which together with the rest of the Levitical Ordinances were but shadows of the things to come the body being only CHRIST That God instructed our first father Adam in the duty of Sacrifice I shall easily grant there being such early mention of them in the Book of God in the several and respective offerings of Cain and Abel And I shall grant as easily that GOD proposed some other end of them in that institution then to receive them as a Quit-rent from the hands of men in testimony that they held their estates from him as the Supreme Land-lord though by Rupertus this be made the chief end thereof Dignum sane est ut donis suis honoretur ipse qui dedit as that Author hath it which possibly may hold well enough in those kinde of Sacrifices which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gratulatory Eucharistical that is the Sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving for those signal benefits which GOD had graciously vouchsafed to bestow upon them But then there was another sort which they tearmed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expiatory or propitiatory ordained by God himself as the Types and figures of that one only real and propitiatory sacrifice which was to be performed in the death of CHRIST who through the eternal Spirit was to offer up himself once without spot to God for the redemption of the world yet were they not bare Types and figures and had no efficacy in themselves as to the taking away of the filth of sin for the Apostle doth acknowledge that the bloud of Buls and of Goats and the ashes of an Heifer sprinkling the unclean did sanctifie as to the purifying of the flesh Heb. 9.13 but that such efficacy as they had was not natural to them but either in reference to the Sacrifice to be made of CHRIST or else extrinsecal and affixed by the divine Ordinance and institution of Almighty God And that they might be so in this last respect there want not very pregnant reasons in the Word of God For whereas God considered as the Supreme Law-giver had imposed a commandement on man under pain of death although it stood not with his wisdome to reverse the Law which with such infinite wisdome had been first ordained yet it seemed very sutable to his grace and goodness to commute the punishment and satisfie himself with the death of Beasts offered in sacrifice unto him by that sinful Creature Which kinde of Commutations are not rare in Scripture It pleased God to impose a command on Abraham to offer up his only son Isaac for a burnt offering to him upon one of the mountains and after to dispense with so great a rigour and in the stead of Isaac to send a Ram It pleased God to challenge to himself the first born of every creature both of man and beast but so that he was pleased in the way of exchange in stead of the first born of the sons of men to take a Lamb a pair of Turtle Doves or two young Pigeons Now that these commutations were allowed of also in the case of punishment is evident by many Texts of holy Writ And this not only in sins of ignorance the Expiation of the which is mentioned Levit. 5.17 18. but in those which were committed knowingly and with an high hand of presumptuous wickedness Lying and swearing falsely deceiving our neighbour and taking away his goods by violence are sins of high and dangerous nature against both Tables and therefore in themselves deserved no less punishment then eternal damnation yet was God pleased to accept of the bloud of Rams in commutation or exchange for the soul of man If a soul sin and commit a trespass against the Lord and lye unto his neighbour in that which was delivered him to keep or in fellowship or in a thing taken away by violence or hath deceived his neighbour or hath found that which was lost and lyeth concerning it and sweareth falsely in all these he doth sin and that greatly too there 's no question of it And yet of these it is
But such was his unspeakable love to the sons of men that he disdained not to submit himself for their sakes to those low conditions as to be made man and to have a Mother a Mother which beyond example did bring forth her God and became the Parent of her Saviour Et mater sine exemplo genuit autorem suum as Lactantius hath it Born then our Saviour was of a mortall womb But the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used in the present Article tels us more then so and telleth us that he was not only born of the Virgin Mary but so born of her as to be made of her also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the word was made flesh Ioh. 1.14 God sent his Son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 made of a woman saith St. Paul Gal. 4.4 where the same word is used as here Made then he was as well as born of the Virgin Mary And made not convertendo not by converting the Word into flesh as Cerinthus nor converting flesh into the WORD as Velentinus was of opinion for the deity cannot be changed into any thing nor any thing into it Nor was it made conciliando as friends are made one or reconciled so as they continue two persons still and while the flesh suffered the WORD stood still and looked on only as Nestorius taught for that were not to be made flesh but made with the flesh not caro sed cum carne saith my reverend Author Nor finally was he made componendo by compounding two persons together and so a third thing produced of both as Eutyches for so he should be neither of both neither the word nor flesh neither God nor man But made he was as St. Paul tels us assumendo by taking the seed of Abraham Heb. 2.16 His generation before time as verbum Deus is as the enditing the word within the heart His generation in time as verbum caro is as the uttering it forth with the voice The inward motion of the minde taketh unto it a naturall body of Aire and so becometh vocal It is not changed into it the word remaineth still as it was yet they two became one voice Take a similitude from our selves Our soul is not turned into nor compounded with the body yet they two though distinct in natures grow into one man So Athanasius in his Creed For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man so God and man is one Christ. So into the Godhead was the manhood taken the natures preserved without confusion the person entire without division The fourth General Councell so determineth also Sic factum est caro ut maneret verbum non immutando quod erat sed suscipiendo quod not erat Nostra auxit sua non minuit nec Sacramentum pietatis detrimentum est Deitatis i. e. He was so made flesh that he ceased not to be the Word never changing what he was but taking that he was not We were the better he was never the worse The mysterie of Godlinesse was was no detriment to the Godhead nor the honour of the creature wrong to the Creator No wrong indeed it was no detriment to the divine nature of the Word to be made flesh and take upon him the infirmities of our humane nature but much to the advancement of our humane nature which he took upon him as many Kings and soveraign Princes have been made free of some particular Corporations under their commands without diminution or impeachment of their Royal Power and highly to the honour of those Companies or Corporations Mortalis factus est non infirmata verbi divinitate sed carnis suscepta infirmitate as divinely Angustine in his De Civit. dei l. 9. c. 15. And herein miserable man hath a great advantage of the Angels though made lower then they in his creation in that the WORD God for ever blessed vouchsafed to be made in such manner of our rank and order as he is not of theirs From the manner passe we to the time when this work was wrought which St. Paul cals plenitudinem temporis or the fulnesse of time that is to say when the time was come and fully accomplished which God in his eternall wisdome had fore-determined which he had also signifyed to the house of Israel by the mouth of his Prophets In reference to the civil Account it was at the time when Herod a stranger to the bloud-royal of David was King of Iewry and Augustus Caesar the sole Monarch of the Roman Empire The first having translated the Scepter from Judah and the Law-giver from between his feet made an apparent way for the coming of Shiloh to whom the gathering of the people was now to be The latter having the third time closed the Temple of Ianus and setled an universal peace over all the Empire made it the most agreeable time for the birth of him who being called the Prince of peace by the Prophet Isaiah proclaimed peace unto all the earth at the hour of his birth and left it to his Disciples as his last Legacie at the time of his death And it was also in the time of a general taxing as our English or rather of a general enrolment cum universus orbis describeretur saith the vulgar very answerably to the Greek Originals as the Rhemists read it A time when every subject of the Roman Empire was to repaire to the head City of his family there to list his name and to professe ut profiterentur saith the Vulgar or make acknowledgment of his fealty and true allegeance to the Prince in being A thing not done at random or by humane providence that by this means the Emperour might come to know quot civium sociorumque in Armis the strength and number of his Subjects as the Statists tell us but by the speciall dispensation and appointment of Almighty God Though Christ had been conceived in Nazareth a City of Galilee yet was he to be born in Bethlehem the City of David And thither was Ioseph to repair to be taxed or enrolled rather with Mary his wife that she being there delivered of her blessed burden the word of God fore-signifyed by the Prophet Micah might be fulfilled viz. that out of Bethlehem-Judah there should come a Governour which should rule over the house of Israel The shutting of the Temple of Ianus and this general taxing or enrolment under the President-ship of Cyrenius point us directly to the 35. year of Augustus his Empire in which CHRIST was born And if it were esteemed as it seems to be so great an honour unto Cicero that this Augustus was born when he was Consul Consulatui Ciceronis non mediocre adjecit decus natus eo anno D. Augustus saith the Court Historian how great an honour may we count it unto this Augustus that CHRIST the Son of God the very brightnesse of his Father was born when he was Emperour And as the year so is the
infirmities of the flesh into natural and personal calling those natural which follow the whole nature of man as hunger thirst labour wearinesse and even death it self those personal which arise out of some defect or imperfection in the constitution of the body or disorder of diet or from some other outward cause as Agues Leprosies and the like Then they infer that all the frailties and infirmities you may call them punishments if you will as indeed they are that are from without and are common to the whole nature of man were taken with our flesh by Christ who came to be a Saviour of all men without respect of persons but such as flow from sin dwelling within or proceed from particular causes and are proper only unto some those he took not on him Aud of these passions and infirmities attendant on Christs humane nature I have spoke the rather in this place because it doth so manifestly conduce to the better understanding of the following Article viz. his sufferings of all sorts under Pontius Pilate ARTICLE V. Of the Fift ARTICLE OF THE CREED Ascribed to St. PHILIP 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Passus est sub Pontio Pilato crusifixus mortuus sepultus i. e. Suffered under Ponce Pilate was crucified dead and buried CHAP. V. Of the sufferings of our Saviour under Pontius Pilate and first of those temptations which he suffered at the hands of the Devil FOr the finding out of the time of our Saviours Birth St. Luke hath given us these two notes and characters the Presidentship of Cyrenius over Syria and the taxing of all the world by Augustus Caesar in the time of his Cyrenius government And for the finding out the time of our Saviours sufferings he hath given us most undoubted notes also such as cannot fail us In the fifteenth yeer saith he of Tiberius Caesar Pontius Pilate being Governour of Judaea and Herod being Tetrarch of Galilee his brother Philip of Iturea and Lysanias of Abylene Annas and Caiaphas being High Priests the Word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the Wilderness which was the first year of our Saviours Ministery and consequently of those sufferings whereof there hath been any notice taken in the Book of God Now in this punctual list of names that of most consideration in this present business is Pontius Pilates being only mentioned in the Creed of whom we shall say somewhat in the way of preamble his name not being inserted here for nothing and then descend unto our Observations on the present Article But first we will remove a rub that hath stumbled many which is the making of Annas and Caiaphas to be both high Priests at the same time being a thing so plainly contrary both to the law and practise of the Iewish state Certum est duos simul Pontifices eodem simul tempore Sacerdotium nunquam occupasse And so much is confessed by Calvin though in the salving of the difficultie he mistakes the matter affirming contrary to the Evangelist non esse eundem ambobus titulum that they did not both enjoy the Title but that Caiaphas did suffer Annas who was his Father in law to participate in the honour with him and be half-sharer as it were in that eminent dignity As wide as this shoots the great Cardinal Baronius who will have Annas be the high Priest properly and Caiaphas to be called so only because he was one of the heads of those 24 Orders into which David had divided the sons of Aaron whereas his own Vulgar could inform him that those heads are always called Primarii Sacerdotes Principes Sacerdotum the chief Priests as our English reads it but Summi Sacerdotes or the high Priests never Nor doth Eusebius shoot much neerer and I wonder at it who doth salve it thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. i. e. that Christ began his Ministerie under Annas and ended it under Caiaphas about four years after whereas it is manifest by Iosephus whom Eusebius citeth that Annas was removed from the high Priesthood by