of modesty The second Proposition is yet more strange these Offices are not distinct Offices but the several parts of Christ's Mediatory Kingdom as if they might not be distinct Offices and yet parts The third Proposition is yet strangest of all That these Offices are the several administrations of Christ's Mediatory Kingdom Is an Office an administration Is the Office of a King but one part and administration of a Mediatory Kingdom You are wiser than I wherefore put me out of my wondering humour and tell me what kind of totum a Mediatory Kingdom is to the Offices of Prophet Priest and King And yet should you so do I should not be cured of the admiring humour this Author hath put me into for he tells me ibid. That Christ's preaching of the Gospel was his exercise of his regal Power and Authority in publishing his Laws and the conditions of eternal life I can easily understand that to make and enact the Laws and conditions of eternal life is an exercise of regal Power and Authority So is it also to constitute and make Officers to promulge and publish Laws But if bare publishing of Laws be the exercise of a regal Power and Authority there will be more Kings in every Common-wealth than were ever yet called by that name He adds ibid. That our Saviour tells Pilate he was born to be a King quoting Joh. 18. v. 37. And yet our Saviour neither there nor anywhere else useth any words of such an import either unto Pilate or any one else Christ was not born to be a King but was born a King I had took no notice of this but that I smelt a Socinian rat in it Pag. 6. That to which we commonly appropriate the name of Regal Power is that Authority which he is invested with to govern his Church to send his Spirit to forgive sins to dispense his grace and supernatural assistances to answer Prayers to raise the dead and judge the world and bestow immortal life on all his sincere Disciples all this is the reward of his death and sufferings and is therefore called his Intercession because like the intercession of the High-Priest under the Law it is founded on his expiation and sacrifice This is a strain of new Divinity so new that perhaps the world never saw it in Print till it was so unhappy as to be pestered with Socinus All the things here spoken of do agree to Christ as God-man yet so that the Divine Nature is chiefly to be eyed and to be look'd upon as the principle or fountain the humane Nature affording only an inferiour instrumental concurrence But why should it be said that all these are the reward of Christs death and sufferings Had he not the Authority for all from his incarnation Did he not raise from the dead and forgive sins and dispense his grace and supernatural assistances before he dyed what one place of Scripture is there that sayes the power of forgiving sins or raising from the dead was a reward of Christs death and sufferings And where did this Gentleman learn that all these things are call'd the intercession of Christ and therefore call'd his intercession because founded on his expiation and sacrifice Every thing that is a fruit of Christs intercession is not presently in Scripture called or to be called his intercession And he writes very loosely and wildly pag. 7. when having quoted Heb. 9.12 He adds so that intercession signifies the administration of Christs Mediatory Kingdom the power of a Regal Priest to expiate and forgive sins For neither doth the intercession of Christ so signifie nor if it did so signifie could such a signification be collected from that place of Scripture where the word intercession is not used nor any other word equivalent thereunto Pag. 8. Though Christ is originally the name of an Office yet it is in Scripture used to signifie the Person who is invested with this Office This is a rare and odd notion for as the word Christ never signifies the Office abstracted from the person so it never signifies the Person but as invested with the Office And he that can distinguish this second acceptation of the word from the first and make sence of both I think must be more subtile than Doctor Subtilis himself What follows that the Lord before his designation to the Office was publickly owned was only call'd Jesus Either I do not understand or else it is very false for when was our Lords designation to his Office publickly owned A man would think by what is added that this Authour thought it was not publickly owned till he was rais'd from the dead For these are his words In the Gospels which contain the History of his life and death he is called Jesus alwayes because all this time it was disputed whether he was the Christ or no. But I am sure that the Gospels contain the History of his resurrection as well as of his life and death and that he is not alwayes in the Gospel called Jesus but he is called Jesus Christ in the very first Verse of St. Matthew's