Valerius Gratus being then Lord Lieutenant of the Province of Iewry who left that Government to Pontius Pilate in the twelfth year of Tiberius Caesar being three years at least before the beginning of our Saviours ministery Others conceive that Annas only was high Priest and that Caiaphas was his Sagan or the second high Priest i. e. his Coadjutor or Assistant which being he was his son in law may not seem unprobable such an Assistant in dispatch of the publick service as the Syncellus of late times was to the Patriarchs of Constantinople But that which seems most probable in my opinion his that Annas was high Priest de jure and Caiaphas de facto For howsoever Annas was put out by Valerius Gratus yet being once consecrated to that Office he was still high Priest de jure as in point of right and so esteemed of by the Iews to whom such innovations in their forms of Government were not very pleasing and that Caiaphas though high Priest de facto did yet ascribe so much to the right of Annas as to let him have a leading power in all great affairs Which appears evidently in this that Christ was carried first to the house of Annas and examined there and after sent by him to the house of Caiaphas to which the chief Priests Scribes and Pharisees were convened together And now to come to Pontius Pilate he was made Governor of Iudaea as before was said in the twelfth year of Tiberius Caesar upon the calling back of Valerius Gratus A man he was of an austere and rigid nature Vir pertinaci duroque ingenio as it is in Philo and for the first essay of his future Government had caused the images of Caesar to be secretly brought into Hierusalem with an intent no doubt to place them in the holy Temple This caused a great tumult in the City and the Countrey people joining with them they went altogether to him to Caesarea desiring Pilate to remove those Images and to preserve the antient laws and liberties of their Country Which when he stifly did refuse to give ear unto and that the Iews as stoutly were resolved not to be denyed they offered him with one consent their naked throats protesting openly with great alacrity and consent that they had rather be all cut in pieces then permit the Law of God to be so defiled At sight whereof he did let fall his resolution and in reward of such a brave and noble courage especially not knowing otherwise how to quiet the people he was contented to remove them which was done accordingly Another time saith the same Iosephus he had a minde to rob the Corban or the publick treasure of the Temple under pretence of making Conduits in the City Which when the people understood they rose up in a tumult and being called to appear before him sitting
how to comfort them with the joyfull news of his recovery Sorrow and grief and anguish and disconsolation our Saviour did begin to feel there 's no doubt of that though not in such a high degree as to make him fall into those extremities of passion as neither to know what he did nor for what he prayed He that could come to his Disciples in the middest of his anguish and reprove them for their sloth and sleepiness had neither lost the use of his speech nor senses And if his prayers were full of faith as no doubt they were for the Scriptures say that he was heard in that he prayed for which could not be without a perfect measure of faith assuredly however he was heavily oppressed under the burden of afflictions he knew full well both what he prayed for and to whom But this was only the beginning of his sorrowes as before was said It followeth in the text both in Matthew and Marke My soul is exceeding sorrowfull even unto the death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 my soul is compassed round with sorrowes such as doe seem to threaten me with no lesse then death and yet no way to scape them as in both Evangelists And certainly it stood with reason that it should be so For as an eminent Prelate of our own doth observe right well The whole work and weight of our Redemption was now before Christs eyes and apprehension in a more exact and lively manner he now appearing before the judgment seat of God then we in this body can discern For as all things needfull shall be present and patent to us when we are brought to Gods tribunall so Christ presenting himself before the judgement of God to the end that man might be redeemed by the ransome which he was to pay for him and Satan ejected from prevailing against his members by his mediation did fully and perfectly behold the detestation which God had conceived against our sins and the power of his wrath provoked by our defection and rebellion as also the dreadfull vengeance prepared and ordained for sin and our dull and carelesse contempt of our own misery together with the watchfulnesse and eagernesse of the common adversary the brunt and burden of all which he was to bear and to avert them from us by by that satis â—action which the justice of God should then require at his hands as a just price and full recompence for the sins of men The due consideration and intuition whereof being in Christ more clear then we can conceive might worthily make the manhood of Christ both to fear and tremble and in his prayers to God to stir and inflame all the powers and parts both of soul and body as far as mans nature and spirit were able with all submission and deprecation possible to powre forth themselves before his God Here was full cause undoubtedly to make him sorrowful and sorrowful unto the death How could it otherwise be conceived when the just and full reward of our iniquities was thus presented to his sight when he beheld the greatnesse and the justnesse of Gods wrath against it and therewithall considered within himself how dear the price must be and how sharpe the pain which should free us of it And on the other side considered how precious his own person was how infinite his obedience how pure his life and yet how that most precious life must be taken from him that by one death and that death only of the body he might deliver us from the death both of body and soul. So then his soul was â—ull of sorrow there was good cause for it but not oppressed with any pains much lesse tormented and inflanted with the pains of hell as some would fain gather from the text for neither tristitia in Latine nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek either amongst divine or humane writers signifie any such impression of pain and torment but an affection only which afflicts the minde rising upon the apprehension of some evill either past or instant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek amongst the choycest humanitians is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Cicero translates opinio recens mali praesentis a fresh opinion of present or impendent evill And Austin telleth us for the Latines that grief and anguish when it is in the soul is called tristitia that is sorrow but when 't is in the body then 't is molestia pain or trouble Thus is the word taken also in the holy Scripture where St. Paul saith I would not come again unto you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in sorrow or heaviness for fear he should have sorrow of them of whom he did expect to be received with joy and where it is affirmed of the rest of the servants when they perceived how cruelly their fellow-servant which was pardoned so great a sum dealt with one of his debters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were very sorry And certainly they might be very sorry on so sad an accident out of a fellow-feeling of their Brothers miserie we have no reason to conceive them to be full of pain Hitherto we have met with such griefs and sorrows in our Saviour as never man endured before but yet they prove not to be such as either did confound all the powers of his soul or astonish all the senses of his body or brought him into such amazement that he considered neither what he said or did Some have endevoured to infer this as before was noted out of the texts and words foregoing but with ill successe and therefore they are fallen at last on an other Scripture which they think makes for them How is my soul troubled saith our Saviour and what shall I say Father save me from this hour but for this cause came I unto this houre Here they observe a contrariety or contradiction in our Saviours words which could not possibly proceed but from a soul distracted and a minde confounded and what could work so strange and sensible a confusion in him but the pains of hell which were within him But whatsoever they observe the most eminent men for parts and learning in the times before them could see no such matter Erasmus in his Paraphrases gives this glosse upon them which Bullinger a learned Protestant writer doth extol most highly and calleth an excellent explication I finde my soul troubled for the day of my death approaching and what shall I say For the love of mine own life shall I neglect the life of the world By no means I will apply my self to the will of my Father Mans weaknesse troubled with the fear of death may say unto him Father if it be possible save me from this hour from this danger of death which is now so near me But love desirous of mans salvation shall presently add Nay rather if it be expedient let death which is desired come for as much as wittingly and willingly by the
this present life And Lyra also saith the same though of later date Dixit Christus se derelictum a Deo Patre quia dimittebat eum in manibus occidentium i. e. Christ saith he was forsaken of God his Father because he was left in the hands of them that slew him And so Theodoret for the Greeks CHRIST saith he calleth that a dereliction or forsaking of God which was a permission of the Godhead that the humanity might suffer With these agree some Doctors of the Protestant Churches of great name and credit as Bucer and Bullinger in their Comments on the 27. of S. Matthew and Munster in his observations on the 21. Psalm Other forsaking other dereliction more then the leaving of him in the hands of his enemies they acknowledg none sure I am no withdrawing from him of the divine presence and assistance of God For so Tertullian doth affirm that God was said to have forsaken him in a sort dum hominem ejus tradidit in mortem whilest he delivered him in his humane nature to the hands of death but that he did not leave him altogether in that it was into the hands of his Father that he commended his Spirit Fulgentius saith as much or more saying that though in the death of Christ his soul was to forsake his dying body Divinitas tamen Christi nec ab anima nec a earne potest separari suscepta yet the Divinity could not be separated from his soul nor from the body neither which it had assumed And how far Christ was then from thinking that he had either lost the favour of Almighty God or his own interest in disposing of the heavenly glories doth evidently appear by that of Hilariâ— derelinqui se ad mortem questus est sed tunc Confessorem suum secum in regno Paradisi suscepit CHRIST saith he doth complain of his being forsaken or left unto the powers of death and yet even then he received the Theef that did confess him into the assured hopes of Paradise Where by the way all the forsaking which this Father doth take notice of was derelictio ad mortem a leaving of our Saviour to the hands of death The Schoolmen also say the same who make six kindes of dereliction or forsaking according as I finde them in our Reverend Field 1. By disunion of person 2. by loss of grace 3. by diminution or weakness of grace 4. by want of the assurance of future deliverance and present support 5. by denial of protection and 6. by withdrawing all solace and destituting the forsaken of all present comfort Then they declare that it is an impious thing to think that Christ was forsaken any of the four first ways in that the unity of his Person was never dissolved his graces neither taken away nor diminished no possibility that he should want assurance either of present support or future deliverance But for the two last ways he may be rightly said say they to have been forsaken in that his Father had denyed to protect and keep him out of the hands of his cruel bloudy and merciless enemies no way restraining them but suffering them to do the uttermost of that which their wicked malice could invent and that nothing might be wanting to make his sorrows beyond measure sorrowful had withdrawn from him also that accustomed solace which he was wont to find in God and removed from him all those things which might any way asswage the extremity of his pain and misery The Master of the Sentences gives it thus more briefly Separavit se divinitas quia substraxit protectionem separavit se foris ut non esset ad defensionem sed non intus defuit ad unionem All the forsaking then that the Lord complained of on the Cross was that he had been left to the hands of his enemies and that his heavenly Father had forborn all this while to shew any open sign of love or favour towards him in the sight of the Iews by whom he had been so afflicted and reproached and indeed blasphemed This is the most that can be said of this bitter and compassionte cemplaint which our Saviour made whether in reference to himself or to all mankinde or perhaps to both unless it may be further added that he desired in these words as some think he did that God would please to manifest by some publick sign what an esteem he had of that sacred Person whom both the Iews and Gentiles had so much oppressed and despised and of whom he had seemed all this while to make little reckoning And this is that which Athanasius hath observed in his fourth Oration or Discourse against the Arians who stood much upon it Loe saith he upon Christs speech why hast thou forsaken me the Father shewed himself to be even then in Christ as ever before For the earth knowing her Lord to speak did straightway tremble and the vail rent in twain and the Sun did hide himself and the rocks clave in sunder and the graves were opened and the dead men rose And that which was no less marvellous indeed the standers by which before denyed him confessed him to be the Son of God To proceed then this exclamation being made and gaining no more from the standers by but addition of scorn to misery and contempt to scorn the people mocking him as if he had called upon Elias to come and help him he cryed out I thirst and even the matter of that cry gives them another opportunity to put a scorn upon him and increase his griefs One of them saith the Scripture ran and took a spunge and filled it with vinegar and put it on a reed and gave it him to drink Matth. 27.48 Where mark the malice of the man if he may so be called which had no humanity Our Saviour called for drink to asswage his thirst the wicked fellow gives him vinegar not to accelerate his death or send him out of hand to the other world for fear Elias indeed should come to help him as Theophylact thinks but rather to continue him the longer in those terrible pains It is the quality of vinegar as we read in Pliny that it stancheth the effusion of bloud Sanguinis profluvium sistunt ex aceto as that Author hath it And therefore I concurre with them who think this vinegar was given him to no other end but out of a most barbarous purpose to prolong his torments for fear least otherwise he might bleed to death and put too speedy an end to their sports and triumphs But contrary to the expectation of this wicked man no sooner had our Saviour took a tast thereof but the work was finished He cryed out with a loud voice Matth. 27.50 It is finished Joh. 19.30 and presently he bowed his head and said Father into thy hands I commend my Spirit and having thus said he gave up the ghost In which it
is to be observed that Christ now seeing all was finished which God required at his hands to the satisfaction of his justice for the sins of man and having fulfilled all those things which were spoken of him by the Prophets did voluntarily of his own accord deliver up his soul into the hands of his Father He had before told us of himself that he was the good Shepheard which giveth his life for the sheep Ioh. 10.11 that no man had power to take it from him Si nemo utique nec mors and if none then not death as we read in Chrysostom but that he laid it down of himself vers 18. and that he gave his life as a ransome for many Matth. 20.28 And the event shewed that he was no braggard or had said more then he was able to perform For the Evangelists declare that he had sense and speech and voluntary motion to the last gasp of his breath all which do evidently fail in the sons of men before the soul parteth from the body Which breathing out of his soul so presently upon so strong a cry and so lowd a prayer seemed so miraculous to the Centurion who observed the same that without expecting any further Miracle he acknowledged presently that truly this was the Son of God And this St. Hierom noted rightly The Centurion hearing Christ say to his Father Into thy hands I commend my Spirit statim sponte dimisisse spiritum and presently of his own accord to give up the ghost moved with the greatness of the wonder said Truly this man was the Son of God The Fathers generally do affirm the same ascribing this last act of our Saviours Tragedy not to extremity of pain or loss of bloud to any outward violence or decay of spirits but as his own voluntary deed and that though God the Father had decreed he should die yet he did give him leave and power to lay down his life of his own accord that his obedience to the will and pleasure of his heavenly Father might appear more evidently and the oblation of himself be the more acceptable And to this purpose saith St. Ambrose Quasi arbiter exuendi suscipiendique corporis emisit spiritum non amisit i. e. he did not lose his soul though he breathed it forth as one that had it in his own power both to assume his body and to put it off Eusebius to the same purpose also When no man had power over Christs soul he himself of his own accord laid it down for man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so being free at his own disposing and not over-ruled by outward force he himself of himself made his departure from the body The judgement of the rest of the Fathers touching this particular he that list to see let him consult St. Augustine lib. 4 de Trinit c. 13. Victor Antiochen in Marc. c. 15. Leo de Passione Dom. serm 16. Fulgentius lib. 3. ad Thrasimundum Sedulius in Opere Paschali lib. 5. c. 17. Beda in Matth. c. 27. Bernard in Feria 4. Hebdom poenosae And for the Greeks Athanasius Orat. 4. contra Arianos Origen in Ioh. Hom. 19. Gregorie Nyssen in Orat. 1. de Christi Resurrectione Nazianzen in his Tragedy called Christus patiens Chrysostom in Matth. 27. Homil. 89. Theophylact on the 27. of Matth. and the 23. of Mark. and the 23. of Luke And for late Writers Erasmus on Luk. 23. and Mark 15. Musculus on the 27. of Matthew and Gualter Hom. 169. on Iohn all which attest most punctually to the truth of this that the death of Christ was not meerly natural proceeding either from any outward or inward causes but only from his own great power and his holy will And to what purpose note they this but first to shew the conquest which he had of death whom he thus swallowed up in victory as the Apostle doth express it and secondly to shew that whereas natural death was the wages of sin which could not be inflicted on him in whom no sin was he therefore did breath out his soul in another manner then is incident to the sons of men to make himself a free-will offering to the Lord his God and make himself a sacrifice for the sins of mankinde by yeelding willingly to that death which their sins deserved And to this death this voluntary but bodily death of the Lord CHRIST IESVS and to that alone the Scriptures do ascribe that great work of the worlds redemption For thus St. Paul unto the Romans When we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son Rom. 5.11 to the Hebrews thus For this cause he is the Mediator of the New Testament that by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions which were under the first Testament they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance Heb. 9.15 if by Christs death it must be by his bodily death by effusion of his bloud and by no other death or kinde of death of what sort soever And to this truth the Scriptures witness very frequently For thus St. Paul we have redemption through his bloud Ephes. 1.7 By his own bloud hath he entred into the holy place having obtained eternal redemption for us Heb. 9.12 St. Peter thus Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things as with silver and gold but with the precious bloud of Christ as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot 1 Pet. 1.18 19. Finally thus the Elders say unto the Lamb in the Revelation Thou wast slain and hast redeemed us to God by thy bloud Apocal. 5 9. Which being so it is most certain that Christ abolished sin and Satan by suffering his body to be slain his bloud to be shed unto the death or the sins of the world and not by any other way or means co-ordinate with it as some lately fable Yet so it is that some men not content with that way of Redemption which is delivered in the Scriptures have fancyed to themselves another and more likely means for perfecting that great work of the death of Christ and teach us that the shedding of his bloud to the death of his body had not been sufficient for the remission of our sins if he had not also suffered the death of the soul and thereby wholly ransomed us from the wrath of God Calvin first led the dance in this affirming very desperately that I say no worse Nihil actum esse si corporea tantum morte defunctus fuisset that Christ had done nothing to the purpose if he had dyed no other then a bodâ—ly death He must then die the death of the soul seeing that his bodily death would not serve the turn and they who pretermit this part of our Redemption never known before and do insist so much externo carnis supplicio in the outward sacrifice of his flesh are insulsi nimis but silly fellows
at the best be they what they will neither the Fathers nor Apostles no nor Christ himself for ought I can see to be excepted Which error being thus sprung up did in an Age so apt to novelties and innovations meet with many followers and some too many indeed in this Church of England some of them teaching as it is affirmed by their learned Adversary that Christ redeemed our souls by the death of his soul as our bodies by the death of his body Now whereas the soul is subject to a twofold death the one by sin prevailing on it in this life which is the natural depriving or voluntary renouncing of all grace the other by damnation in the world to come which is the just rejecting of all the wicked from any fellowship with God in his glory and fastning them to everlasting torments in hell fire I would fain know which of these deaths it was the first or second which our Saviour suffered in his soul. I think they do not mean the last and am sure they cannot prove the first for to talk as some of them have done that there may be a death of the soul a curse and separation from God which of it self is neither sin nor conjoyned with sin is such a Monster in Divinity as was never heard of till this Age. Certain I am the Scripture only speaks of two kindes of death the first and the second both which we finde expressed in the Revelation where it is said the fearful and the unbeleeving and the abominable and murtherers and sorcerers and whoremongers and Idolaters and all lyers all which no doubt are under the arrest of the first death whereof he speaketh chap. 2. vers 11. shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone which is the second death And sure I am the Fathers if they may be credited are contrary in tearms express to this new device not only acknowledging no death in Christ but the death of the body but also utterly disclaiming this pretended death of the soul. In quo nisi in corpore expiavit populi peccata in quo passus est nisi in corpore Wherein saith Ambrose did he expiate the sins of the people but in his body wherein did he suffer death but in his body St. Austin to this purpose also Sacerdos propter victimam quam pro nobis offerret a nobis acceptam that Christ was made or called a Priest by reason of that sacrifice which he took of us that he might offer it for us which could be nothing but our body More plainly and exclusively Fulgentius thus Moriente carne non solum deitas sed nec anima Christi potest ostendi commâ—rtua that when Christ dyed in the flesh neither his Deity nor his soul can be demonstrated to have dyed also with it The greatest Doctors of the Greek Churches do affirm the same Christ saith Theodoret was called an high Priest in his humane nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and offered none other sacrifice but his body only And thus Theophylact A Priest may by no means be without a sacrifice It was necessary then that Christ should have somewhat to offer Quod autem offerretur praeter ejus corpus nihil quippiam erat and there was nothing which he had to offer but his body only Athanasius in his third Oration against the Ariâ—ns and Nazianzen on that text When Iesus had finished all those sayings do affirme the same but not so clearly and exclusively as the others did Now as here is no death of the soul which possibly may be imagined to have happened to Christ if we will be judged by the Scriptures and as the Fathers Greek and Latine do so significantly and expresly disclaime the same so is it such an horrid speech such a pang of blasphemy as should not come within the heart nor issue from the mouth of any Christian. But this I only touch at now We shall hear more of it in the next Article touching the descent into hell where it shall be presented to us in another colour I end this point at this time with that of Augustine There is a first death and there is a second The first death hath two parts one whereby the sinfull soul by transgressing departeth from her Creator the other whereby she is excluded from her body as a punishment inflicted on her by the judgment of God The second death is the everlasting torment of the body and soul. Either of these deaths had laid hold upon every man but that the righteous and immortall Son of God came to die for us in whose flesh because there could be no sin he suffered the punishment of sin without the guilt of it And to that end admitted or endured for us the second part of the first death that is to say the death of the body only by which he ransomed us from the dominion of sin and the pain of eternal punishment which was due unto it But yet there is another argument which concludes more fully against this new device of theirs then any testimonies of the Fathers before produced mamely the institution of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper by the Lord himself in which there is a commemoration to be held for ever both of the breaking of his body and of the effusion of his bloud by which his bodily death is represented and set forth till his coming again but no remembrance instituted or commanded for the death of his soul. Which if it were of such an unquestionable truth as these men conceive and of such special use and efficacie to the worlds redemption as they gave it out would doubtlesse have been honoured with some special place in that commemoration of his Sacrifice which himself ordained Who in the same night he was betrayed took bread and when he had given thankes he brake it and said Take eate this is my body which is broken for you this do in remembrance of me and likewise after the same manner also he took the cup when he had supped saying this cup is the new Testament sealed in my bloud which is shed for you this do as oft as ye drink in remembrance of me In which and more then this we finde not in the book there is not one word which doth reflect on the death of his soul or any commemoration or remembrance to be held of that Only we find that as our Saviour by his death which was then at hand did put an end to all the legal rites and sacrifices of the old Testament which were but the shadows of things to come as St. Paul cals them Coloss. 2.17 So having fulfilled in the flesh all that had been fore-signifyed and spoken of him in the Law and Prophets he did of all ordain and institute one only Eucharistical sacrifice for a perpetuall remembrance of his death and passion to his second coming And thus St.