Gospel and that he was called Christ as well as Jesus before his resurrection not only by his Disciples but by such who had not courage or faith enough to become his Disciples Had it been otherwise the Iews would not have thought it necessary to make a Law against those who said he was the Christ. The reason why the Evangelists use the name Jesus more frequently than the name Christ could not be because in the life-time of Christ it was disputed whether Jesus were the Christ for the Gospels were all written after the resurrection of Christ and one of them was written after all Paul's Epistles were written at which time there were many Churches founded on this perswasion and belief that Jesus was the Christ Pag. 9. He acquaints us That Christ sometimes signifies the Gospel and Religion of Christ I think in the Sacred Scripture it doth sometimes so signifie but wish he had not brought Col. 2.8 as an instance of that signification The Socinians would be glad to have it convincingly proved that the word Christ is there used for Christ's Doctrine and Religion or Gospel for so they would have it to signifie and thence they infer that the words in the 9th Verse are not a sufficient argument to prove Christ's Divinity 'T is say they not the humane Nature of Christ but the Gospel of Christ in which the fulness of the Godhead dwelleth bodily and they prove it by so expounding the 8th Verse as Mr. Sh. expounds it I grant also that the word Christ doth as he notes pag. 11. sometimes signifie the Church of Christ which is his body the fulness of him that filleth all in all But I deny that we must thus understand those Phrases of being in Christ ingrafted into Christ united to Christ I deny that these Phrases signifie no more than to be one who belongs to the Society whereof Christ
Speculum Sherlockianum OR A LOOKING-GLASS In which the ADMIRERS of Mr. Sherlock may behold the Man as to his Accuracy Judgement Orthodoxy By an Obedient Son of the Church of ENGLAND LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Three Crowns and Bible at the lower end of Cheap-side near Mercers-Chappell M.DC.LXXIV SIR YOu are pleased in your Letter March 24th to counsel me to buy the Book called A Discourse concerning the Knowledge of Jesus Christ not questioning but by reading of it I shall be brought to abate of the esteem I have sometime expressed of those Divines who are therein refuted Your counsel to buy the Book came somewhat too late I had bought it sundry weeks before tempted so to do by its promising title and flattering my self into a perswasion that what was written by Mr. W. S. and Licensed by Dr. S. P. must needs contain in it somewhat extraordinary In this perswasion I was somewhat confirmed because I found the Author in the Preface averring that he had composed his Book not without imploring the guidance and direction of God But having perused only his first Chapter consisting of 13 pages I found in them so much weakness contradiction and calumny that I wish'd I had the Money I gave for the Book in my Pocket again Pag. 3. He saith The Gospel of Christ is as severe a dispensation as the Law which dooms all men to eternal misery who live not very innocent and virtuous lives but the Person of Christ is all Grace a meer refuge for the wicked and ungodly If these words express his own mind then have those who ordained him reason to wish they had laid their hands upon a thorn bush rather than imposed them on his head If they are intended to represent the opinion of others whom he takes upon him to refute or rather to deride then must I needs for the present look upon them as a calumny being very confident that no one of them hath either Preached or Printed such things from which such desperate absurd opinions can be inferred Pag. 4. Some men wherever they meet with the word Christ in Scripture alwayes understand by it the Person of Christ I have heard of some that wherever they heard their Minister read the word Jesus in the New Testament thought they were to understand by it the Redeemer of Mankind and therefore have devoutly bowed their Knees at the Name Jesus when it signifyed Joshua or him that was called Justus but of any men who thought that the word Christ was alwayes in the New Testament to be understood of the Person of Christ did I never till I read this Author here and I believe he himself doth not think there are any such if he do why then doth he say pag. 11. that it is acknowledged by all that Christ sometimes signifyes the Church of Christ Let us frame a Syllogism If it be acknowledged by all that the word Christ doth sometimes signifie the Church then are there none who wherever they meet with the word Christ in Scripture do alwayes understand it of the Person of Christ. But it is acknowledged by all c. Ergo If you can answer this Syllogism so as not to make your friend