Augustine doth informe us saying Id enim sacrificium est quod successit omnibus sacrificiis quae immolabantur in umbra futuri that this one sacrifice succeedeth in the place of all those which were offered in relation unto Christ to come But before him St. Ireneus did more plainly affirme that same who living in the next age to the Apostles is able to instruct us better in the mysteries of the Christian faith then any other more remote and of lesse antiquity And he tels us this viz. that as God caused his Gospel to be preached over all the world in stead of the innumerable ordinances of the Law of Moses so he ordained that for those several sorts of sacrifices which are there prescribed simplex oblatio panis et vini sufficiat the offering of bread and wine only should be held sufficient More plainly yet as plainly as he could expresse himself by words and writing he doth thus deliver it Sed suis Discipulis dans consilium c. Christ saith he giving his Disciples charge to offer the first fruits of every creature to the Lord their God not that God standeth in need of their oblations but that they might not be esteemed to be either unfruitfull or ungratefull tooke ordinary bread eum qui ex natura panis est and having given thanks said This is my body and taking the cup into his hands such as we use to drink of the fruit of the vine acknowledged it to be his bloud What then for this we know already It followeth Et novi testamenti novam docuit oblationem quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens in universo mundo offert Deo By doing which saith that old Father he taught us the new sacrifice of oblation of the new Testament which the Church receiving from the Apostles doth offer unto God over all the world So that the holy Eucharist was ordained by Christ not only as a Sacrament but a sacrifice also and so esteemed and called by the most antient writers though many times by reason of several relations it hath either severall names or severall adjuncts that is to say a sacrifice a commemorative sacrifice an eucharisticall sacrifice a spiritual sacrifice the Supper of the Lord a Sacrament A sacrifice it is and so called commonly in reference unto the oblation or offering of the bread and wine made unto God in testimony and due acknowledgment that all which we possesse is received from him and that we tender these his creatures to him as no longer ours but to be his and to be spent in such employments and for such holy uses as he shall please to put it to In this respect it is entituled Oblatio panis et vini the offering or oblation of bread and wine as before we saw from Irenaeus the sacrifice offered by us Gentiles hostia quae ipsi a nobis Gentibus offertur of the bread and wine presented in the holy Eucharist as in Iustin Martyr Sacrificium panis vini the sacrifice in plain terms of bread and wine as Fulgentius hath it For clearing of which point we may please to know that antiently it was the custome of the Primitive Christians to bring their bread and wine to the Church of God and offer them to the Lord by the hands of the Priest or Minister part of the which was consecrated for the use of the Sacrament the rest being usually given to the poor and needy as having a letter of attorney from the Lord of heaven to receive our bounties For thus we read in Iustin Martyr who lived the next dore also to the Apostles Prayers being done saith he we salute one another with an holy kisse Then do we offer to the Bishop for such is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom he speaks of there bread and wine mixt with water as the use then was which he receiving offered to God the sacrifice of praise and glory c. And thus St. Cyprian speaking of a rich but covetous Widow who came not with her offering to the Church as her poor neigbours did charged her that she came into Gods house without her sacrifice and eat of that which had been offered or sacrificed unto God by far poorer folke Locuples et dives Dominicum celebrare te dicis but there dominicum signifyeth the Lords day plainly qui corbonam omnino non respicis qui in dominicum there it is the Church sine sacrificio venis qui partem de sacrificio quod pauper obtulit sumis are his words at large Where sacrificium in both places signifyeth the bread and wine which they used to offer to the Lord to be consecrated and employed in celebrating the memorial of our Saviours passion It is called next a commemorative sacrifice a Sacrifice commemorative and representative by Dr. Morton Ld. B. of Durham in his book of the Sacrament in regard that it was instituted by our Saviour Christ for a perpetual memory of that one perfect and al-sufficient sacrifice which he offered of himself upon the Crosse. And to this end it was that Chrysostome having called the Sacrament of the Lords supper by the name of a Sacrifice addes presently not by way of correction or retractation as I know some think but by way of explanation only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it was the remembrance rather of a sacrifiâ—e or a commemorative sacrifice as some others call it Which word commemorative as I take it detracts not from the nature of a sacrifice as if it were the lesse a sacrifice because commemorative but only signifyeth the end to which it is specially directed For as the sacrifices of the old law were true and proper sacrifices in respect of the beasts or â—owles or other things which were offered although prefigurative of that sacrifice made upon the Crosse which was then to come so are the sacrifices of the Gospel true and real sacrifices in reference to the oblation made of bread and wine for the service of God although commemorative of the same great sacrifice now already past It was called thirdly a spiritual and Eucharistical sacrifice by reason that Gods servants therein make profession of their due acknowledgements for all the blessings which he hath vouchsafed to bestow on their souls and bodies especially for the redemption of themselves and of all mankinde by the death of Christ and therewith offering up themselves their souls and bodies as a pleasing and most acceptable sacrifice to the Lord their God For thus we finde in Iustin Martyr that the Bishop or President of the Congregation having received the bread and wine from the hands of the faithful offered by them the sacrifice of praise and thanks to God the Father of all things in the name of the Son and the holy Ghost for all those blessings which he hath graciously from time to time bestowed upon them And thus Irenaeus Oportet nos
to attone the difference The generall resolution is for this is neither time nor place to discusse it fully that the whole day amongst the Iews from sun to sun which the Astronomers call the artificial day was commonly divided into four quaternions of houres of which the first three had the name of the third houre the second three of the sixt hour the third three of the ninth hour and the last three of the evening or sun set Then that the sixt hour beginning where the third did end the same thing may be said to be done in the end of the third houre which was done in the beginning of the sixt inchoative in the sixt hour but completive in the third And so our Saviour may be said to be crucifyed in the third hour as St. Marke relateth that is to say in the end of the third houre complete and about the sixt hour as St. Iohn delivereth it that is to say about the sixt hour coming on Others conceive that Marke relates unto the time when Pilate did passe sentence on him and deliver him over to be crucifyed which was in the third hour of the day and that Iohn speaks as to the execution of the sentence which was done in the sixt And if this could agree with the other cicumstances it were undoubtedly the best and of most probability especially considering what good ground it hath from Ignatius who lived in the times of the Apostles By whom the whole story of the Passion is thus distributed In the third hour Christ was condemned by Pontius Pilate crucifyed in the sixt died in the ninâ—h and was buried before sunset And unto either of these two I should sooner yeild then hearken to the new devise of Daniel Heinsius who will have the third hour mentioned in St. Marks Gospell to be the third hour of our Saviours crucifying with which the circumstances of the text can no way agree and yet far sooner unto him then to an eminent Divine of great place and name affirming openly in a Sermon before the King on the credit of some old Greek copies that the text in Iohn had been corrupted Lesse difficulty far there is about the place of the Passion in which all Euangelists do agree in meaning though they use divers words St. Matthew Marke and Iohn do call it Golgatha according to the Hebrew name but St. Luke cals it Calvarie 23.33 according to that Hebrew name translated and made intelligible to the ears of the Romans In every one it signifieth the place of a skul and is so translated in our Bibles Matth. 27.33 Mark 15.22 Ioh 19.17 A name bestowed upon it as the Fathers say in regard that Adam was there buryed and his skul found there by the people many Ages after And though I dare not swear this for a Canonical truth yet certainly it hath as good grounds to stand upon as an old Tradition can confer For sure I am that such a Tradition there was in the time of Origen one of the most antient Christian writers whose works are extant Venit ad me talis traditio quod corpus Adae primi hominis sepultum est ibi ubi crucifixus est Christus There is a Tradition saith he that the body of the first man Adam was there buried where Christ was crucified Tertullian doth affirm the same amongst his verses So doth St. Basil also on Levit. 5. Epiphanius contra haereses n. 46. Chrysostom in his 84. Homilie on Iohn St. Augustine in the 71. Sermon inscribed de Tempore St. Ambrose Epistola 3. lib. 5. Hierom on Matth. 27. Theophylact in his Comments on the four Evangelists Nor do they only thus unanimously report the said Tradition but they give their reason for it too viz. that because all men dyed in Adam so by Christ all might be also made alive that so where sin took its beginning it should finde destruction and finally that ut super Adae tumulum sanguis Christi stillaret which was Hieroms conceit that so the bloud of Christ might fall upon Adams tomb And I remember I have seen a picture in an old peece of hanging in the stals at Westminster for we have our Testes fenestras too especially in such a case as this as well as Campian in a greater in which we finde the souldier piercing Christs side with his lance water and bloud issuing from the side â—o pierced and Adam starting out of his grave with a cup in his hand to receive the bloud Which fancy as it was conform to the old Tradition so did it hand somely express a good peece of Divinity the meaning of it being this that as Adam being the root of all mankinde had forfeited for himself and his posterity all those most excellent endowments of grace and nature which God had given him at the first so now he did lay hold upon Salvation for himself and his that all who were and were to be descended of him should have their part in the redemption of the World by the bloud of Christ. And this I call a piece of good Divinity howsoever expressed by reason that the universality of Redemption by our Saviours death was not alone the Doctrine of the Primitive times but is the genuine and confirmed doctrine of this Church of England which teacheth us to pray unto God the Son as the Redeemer of the world and every one of us to believe in the same God the Son who hath redeemed me and all mankinde and finally to pray to God to have mercy upon all men even upon all Iews Turks Infidels and Hereticks that they may all be saved amongst the remnant of true Israelites and be made one fold under the same one Shepheard IESVS CHRIST our Lord. No truth more rightly stated more piously applyed nor more fully explicated It is now time we lay our Saviour in his Grave being the last degree of his humiliation taking along with us such preparatives as lead unto the same in the holy Gospel in which the first passage which we meet with is how some devout people repaired to Pilate and begged the body of their Lord that they might entomb it others in reference to the great festival ensuing had desired of him that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away to the end that their bodies might not remain upon the Cross on the Sabbath-day Which suit being granted and that the souldiers coming to Christ found him dead already they omitted the breaking of his legs for so had God disposed who before had signified that a bone of him should not be broken but yet to make sure work it seemed good to one of them to pierce his side with a spear and forthwith saith the Text came out bloud and water Ioh. 19.34 On this St. Augustine makes this gloss that by the bloud and water issuing from the side of CHRIST we are to understand the two
Sacraments of Baptism and the Lords Supper commanded and ordained by him De latere pendentis in Cruce Lancen percusso Sacramenta Ecclesiae profluxerunt as his words are briefly and hereunto the Fathers and most writers since have inclined generally This was the last remakable thing remembred in our Saviours passion the draining of his bloud to the last drop as it were which though it could not yet add to his former sufferings being dead before yet served it as a confirmation of his death in the eyes of those who otherwise might have called the realty thereof in question and was a certain note to discern him by after he was risen again from death to life as in the story of St. Thomas No further difficulty that I know of doth occur in this the pleading of this Text by the Canonists of the Church of Rome in maintenance of their mingling water with the wine in the blessed Sacrament being so silly a device that it deserves not to be honoured with a confutation But in the other passage which the Gospel mentioneth touching the not breaking of his bones perhaps a question may be made by some captious men how it can possibly agree with another text of holy Scripture where it is said This is my body which is broken for you and to what use the breaking of the bread doth serve in the holy Eucharist it not to signifie the breaking of our Saviours body But the answer unto this is easie For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the word used by St. Paul in the Original doth not only signifie to break in peeces though Rob. Stephanus in his Thesaurus expound the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by no other word then the Latine Frango Sometimes it signifieth to strain as in that of Aristotle going up an hill 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the knees are bent or strained backwards and in that also of Hippocrates where he observeth that sometimes in holding the hand forth out-right 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the bowing of the joynt or elbow is strained Sometimes it signifieth to cut Hesychius an old Grammarian expounding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is cut and Theophrastus calling the cuttings of vines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with whom Suidas Phavorinus and the Scholiast on Aristophanes do agree also And in this sense the bread is broken in the Sacrament although cut with knives there being mention of a sacred knife in St. Chrysostoms Liturgie which was employed unto no other use then that of the holy Sacrament And last of all it signifieth sometimes the tearing or bruising of the fleshy parts when the bones are neither broken nor so much as touched which is most clearly witnessed by Hippocrates the Father of all learned Physick giving this for a Rule of Art that the breaking of any of the bones is less dangerous then where the bones are not broken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the veins and sinews adjoining are on every side bruised So that although the bones of our Saviour were not broken that he might in all things be agreeable to the Paschal lamb yet were his joints strained to the utmost when he was stretched upon the Cross his flesh most cruelly cut and torn with scourges his veins and sinews miserably bruised and broken with those outward torments All which as they are signified by this one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we render broken so doth it very well agree with that meaning of the word broken in our Engish Idiom As when we say a man hath got a broken skin or broken head when the flesh is only bruised and the skin but rased And hereto Beza doth agree in his Annotations on that Text By the word broken in St. Paul is designed saith he the very manner of Christs death his body being torn bruised and even broken with most cruel torments though his legs were not broken as the theeves were so that the word hath a marvellous express signification making the figure to agree so fully with the thing it self the breaking of the bread representing to us the very death and passion of our Saviour Christ. Now go we on Pilates leave being thus obtained and the certainty of Christs death assured by this second murder they hasten all they could unto his funeral to which was used small preparation but less pomp by far It was the day of preparation to the following festival as two of the Evangelists do affirm expressely the Friday or good Friday as we call it now in which it was not lawful for the Iews to do any work A garden there was hard at hand and in the garden a new sepulchre in which never man was laid before a Virgin-sepulchre for the son of a Virgin-mother a Garden to receive that great pledge of death which first found entrance by a Garden So that the labour was not much to take down his body and carry it to the next spot of ground and there intomb it No further cost bestowed upon his funerals who spared not his most pretious bloud to procure our happiness but a mixture made of Myrrhe and Aloes and had not Nicodemus been more valiant now then when he used to come unto his Saviour as it were by stealth he had wanted that And this was done after the custom of the Iews whose manner it was to bestow that charge upon their dead in sign of their belief of the Resurrection unto life eternal not out of any thought they had of his so speedy a Resurrection at the three days end though he had often told them that he would so do So far were they from looking to behold him again on the first day of the week then following that they did all they could to lay him up fast enough till the day of judgement and to that end not only wrapped him up in sear-cloaths for such the linnen clothes were which they wrapped him in Ioh. 19.40 but rolled a great stone to the dore of the sepulchre to make sure work with him God certainly had so disposed it in his infinite wisdome to make the miracle of his Resurrection the more considerable and convincing both with Iews and Gentiles This is the sum of those particulars that concern Christs burial Which though it seem of no more moment then as a confirmation of an unfaigned death and a preparative to his Resurrection and consequently may be thought unnecessary to be here added in the Creed yet upon further search into it we shall finde it otherwise Our Saviour had not overcome death if he had not dyed nor got the victory of the grave had he not been buryed His being restored unto life within three days of his death was a very great and signal miracle but not so great as that which had been acted before on Lazarus who had lain four days in the earth and began to putrefie His lying in the grave was the way
that we see that not alone the sacred penmen of the new Testament written first in Greek but also all the Ecclesiasticall writers of the Greek Church when they speak of Hades intend not any thing thereby but hell the place prepared for the Devils and the damned souls Let us next see whether the Fathers of the Latine or Western Church have any other meaning when they speak of inferi or infernum for they use both words by which they do expound Hades or translate it rather as often as they chance to meet it And first for the Quid nominis take it thus from Augustine Inferi eo quod infra sunt the inferi are so called saith he because they are below in the parts beneath And somewhat to this purpose saith Lactantius also Nihil terra inferius humilius nisi mors inferi that there is nothing lower then the earth but death and inferi From infra the root or theme the Fathers do derive infernus of which thus St. Hierome Inferiora terrarum infernus accipitur the lower parts of the earth are called infernus to which our Saviour did descend Which as it sheweth that infernus was derived from inferius and so by consequence from infra as the word inferi was before so it directs us also where to finde the place And this he doth elsewhere also saying Simul discimus quod infernus sub terra sit and in another place quod autem infernus in inferiore parte terrae sit in both that it is under the earth and in the lowermost parts thereof Tertullian also saith the same as to the situation of it Habes regionem inferûm subterraneam credere we are to believe that the region of inferi is under the earth affirming also that it is in visceribus terrae abstrusa profunditas a bottomlesse pit in the very bowels of the earth In this there is no difference amongst the Antients in the nature or meaning of the word there is For by Tertullian the word inferi is taken for a place under the earth whither the souls of good and bad descend after death the good to a kind of refreshing the bad to punishments affirming for a certain truth or rather pronouncing so ex tripode for so the word Constituimus imports omnem animam apud inferos sequestrari in diem domini that the soul of every man is kept in Inferi till the day of the Lord. Which as it was a fancy private to himself after his lapse into the heresie of Montanus so he received no countenance in it from the rest of the Fathers by whom it is unanimously agreed upon that the souls of all good Christians are received into Paradise 'T is true indeed that Hierome seemeth to incline to the same opinion where speaking of the difference between death and inferi he saith that death is that whereby the soul is separated from the body infernus in quo animae includuntur sive in refrigerio sive in poenis and that infernus is the place wherein the souls of men are kept either in some refreshments or else in punishments Which seems to be the same with that which Tertullian had affirmed before but it doth but seem so For when he speaketh of inferi or infernus in this extension of the word he relates only to the times before the coming of our Saviour and his victory over death and hell and not at all unto the times of the Gospell For thus he doth explain himself in another place Solomon speaketh thus saith he because before the coming of our Saviour omnia pariter ad inferos ducerentur all were alike carryed to the inferi or the places below and that thereupon it was that Job complained how both the godly and the wicked were detained in inferno whereunto this expression tendeth we shall see hereafter The same he saith in his notes or Comment upon another Chapter of the same book of Solomons affirming plainly ante adventum Domini omnes quamvis sanctos inferni lege detentos that before the coming of the Lord all men how just and holy soever were detained under the Law of infernus But then immedately he addeth that since the resurrection of Christ the case is otherwise and that the souls of righteous men nequaquam inferno teneantur are by no means to be supposed to be detained in infernus and this he proveth from that of the Apostle saying I desire to be dissolved and to be with Christ and he that is with Christ saith he is not held in infernus So that whatsoever he conceived of infernus before Christs coming the truth of which opinion we dispute not here t is plain that since the resurrection he leaves it for a place appointed to the wicked only there to be held in everlasting pains and torments And so elsewhere he doth define it Infernus locus suppliciorum cruciatuum est in quo videter dives purpuratus that is to say infernus is the place of punishments and torments where the richman clothed in purple was seen by Lazarus Nay even Tertullian though he had made himself an inferi of his own devising acknowledgeth the prison which the Gospel speaketh of Mat. 5.24 25. to be no other then this inferi and therefore certainly not the receptacle both for good and bad the just and unjust But none of all the Antients states this point more clearly then divine St. Augustine who looking more judiciously into the businesse doth affirme expresly Frist Of the inferi or place it self nusquam scripturarum in bono appellatos potui invenire that he could never find any place of Scripture in which the word inferi was taken in any good sense Secondly that he could never finde that the place was called inferi y ubi justorum animae requiescunt where the souls of the righteous were at rest Thirdly that past all peradventure since the descent of Christ into hell boni fideles prorsus inferos nesciunt the godly believers are acquainted with no such place And last of all Non nisi poenalia recte intelligi per inferna that infernus can be taken for nothing rightly but the place of punishments And in this sense according unto these restrictions and explanations have the words inferi and infernus been since used in most Orthodox writers and in that sense still used by the old translatour of the new Testament into Latine as often as he meeteth with the Greek Hades And so St. Ambrose also doth interpret or expound the same where saying that according to the Theologie of the old Philosophers the souls of men severed from their bodies went unto Hades he gives this glosse upon the word id est locum qui non videtur quem locum latine infernum dicimus that is to say a place unseen which in Latine we do call infernus But as there is no
most secret seats of Tartarus or the dungeons of Hell Then comes the Renowned Athanasius There are saith he no other places but the grave and Hell out of which man was perfectly freed by Christ. And this appeareth not only in us but in the death of Christ also the body going to the grave 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. and the soul descending unto Hell being places severed with a very great distance the grave receiving his body for there it was present and Hell or Hades his soul. Else how did Christ present his own soul to the souls in bands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he might break in sunder the bands or chains of the souls detained in Hell St. Basil next When David said God will deliver my soul from the power of Hell he doth plainly prophesie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the descent of the Lord to Hell or Hades to redeem the Prophets souls with others that they should not be detained there So Nazianzen Christ dyed but he restored to life and by his death abolished death he was buryed but he rose again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He descended into Hell but he brought back souls and ascended into Heaven Macarius to the same purpose also When thou hearest that Christ delivered souls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of hell and darkness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that the Lord descended to Hell and performed an admirable work think that these things are not far from thine own soul. St. Chrysostom then being one of the Presbyters of the Church of Antioch composed two Homilies upon the Creed in one of which after he had spoken of the death and burial of our Saviour he addes this descendit ad infernum that he descended unto Hell that this also might not want a wonder Epiphanius though in other points his Enemie doth agree with him in this particular touching the descent of Christ into Hell though he differ both from him and others in making the Deity of Christ to be united with his soul in the performance of that action to the end that Hades so he calls the Devil the chief Ruler thereof thinking to lay hands on a man and not knowing that his Deity was united to his sacred soul Hades himself might be surprized and death dissolved and that fulfilled which was spoken Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell To this agrees St. Cyril of Alexandria thus The soul which was coupled and united to the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 descended into hell or Hades and using the power and the force of the Godhead shewed it self to the spirits there For we must not say that the Godhead of the only begotten which is a nature uncapable of death and no way conquerable by it was brought back from the dark caverns of the earth To the same also saith Iohn Damascene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. i. e. The deified soul of Christ descended to Hades that as to those upon the earth the Sun of righteousness was risen so to those who sate under the earth and in shades and darkness light might also shine Next look we on the Fathers of the Western Church and we shall finde as general consent amongst them for proof of Christs descent into hell as before we had amongst the Fathers of the Eastern And first beginning with Tertullian the most antient of the Latine Writers he doth not onely tell us in plain tearms Christum inferos adiisse that Christ went into hell but addes this reason of it also ne nos adiremus that we might not go thither St. Cyprians judgment in the point we have seen before where he declareth that Hell had been broken open in the presence of Christ when he led captivity captive c. Spolians inferos captivos praemittens ad superos first spoyling hell and then sending the captives before towards Heaven Arnobius thus Postea vidit inferos c. in Abyssi profunda descendens After his Passion he visited hell and not only became far off from heaven but even from the earth it self descending into the depth of the bottomeless pit Lactantius if the verse be his shewing how the darkness of hell vanished at the brightness of Christ then addes Hinc tumulum repetens post Tartara carne resumpta c. that after his being in hell he returned to his grave and resuming his body went to heaven like a noble Conquerer St. Hilarie of Poictiers next The powers of heaven saith he do incessantly glorifie the Name of God for conquering death and breaking the gates of hell for in hell he conquered death Christ saith St. Hierom destroyed and brake open the inclosed places of hell and put the Devil which had power over death out of his Kingdom and Dominion And in another place more plainly Hell saith he is the place of punishments and torments ad quem descendit Dominus ut vinctos de carcere dimitteret to which the Lord descneded to release those from prison who were therein bound St. Ambrose to the same effect Expers peccati Christus cum ad Tartari ima descenderet c. Christ saith he being void of sin when he descended to the lowest pit of hell destroying the Dominion of death recalled out of the Devils jaws to eternal life the souls of those who there lay bounden for their sins St. Austin living in those times though he assert as much as any the descent into hell yet gives a more unquestionable reason for it Quaeri solet si non nisi poenalia intelligantur inferna c. It is demanded if Infernus Hell be taken for no other then the place of punishment how we may safely believe that the Soul of our Lord Christ descended thither But it is answered ideo descendisse ut quibus oportuit subveniret that he descended into hell to succour those that were to be succoured And in another place more clearly as unto the reason There is saith he a lower hell whither the deceased use to go from whence God would deliver our souls by sending his Son thither Ideo enim ille usque ad infernum pervenit ne nos in inferno maneremus for therfore went Christ even unto hell that we should not remain in hell Vigilius shewing how our Saviour could be both in Hell and in the grave doth resolve it thus Dicimus ergo Dominum jacuisse in sepulchro sed in solo corpore descendisse ad infernum sed in sola anima viz. that the Lord lay in the grave as to his body alone but descended down to Hell in his soul only Ruffinus commenting on this Article of the Creed gives it briefly thus Quod in Infernum descendit audenter pronunciatur in Psalmis that Christs descent into hell is evidently foretold in the Psalmes and then eo usque ille miserando descendit usque quo tu