either to contradict himself or calumniate others then shall I confess my self to be what you imagine somewhat Melancholly and to need a diversion Ibid. Christ is originally the name of an Office which the Jews call the Messias or one anointed by God That a concrete or connotative term should be originally the name of an Office seems to me very strange and uncouth All terms that are denominative signifie two things that which is denominated and the form from which it is denominated so must the word Christ needs signifie and I despair of being referred to any place of Scripture where it signifies an Office and not also the Person invested with the Office But to say that the Jews call an Office the Messias a word of a Greek termination or one anointed by God is to father such a piece of prodigious Nonsence upon the Jews as I dare say they would be loth to have laid at their doors And yet this confident Gentleman takes upon him to give a reason of so gross Nonsence in these words For under the Law their Prophets Priests and Kings were invested in their several Offices by the Ceremony of anointing them with Oyle I will not be so severe as to bring this reason into the form of an argumentation lest it should create some horror in you Make the words an intire or absolute Proposition and you will not much fancy it for indeed under the Law the High-Priests in regular times were invested in their Office with the Ceremony of anointing with Oyle but so were not the inferiour Priests at any time save only the first As for the Prophets under the Law I cannot find that any one of them was invested in his Prophetical Office by the Ceremony of anointing with Oyle which notwithstanding they might and perhaps were called the Lords anointed and so at this day may we call all Ministers and Christians yet not because they are anointed with Oyle ceremonially applyed to them when first they are put into the number of Ministers or Christians He adds That the legal unctions were typical of that divine unction the Holy Jesus received at his baptism when the Spirit of God descended on him like a Dove and I think that those unctions were typical but doubt many of the Jews never understood their typicalness and do not see why they should be thought only to have typified the anointing of Christ at his baptism He was anointed with the Holy Ghost and with power at his conception or incarnation But be this as it will I am unsatisfied with what follows page the 5th That Gods anointing Christ with the Holy Ghost and with power should be his consecration to the Mediatory Office Dr. Jackson and Dr. Hammond sing quite another Song and tell us Christ was consecrated to his Priestly Office a part sure of his Mediatory Office by his sufferings and death and surely Christ's dying was not his being anointed with the Holy Ghost There follows something pag. the 5th which amazed me for he saith all those Offices of Prophet Priest and King are not properly distinct Offices in Christ but the several parts and administrations of his Mediatory Kingdom Do not wonder if this put me into a little amazement for resolving it into three Propositions I found every one of them strange 'T is strange presumption for a young Divine to say that these Offices are not distinct Offices in Christ and never in the least to suggest wherein the impropriety of so calling them doth lye To find fault with forms of speech generally used and which may be retained without any inconvenience and never to tell us where the faultiness of those forms of speech lyes does not become one who is minded to keep up a reputation
for it Ans So did the Jews whom yet Christ condemneth Here Mr. T. S. stumbled and Mr. Sh. must needs call to all England to take notice of it But the answer though unhappily expressed is sufficient to shew that a man may strictly keep a day of Divine Institution and yet be of the number of those whom Christ condemns But hath not Mr. Sh. committed a greater mistake in saying that to keep the Lords Day strictly is one good thing which doth well in the company of more such a Speech would formerly have been esteemed Puritanical and it may be this notwithstanding he could like well enough of a Book of Sports 2. In implying that with other things it will justifie a man for as I think it is God and not the Observation of the Lords Day that justifieth I am ashamed to observe how in the remainder of p. 382 and pag. 383. throughout Mr. Sh. shews his teeth and knoweth not where to bite just like a man that wisheth his adversary had errors to be confuted and were sorry he could find none That a man may think he hath a good heart to God and yet deceive himself which is all that Mr. Shepeheard saith he cannot deny but wisheth he had said that a man who thinks he hath a good heart towards God must needs be mistaken and then he would say the whole