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What saith he meaneth Pspothomphanech To which he answereth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. An interpreter of hidden things Which also very well agreeth to our Lord and Saviour to whom all hearts be open all desires known and from whom no secrets can be hidden Come said the woman of Samaria and behold a man that hath told me all the things that ever I did Ioh. 4.29 The Iew which thorough this thin vail on the face of Ioseph doth not behold the portraiture and lineaments of Christ our Saviour is not so properly to be termed blinde because he cannot see as because he will not Such also was the type of the Prophet Daniel cast by the malice of his enemies the King unwillingly consenting into the den of ravenous cruel Lyons the dore sealed up with the Kings Ring nothing but death to be expected And yet behold a resurrection in the person of Daniel exactly typifying that of Christ our Saviour in each of the particulars before remembred But of all types especially as to the circumstances of time and place that of the Prophet Ionas doth come nearest home and it comes close home too as to the occasion Ionas went down into the Sea and put himself into a Ship to flie from the presence of the Lord but a great tempest overtook him a tempest of extraordinary violence that neither art nor strength could prevail against it insomuch that the Mariners although Heathens did conclude aright that it was of Gods immediate sending and that there was some heinous sinner got aboard amongst them which drew down vengeance from above upon all the rest To Lots they went Ionas was found to be the party who willingly and cheerfully submitting to the will of God to save the rest in danger to be cast away said frankly without opposition or repining at it Tollite me take me and cast me into the sea Better one perish then so many Accordingly cast in he was and drowned as the poor men thought that had cast him in But the Lord prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah and Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights which time expired the Lord spake unto the fish and it vomited out Jonah on the dry land This is Historia vera a true relation of the story in respect of Ionah but it is Sacramentum magnum a very great mysterie withall in regard of Christ. For Ecce plusquam Ionas hic behold a greater then Ionas is presented here It was but signum Prophetae the signe of the Prophet Ionah as our Saviour cals it in respect of the history but it was Res signata too in regard of the mysterie And so it is affirmed by Christ whose death and resurrection it foreshadoweth to us viz. As Ionas was three days and three nights in the Whales belly so shall the son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth Never did type and truth correspond more perfectly For who knows not how usual a thing it is to compare the world unto a ship or argosie wherein all mankinde is imbarked all the sons of Adam and amongst them the son of man as he cals himself But all the sons of Adam being sinners from the very birth no wonder if the tempest of Gods anger fell upon them all and made them all in danger to be cast away In which amazement and affright only the son of man like Ionah in the sides of the ship slept it out securely who though he knew no sin was made sin for us by taking our iniquities upon his accompt and in that sense the greatest sinner in the vessel So that the high Priest did not prophecie amisse when he said this of him It is expedient that one man do die for the people that the whole nation might not perish Never was doubtfull Oracle fulfilled more clearly For Christ no sooner found what their purpose was but he was at his tollite too as willing to be throwne in as Ionas was and therefore said to those who came out against him Sinite hos abire let those go their way I only am the man that must stay this storme and pacifie the wrath of Almighty God And so accordingly it was done Gods wrath thereby appeased poor mankinde saved and Christ like Ionas having lain three days and three nights in the heart of the earth did on the third day rise again and by so doing vanquished death and swallowed up the grave in victory But this particular we shall hereafter meet with and more fully speak of when we are come unto the Circumstances of the resurrection of which this of the time the third day is the most materiall I add this only for the present in respect of the Iews who being by Christ foretold of his resurrection and in so evident a type thereof as this Signum Prophetae this signe of the Prophet Ionas as himself entitles it could look with an Historical faith on the resurrection of the Prophet out of the belly of the Whale and yet give no belief unto that of Christ out of the bowels of the earth though testifyed and confirmed unto them by such pregnant evidence And yet I shall crave leave to add that if Ionah was the Widow of Sereptas son he whom Elias raised from death to life 1 King 17. as many of the Iewish Doctors do affirme he was the parallel will yet come closer then before it did For Ionas in the Whales belly was but dead putative in the esteem and eye of men but in the Widowes Chamber he was dead realiter and so more perfectly resembling him whose signe he was This leads me on to the next way of evidence in regard of the Iew which is that of example Themselves had read in holy Scripture and believed accordingly that Elias had restored from death to life the son of the Sareptan woman whosoever he was and that Elisha did not only work the like wonder on the dead child of the Shunamite but that his dead body did revive a man and raised him also from the grave And to this head we may reduce the more then wonderfull deliverance of Daniel from the Lyons den and the three Hebrew Salamanders from the fierie furnace all of them putative dead all of them ransomed by the Lord from the mercilesse furie of the grave and jawes of death and that miraculous deliverance no lesse to be esteemed then a Resurrection To each of these the Iews most readily give assent How then can they deny it unto this of Christ Assuredly it was as possible to God to raise our Saviour from the dead if we consider him no further then a mortall man as to raise dead bodies by the prayers of the Prophets and by the dead carkasse of Elisha or as it had been to reprieve Daniel and the three children from the hands
or designement unto that high office a calling far more solemne and of better note then that which Aaron had to the Legal Priesthood For of the calling of Aaron it is only said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he was called by God is a common word and therefore like enough 't was done in the common way But the calling of Christ it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a more solemne and significant word and intimates that he was solemnely declared and pronounced by God to be a Priest after the order of Melchisedech Now as the calling was so was the consecration in all points parallel to Aarons and in some beyond Aaron was consecrated to the Priesthood by the hand of Moses but Christ our Saviour by the hand of Almighty God who long before as long before as the time of David had bound himself by oath to invest him in it Aarons head was anointed only with materiall oile Christs with the oil of gladnesse above all his fellowes The consecration of Aaron was performed before all the people gathered together for that purpose at the dore of the Tabernacle That of our Saviour was accomplished in the great feast of the Passeover the most solemne publick and universall meeting that ever any nation of the world did accustomably hold besides the confluence and concourse of all sorts of strangers In the next place the consecration of Aaron was solemnized with the sacrifices of Rams and Bullocks of which that of the Bullock was a sin-offering as well for Aarons own sins as the sins of the people and of the Rams the one of them was for a fire-offering or a sacrifice of rest the other was the Ram of consecration or of filling the hand And herein the preheminence runs mainly on our Saviours side who was so far from needing any sin-offering to fit him and prepare him for that holy office that he himself became an offering for the sins of others even for the sins of all the world And as he was to be advanced to a more excellent Priesthood then that of Aaron so was he sanctifyed or prepared if I may so say after a far more excellent manner then with bloud of Rams For he was consecrated saith the text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with his own bloud and with this bloud not only his hands or ears were spinkled as in that of Aaron but his whole body was anointed first being bathed all over in a bloudy sweat next with the bloud issuing from his most sacred head forced from it by the violent piercing of the Crown of thornes which like the anointing oyle on the head of Aaron distilled unto the lowest parts of that blessed body and lastly with the streams of bloud flowing abundantly from the wounds of his hands and feet and that great orifice which was made in his precious side Though our Redeemer were originally sanctifyed from the very wombe and that in a most absolute and perfect manner yet would Almighty God have him thus visibly consecrated in his own bloud also that so he might become the authour of salvation to all those that obey him and that he having washed our robes in the bloud of the Lamb might be also sanctifyed and consecrated to the service of our heavenly father Finally the consecration of Aaron and of all the high Priests of the law which succeeded him was to last seven dayes that so the Sabbath or seventh day might passe over him because no man as they conceived could be a perfect high Priest to the Lord their God until the Sabbath day had gone over his head The consecration of our Saviour lasted seven dayes too in every one of which although he might be justly called an high Priest in fieri or per medium participationis as the Schoolmen phrase it yet was not he fully consecrated to this Priestly office till he had bathed himself all over in his own bloud and conquered the powers of death by his resurrection That so it was will evidently appear by this short accompt which we shall draw up of his actions from his first entrance into Hierusalem in the holy week till he had finished all his works and obtained rest from his labours On the first day of the week which still in memory thereof we do call Palme Sunday he went into the holy City not so much to prepare for the Iewish Passeover as to make ready for his own and at his entrance was received with great acclamations Hosanna be to him that cometh in the name of the Lord And on the same day or the day next following he purged the Temple from brokery and merchandizing and so restored that holy place to the use of prayer which the high Priests of the Law had turned or suffered to be turned which comes all to one to a den of Theeves The intermediate time betwixt that and the day of his passion he spent in preaching of the Gospell instructing the ignorant and in healing of the blind and lame which were brought unto him in the performance whereof and the like workes of mercy he was more diligent and frequent and more punctuall far then Aaron or any of his successors in the legal Priesthood in offering of the seven dayes sacrifice for themselves and the people On the fift day having first bathed his body in a bloudy sweat he was arrained and pronounced to be worthy of death in the high Priests hall And on the sixt according to the Iewish accompt with whom the evening is observed to begin the day he went into his heavenly sanctuary to which he had prepared entrance with his precious bloud as Moses at Aarons consecration did purifie and consecrate the materiall Sanctuary with the bloud of Bullocks and of Rams Not by the bloud of Goats and Calves saith the Apostle but by his own bloud hath he once entred into the holy place and obtained eternal redemption for us Which Sacrifice of the Son of God on the accursed Crosse although it was the perfect and full accomplishment of all the typical and legal sacrifices offered in the law yet was it but an intermediate though an especiall part of his consecration to the eternall Evangelical Priesthood which he was to exercise and not the ultimum esse or perfection of it That was not terminated till the day of his resurrection untill a Sabbath day had gone over his head which was more perfectly fulfilled in his consecration then ever it had been in Aarons and the sons of Aaron For then and not till then when God had powerfully defeated all the plots of his enemies did God advance him to the Crown to the regal Diademe setting him as a King on his holy hill the hill of Sion and saying to him as it were in the sight of his people Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee And then and not till then when he had glorifyed him thus in the
Reformers in Queen Elizabeths time say as much as this The Scriptures say the Papists in their Council of Trent for I regard not the unsavory Speeches of particular men Is not sufficient to Salvation without Traditions that is to say without such unwritten Doctrinals as have from hand to hand been delivered to us Said not the Puritans the same when they affirmed That Preaching onely viva voce which is verbum traditum is able to convert the sinner That the Word sermonized not written is alone the food which nourisheth to life eternal that reading of the Word of God is of no greater power to bring men to Heaven than studying of the Book of Nature that the Word written was written to no other end but to afford some Texts and Topicks for the Preachers descant If so as so they say it is then is the written word no better than an Ink-horn Scripture a Dead Letter or a Leaden Rule and whatsoever else the Papists in the height of scorn have been pleased to call it Nay of the two these last have more detracted from the perfection and sufficiency of the holy Scripture than the others did They onely did decree in the Council of Trent That Traditions were to be received Paripietatis affectu with equal Reverence and Affection to the written Word and proceed no further These magnifie their verbum traditum so much above it that in comparison thereof the Scripture is Gods Word in name but not in efficacy They onely adde Traditions in the way of Supplement where they conceive the Scriptures to be defective These make the Scriptures every where deficient to the work intended unless the Preacher do inspire them with a better Spirit than that which they received from the Holy Ghost Good God that the same breath should blow so hot upon the Papists and yet so cold upon the Scriptures that the same men who so much blame the Church of Rome for derogating from the dignity and perfection of the Holy Scriptures should yet prefer their own indigested crudities in the way of Salvation before the most divine dictates of the Word of God But such are men when they leave off the conduct of the Holy Ghost to follow the delusions of a private Spirit Articuli IX Pars Secunda 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam i. e. The Holy Catholick Church CHAP. II. Of the name and definition of the Church Of the Title of Catholick The Church in what respects called Holy Touching the Head and Members of it The Government thereof Aristocratical IN the same Article in which we testifie our Faith in the Holy Ghost do we acknowledge That there is a Body or Society of faithful people which being animated by the power of that Blessed Spirit hath gained unto it self the name of the Church and with that name the attribute or title of Catholick in regard of the extent thereof over all the World of Holy in relation to that piety of life and manners which is or ought to be in each several Member And not unfitly are they joyned together in the self same Article the Holy Ghost being given to the Apostles for the use of the Church and the Church nothing but a dead and lifeless carcass without the powerful influence of the Holy Ghost As is the Soul in the Body of Man so is the Holy Ghost in the Church of Christ that which first gives it life that it may have a Being and afterward preserves it from the danger of putrefaction into which it would otherwise fall in small tract of time Having therefore spoken in the former Chapter of the Nature Property and Office of the Holy Ghost and therein also of the Volume of the Book of God dictated by that Blessed Spirit for that constant Rule by which the Church was to be guided both in Life and Doctrine We now proceed in order to the Church it self so guided and directed by it And first for the Quid nominis to begin with that it is a name not found in all the writings of the Old Testament in which the body of Gods people the Spiritual body is represented to us after a figurative manner of Speech in the names of Sion and Ierusalem as Pray for the peace of Jerusalem Psal. 121. And the Lord loveth the gates of Sion Psal. 87. The name of Church occurreth not till the time of the Gospel and then it was imposed by him who had power to call it what he pleased and to entitle it by a name which was fittest for it The Disciples gave themselves the name of Christians the name of Church was given them by our Saviour Christ. No sooner had St. Peter made this confession for himself and the rest of the Apostles Thou art Christ the Son of the living God but presently our Saviour added Upon this Rock that is to say The Rock of this Confession as most of the Antients and some Writers also of the darker times do expound the same will I build my Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Greek The word used by our Lord and Saviour is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence the Latines borrowed their Ecclesia the French their Eglise and signifieth Coetum evocatum a chosen or selected company a company chosen out of others derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is as much as evocare to call out or segregate In that sense as the word is used to signifie a company of men called by the special Grace to the Faith in Christ and to the hopes of life eternal by his death and passion is the word Ecclesia taken in the writings of the holy Apostles and in most Christian Authors since the times they lived in though with some difference or variety rather in the application to their purposes But antiently it was of a larger extent by far and signified any Publick meeting of Citizens for the dispatch of business and affairs of State For so Thucidides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. That the Assembly being formed the different parties fell upon their disputes and so doth Aristophanes use it in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. That the people should now give the Thracians a Publick meeting in their Guild-hal or Common forum of the City St. Luke who understood the true propriety as well as the best Critick of them all gives it in this sense also Acts 19.32 where speaking of the tumult which was raised at Ephesus he telleth us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Assembly was confused And in the 26. Psal. Ecclesia malignantium is used for the Congregation of ungodly men APPLICATION BUt after Christ had given this name unto the Body of the Faithful which confessed his Name and the Apostles in their writings had applied it so as to make it a word of Ecclesiastical use and notion the Fathers in the following Ages did so appropriate the same to the state of
entituled actual The nature of which Birth-sin or Original sin is by the Church of England in her publick Articles defined to be the fault and corruption of the nature of every man that naturally is ingendred of the Of-spring of Adam whereby man is very far gon from Original righteousness and inclined to evill In which description we may find the whole nature of it as first that it is a corruption of our nature and of the nature of every man descended from the Loyns of Adam Secondly That it is a departure from and even a loss or forfieture of that stock of Original Iustice wherewith the Lord enriched our first Father Adam and our selves in him And thirdly That it is an inclination unto evil to the works of wickedness by means whereof as afterwards the Article explains it self the flesh lusteth against the Spirit and both together do incur the indignation of God So that if we speak of Original sin formally it is the privation of those excellent gifts of divine Grace inabling us to know love serve honor and trust in God and to do the things that God delights in which Adam once had but did shortly lose If materially it is that habitual inclination which is found in men most averse from God carrying them to the inordinate love and desire of finite things of the creature more than the Creator which is so properly a sin that it makes guilty of condemnation the person whosoever it be in whom it is found And this habitual inclination to the inordinate love of the creature is named Concupiscence which being two-fold as Alensis notes it out of Hugo that is to say Concupiscentia spiritus a concupiscience of the spirit or superior and concupiscentia carnis a concupiscence of the flesh or inferior faculties the first of these is onely sin but the latter is both sin and punishment For what can be more consonant to the Rules of Iustice than that the Will refusing to be ordered by God and desiring what he would not have it should finde the inferior faculties rebellious against it self and inclinable to desire those things in a violent way which the Will would have to be declined Now that all of us from the womb are tainted with this original corruption and depravation of nature is manifest unto us by the Scriptures and by some Arguments derived from the practise of the Catholick Church countenanced and confirmed by the antient Doctors In Scripture first we find how passionately David makes complaint that he was shapen in wickedness and conceived in sin Where we may note in the Greek and Vulgar Latine it is in sins and wickednesses in the plural number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Greek in peccatis in iniquitatibus as the Latine hath it And that to shew us as Becanus hath right well observed Quod unum illud peccatum quasi fons sit aliorum that this one sin is as it were the Spring and Fountain from whence all others are derived Next St. Paul tels us in plain words that by the offence of one of this one man Adam Iudgement came upon all men to condemnation and Judgement could not come upon all or any were it not in regard of sin Not that all men in whom Original sin is found without the addition of Actual and Personal guiltiness are actually made subject unto condemnation and can expect no mercy at the hands of God but that they are all guilty of it should God deal extreamly and take the forfeiture of the Bond which we all entred into in our Father Adam Thus finde we in the same Apostle that we are by nature the children of wrath polluted and unclean from the very womb our very nature being so inclinable to the works of wickedness that it disposeth us to evil from the first conception and makes us subject to the wrath and displeasure of God Last of all we are told by the same Apostle for we will clog this point with no further evidence That the wages of sin is death that sin entred into the world and death by sin and that death passed upon all men for that all have sinned And thereupon we may conclude That wheresoever we behold a spectacle of death there was a receptacle of some sin Now we all know that death doth spare no more the Infant than the Elder man and that sometimes our children are deprived of life assoon almost as they enjoy it sometimes born dead and sometimes dead assoon as born Prima quae vitam dedit hora carpsit in the Poets language A wages no way due to Infants for their actual sins for actually as yet they have not offended and therefore there must needs be in them some original guilt some Birth-sin as the Article calls it which brings so quick a death upon them And this is further verified from the constant and continual practise of the Church of Christ which hath provided That the Sacrament of Baptism be conferred on Infants before they come unto the use of Speech or Reason yea and at some times and on some occasions as namely in cases of extremity and the danger of death to Christen them assoon as born For by so doing she did charitably and not unwarrantably conceive that they are received into the number of Gods children and in a state of good assurance which could not be so hopefully determined of them should they depart without the same And with this that of Origen doth agree exactly Si nihil esset in parvulis quod ad remissionem deberet indulgentiam pertinere gratia Baptismi superflua videretur Were there not something in an Infant which required forgiveness the Sacrament of Baptism were superfluously administred to him Upon which grounds the Church of England hath maintained the necessity of Baptism against the Sectaries of this age allowing it to be administred in private houses as oft as any danger or necessity doth require it of her A second thing we finde in the Churches practise and in the practise of particular persons of most note and evidence which serves exceeding fitly to confirm this point and that is That neither the Church in general doth celebrate the birth-day of the Saints departed but the day onely of their deaths nor any of the Saints themselves did solemnize the day of their own Nativity with Feasts and Triumphs First for the practise of the Church we may take this general rule once for all Non nativitatem sed mortem sanctorum ecclesia pretiosam judicat beatam That the Church reckoneth not the day of their birth but the death-day if I may so call it of the Saints to be blest and precious According unto that of the Royal Psalmist Right precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his Saints Upon which grounds the word Natalis hath been used in the Martyrologies and other publick
the sin against the Holy Ghost or utterly past hope of pardon Nor is the case much better if we read it wilfully though better with some sort of men than it is with others For miserable were the state of us mortal men if every sin that is committed wilfully which too often hapneth either against the truth of science or the light of conscience should make a man uncapable of the mercy of God as one that blasphemed or sinned take which word you will against the power and vertue of the Holy Ghost A doctrine never countenanced in the Primitive times the Church extending her indulgence to the worst of Hereticks and opening both her arms and bosom unto those Apostataes which with true sorrow for their sins did return unto her condemning the Novatians for too rigid and severe in their bitter Tenet touching the non-admittance of them unto publick penance and after that unto the Sacraments of the Church again Which being premised the meaning of the Text will appear to be onely this That they who willingly offend after they have received the knowledge of the truth and Gospel must not expect another Christ to die for them or that he who died once for their sins should again die for them St. Ambrose and St. Chrysostom do expound it so Out of whom Clictoveus in his Continuation of St. Cyrils Commentaries upon the Gospel of St. Iohn informs us That the Apostle doth not hereby take away the second or third remission of sins for he is not such an enemy to our Salvation but saith onely that Christ our Sacrifice shall not be offered any more upon the Cross for the man so sinning And this is further proved to be the very meaning of the Apostle in the place disputed out of the scope and purpose of his discourse which was to shew unto the Iews that it was not with them now as it was under the Law For under the Law they had daily Sacrifices for their sins but under the Gospel they had but one Sacrifice once for all Every Priest saith he doth stand daily ministring and offering often times the same sacrifice but this man JESUS after he had offered one sacrifice sate down for ever at the right-hand of God than which there cannot be a clearer explanation of the Text in question Though Sacrifices were often reiterated in the times of the Law Hic vero nec baptismus repetitur neque Christus bis nisi cum ludibrio mori pro peccato yet neither is Baptism to be reiterated in the times of the Gospel nor can Christ be exposed for sin to a second death without a great deal of scorn as Heinsius hath observed from Chrysostom Some light doth also rise to this Exposition from the words immmediately succeeding where the Apostle speaks of a certain expectation of a fearful judgment Which joyned unto the former verse have this sense between them That he which doth not put his whole trust and confidence in the sufficiency of the Sacrifice already offered but for every sin expects a new Sacrifice also must look for nothing in the end but a fearful judgment which most undoubtedly first or last shall fall upon him The third and last place which is commonly alleged for proof that there are some sins irremissible in their own nature is that of St. Iohn If any man saith he see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death he shall ask and God shall give life for them that sin not unto death There is a sin unto death I do not say he shall pray for it In which words we finde two sorts of sins a sin to death and a sin that is not to death a sin which is not unto death for the remission of the which a man is bound to pray in behalf of his Brother a sin to death concerning which it seems unlawful for one man to pray for another And yet it doth but seem so neither For the Apostles words I do not say he shall pray for it amount not to a Negative that he shall not pray for it as the fautors of the contrary opinion would full gladly have it 〈◊〉 â—ather to a toleration that they might pray if they would the business being of 〈◊〉 a nature that the Apostle had no minde to encourage them in it because he could not promise them the success desired but leaving every man to himself to pray or not to pray as his affections to the party or Christian pity of the case might induce him to That by peccatum ad mortem somewhat more is meant than ordinary mortal sins is a thing past question but what it is is not so easie to discover St. Augustine will have the sin which is here called a sin unto death to be that sin wherein a mam continueth until his death without repentance but addes withal That in as much as the name of the sin is not expressed many and different things may be thought to be it Pacianus an old Catholick writer interprets it of peccata manentia Such sins as men continue in till the hour of death St. Ierom reckoneth such men to commit this sin Qui in sceliribus permanent who abide in their wickedness and express no sense nor sorrow of their lost estate The Protestant writers do expound it generally of the sin against the Holy Ghost For which say they no man ought to pray because our Saviour hath testified it to be irremissible And to this end they do allege a place from Ierom affirming Stultum esse pro eo orare qui peccaverit ad mortem That it is a foolish thing to pray for him which sins unto death because the man that is marked out to some visible ruine nullis precibus erui potest cannot possibly be reprieved by prayer But herein Ierom is not consonant to himself elswhere for in another place he telleth us with more probability that nothing else is here meant but that a prayer for such a sin whatsoever it be is very difficulty heard And this I take to be the truer or at least the more probable meaning of the Apostle who saith immediately before This is the confidence which we have in him that if we ask any thing according to his will he heareth us 1 Iohn 5.14 And therefore lest we should conceive that this holds true in all Petitions whatsoever which we make for others he addes That if it be a great sin such as is not ordinarily forgiven but punished with death I dare not say that you can either pray with confidence or that I can give you any great hopes of prevailing in it According as God said to the Prophet Ieremy Pray not for this people for I will not hear thee And though St. Augustine sometimes thought this sin to be final impenitency or a continuance in sin till death without repentance yet in his Book of Retractations he resolves the contrary affirming That
ointment on our Saviours head he appâ—oved it as a work well done saying She did it aforehand to anoint his Body to the burial And to this purpose the good women mentioned by St. Luke prepared their ointments and sweet odors intending therewithal to embalm his Body but were therein prevented by his Resurrection Which as it proves sufficiently what the custom was so our Redeemers Resurrection which so soon followed the anointing made by Mary Magdalen shews plainly to what end it pointed The care they took about them in their funeral rites is evidence sufficient if there were none else That they commit the bodies of the dead unto the Earth in sure and certain hope of the Resurrection according to the Language of the English Liturgy Upon this very ground no other the Christians of the Primitive times did use to spare no cost to embalm their dead but were more prodigal of sweet odors and most precious oyntments in the obsequies of the Saints departed than the poverty of their estate could well admit of Tertullian so affirms it saying Sciant Sabaei se pluris merces suas Christianis sepeliendis profligari quam diis fumigandis We spend saith he more Frankincense and Arabian Spices upon the burial of our dead than would suffice to offer at the Altars of the Heathen gods And on this ground it hath hitherto been the piety of the Church of England to lay the bodies of the dead into the Earth with all due solemnities though now she stand accused for Superstition even in this particular in the conceit of some Novators more precise than pious Nay if I understand aright the Apostles meaning St. Paul derives a very strong Argument from this antient custome to prove the Resurrection of the dead against all opposers Else what do they saith he which are baptized for dead if the dead rise not again why are they then baptized for dead That is to say and the Greek Text will bear it well why do they use such frequent washings over the bodies of the dead why are the dead baptized as a man may say with rich balms and ointments why are they laid into the Earth with such costly oyls if there be no certainty of this that even those bodies shall be raised to eternal glory I know it is an hard place I am faln upon A place which hath as much perplexed the wits of our greatest Clerks as any one in all Pauls Epistles St. Ambrose doth expound this place of Baptism applied unto some living man in the name and behalf of his friend dying without Baptism out of a superstitious conceit that Baptism so conferred upon one alive in the name of him that was deceased might be available to the Resurrection of the other dying unbaptized Atque ita vivus nomine mortui tingebatur as the Father hath it That there was Vicarium tale Baptisma as Tertullian calleth it amongst the Marcionites is plain and evident yea and amongst the Cerinthians also another sort of Hereticks as bad as they Epiphanius tells us of the quod sit that so indeed it was amongst them and Chrysostom informeth us of the manner of it But that such a superstitious custom as baptizing one man for another in hope that other might receive the benefit and effect thereof should creep so early into the Church of Corinth as to get footing there within three years after the first Preaching of the Gospel to them for no more time occurred between St. Pauls first Preaching there Anno 52 and the writing of this first Epistle which was in Anno 55. is a thing not possible to be believed Rather I think that mistaking of St. Pauls meaning in the place aforesaid might give occasion to that erroneous practise amongst the Cerinthians the wretched followers of Cerinthus and then by a very easie mistake it might be fastned on these Corinthians as it seems it was Others expound it of the Clinici as they called them in the former times such as were sick upon their death beds and being like to die and as good as dead desired the Sacrament of Baptism before their departure out of this life in hope to finde the better entrance by it unto that to come Most true it is that this Baptismus Clinicorum doth oft occur in Antient Writers and in the Canons also of some former Councils in which it was prohibited that any man so baptized should be admitted into holy Orders But that this custom was in use in those early daies or that the people were permitted to defer their baptism till the extremity of sickness did inforce them to it or did not rather receive it with the Faith it self as well in Corinth as elsewhere it is plain they did I can by no means be perswaded Another Exposition hath been thought upon and that too borrowed from a custom as erroneous as that first delivered which is that many did desire in the former times to be baptized on or near the Sepulchres of the Martyrs that so they might profess that Faith in the Resurrection for which they were slain This Musculus reports of some but of whom I know not But sure I am whosoever they were they were exceedingly mistaken in looking for the Tombs of Martyrs in the Church of Corinth within three years no more after their conversion And on the same leg as I take it halts the gloss of Chrysostom whom Theophylact followeth affirming it to be the custom of the Church of Corinth that when they were to be baptized they said over the Creed and that as they said the words of this Article viz. The Resurrection of the Body the Sacrament of Baptism was conferred upon them And then the meaning must be this Why are they then baptized for dead that is to say why are they then baptized into the resurrection of the dead in case the dead rise not again But first there is no constat of any such custom and if it were it had been but a weak Argument in so strong a Disputant to prove the Churches Doctrine in a point of Faith by the particular Churches custom not elsewhere used nor ever of such credit as to be continued Finally not to wander into more particulars Lyra doth give this gloss upon it Pro mortuis i. e. pro peccatis mortalibus quae sunt opera mortua Why are they then baptized for the dead that is saith he Why are they baptized for deadly sins which are called dead works in holy Scripture pro quibus abluendis accipitur Baptismus for washing away of which they receive that Sacrament But this agrees not well with the following words For being that the resurrection is of those that are so baptized if by pro mortuis we must mean dead works or our mortal sins it may be then inferred by the Rules of Logick that our dead works or mortal sins shall be also raised
doth exclude a Metaphor Nor do there want good Reasons to confirm this truth against the cavils and exceptions of unquiet men For first considering that the fire of Hell is so often threatned in the Scriptures to ungodly men unless we hold fast to this good old Rule in expounding Scripture to take it in the literal sense according as the native meaning of the words import but where the same may be against the truth of faith and honesty of manners it is St. Augustines Rule we shall leave nothing safe nor sound in the Book of God And then it is to be considered That Christ our Saviour shall pronounce this sentence in the day judgment Depart from me ye cursed into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels Which if it be not spoken in the literal sense according to the plain meaning of the words neither the guilty can perceive what they are to suffer nor the Ministers what they are to execute nor the Saints what belongs to them to approve and applaud but all things will be left in most strange perplexities Besides it was the custom of our Lord and Saviour when he had spoken to the Iews in Tropes and Parables to make an exposition of them to his own Disciples and in that exposition to speak so plainly that every one might be able to understand him As in the Parables of the Tares and the Casting Net delivered in the thirteenth of St. Matthews Gospel the Disciples understood not what he meant by either but were as ignorant of his scope and purpose as the rest of the Iews But when he did expound himself unto them in private touching the sending of his Angels in the day of judgment to sever the wicked from the just and to cast them being severed so into the furnace of fire and then demanded if they understood what was said unto them they made answer yea It must not therefore be a Metaphor but a proper Speech by which our Saviour Christ did expound his meaning and open the obscurity of the said two Parables for to expound a Parable by a Trope or Metaphor had neither been agreeable to our Saviours goodness nor any way conducing to their Edification So then the fire of Hell shall be true and real not Figurative and Metaphorical and as it is a real fire a devouring fire so is it ignis inextinguibilis an unquenchable fire in the third and ignis aeternus an everlasting fire in the five and twentieth of Matthew The smoke whereof goeth up for ever saith the Prophet Isaiah A fire which feedeth both on the body and the soul yet shall never consume them and such a fire as breeds a kinde of worm within it which shall never die but always gnaw upon the conscience of the man condemned and create far more anguish to him than all bodily torments And of this worm it is which St. Basil speaketh where reckoning up the terrors which shall be presented to the wicked in the day of judgment amongst them he recounteth a darkish fire which though it hath lost his light shall retain its burning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a most venemous kinde of worm feeding on flesh and raising intolerable torments with continual biting See to this purpose also that of Gregory Nyssen in his Homily De Resurrectione Christi nor is it thus delivered in the writings of the Christians onely Iosephus also hath the like a Iew but a learned and a modest Iew in an Oration of his which he made to the Grecians not extant in his works indeed but mentioned by Damascene and preserved by Zonaras For speaking also his opinion of the final judgment to be executed by the Messiah in the last day he saith That there remaineth for the lovers of wickedness an unquenchable and never ending fire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. And a fiery worm not dying nor destroying the body but breaking forth of the body with unceasing anguish And to this truth as to the miserable state of those in Hell all the old Catholick Doctors do attest unanimously whether Greeks or Latines Tatianus one of the most antientest of the Grecian Doctors calleth the estate of the damned in Hell 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a death which never dieth an immortal misery Tertullian the most antient Latin Cruciatum non diuturnum sed sempiternum Not onely a long and lingring torrant but an everlasting one St. Augustine answerably unto that of Tatianus doth call it Mortem sine morte adding more over of those sires Punire non finire corpora that they torment the body but destroy it not Tertullian he goeth further yet saith That it burns the body but repairs it also and calls it poenam nutrientem A fire which so devoureth that it also nourisheth With him Lactantius doth consent so also doth Minutius Felix Prudentius Cassiodorus and indeed who not And why should this be thought a wonder so far beyond the reason and belief of a meer natural man or such who taking on themselves the names of Christians will yet believe no more than will stand with reason Doth not the Scripture tell us of a burning bush a bush that burned with the fire and was not consumed And the Historians of the Hills of Aetna and Vesuvius which do almost continually send out dreadful flames and yet never waste And the Philosophers of a Worm or Beast which they call the Salamander whose natural habitation is in the midst of the fire and the Poets of Prometheus and Titius Vultures which having fed so many hundred years upon their Bowels had not yet devoured them Doth not experience tell us daily That the lightning glanceth on our Bodies often but doth seldom hurt us And doth not Ovid say expresly Nec mortis poenas mors altera finiet hujus That there is a second death which shall never end yet I confess that the prevailing Heresie which pretends to such wit and piety hath no small reason to declare Interire posse animas aut ab exitio liberari That the souls of wicked and impenitent men shall either be annihilated or in fine released For we may safely say of these new Pretenders as once Minutius did of the old Philosophers Malunt penitus extingui quam ad supplicia reparari Considering how they have subverted all the Fundamentals of the Christian Faith it is all the reason in the world that they should rather wish to be annihilated than survive to torments such torments as shall know neither end nor measure BUt blessed JESUS why do we waste our time in such nice disputes in proving and disproving points of so clear an evidence which were much better spent in pursutes of those ways and courses by which we might have hope to flie from the wrath to come Thou Lord hast set before us both Heaven and Hell commandest us to choose the one and avoid the other and tracedst