Doctrine concerning marks and evidences were at an end It may perhaps be worthy a little observation what Mr. Sh. saith to a distinguishing mark betwixt a regenerate and an unregenerate man An unregenerate man saith T. S. let him go never so far do never so much yet he lives in some one sin or other This I say is a good Rule for a man to judge himself by He that allows himself in no known sin either of Omission or Commission is a regenerate man Every unregenerate man allows himself in some known sin of omission or commission A Regenerate person hates every known sin and sincerely endeavours to avoid all known sin so doth no unregenerate man so can no unregenerate man doe no man not born of God loves God above all there is something he loves above God and what the effect of not loving God above all must needs be who knows not Mr. Sh. it should seem doth not for he saith this is very strange That let an unregenerate man go never so far and doe never so much yet he lives in some one sin or other If it seem strange very strange I cannot help it but a little Christian Philosophy will take away the admiring Humour Lastly It is manifest that Mr. Sh. thrusts out his sting against those who have written nothing taken notice of by him that can be supposed to hurt or hinder Godliness He mentions Thomas Vincent p. 144. censureth the prettiness and fantastical Wit of an Exhortation made by him What is the Exhortation why the Exhortation is directed to his Hearers To choose Christ for their Husband because he is Rich Beautifull and Kind and hath all the Properties of an excellent Husband This he saith would sound better in a Popish Nunnery than among such pretenders to Reformation One mans Exhortation doth not please him but he cannot content himself to declare his displeasure against one man we presently hear of pretenders to Reformation not so generous suitors for Christ as the Papists To the reproach of my stupidity I cannot see what prettiness or fantasticalness is in this Wit if wit it must be called I ever took it for granted that in sound Conversion a man is taken into a conjugal Relation with Christ and that if any man so related to Christ should fall into an Act of Idolatry he should commit spiritual Adultery and would provoke God to jealousie This young Divine is so illuminated that he can correct Magnificat and spy a beam in Expressions so usual among the greatest Clerks and so agreeable to Scripture let us see what Discovery he hath made The Church is Christs Spouse and every Christian is a member of that Society which Christ owns for his Spouse He is a great Enemy to Polygamy and hath but one Spouse as he hath but one Body but one Church If Mr. Vincent should grant all this to be true his Exhortation is not at all spoyled Maids are still to be perswaded to choose Christ to be their Husband onely it seems they must first choose to be members of the Church and then they shall be parts of the Spouse of Christ But I should think that as his Majesty by being King of England Scotland Ireland is King to every Person in these three Kingdoms so Christ by being Husband to his Church hath the Relation of an Husband to every member of the Church It is the Church of Christ that is called the Spouse in the Canticles and the Wife of the Lamb in the Revelations but why is she so called but because she is a collection of such men and women as are married or espoused to him The Church which is married to Christ is also married to his Father is so his Wife that she is also his Mother and yet Christ is as great an Enemy to Incest as Polygamy Let us leave it to Julian to scoffe at these Titles and Relations and for our own parts let us admire at the condescensions of Divine love and conceive of things spiritual spiritually so shall we be accounted worthy to be called to the Marriage of the Lamb and be brought by him into his Fathers House which he hath prepared for all that fear him I have now done and desire you to keep these Papers to your self or if you will needs shew them to Mr. Sh. to conceal my Name for I love not to enter into the Lists with any man and he hath already Adversaries enow And if you will you may please to acquaint him with the misadventures of some men of wit but of no great judgement in Divinity Vergerius was a witty man else he had not been made Legate to Clement the seventh and Paul the third he setting himself to write against the Apostates of Germany became by reading their Books their Convert and so quite lost the Hope he had of a Cardinalship Pighius adventuring to read Calvin about Justification with a design to refute him became a Calvinist in point of Justification and that did not help him to Preferment A worthy Right Reverend Person now one of his Majesties Bishops preaching when he was young for a Friend of yours and mine very elegantly discoursed against the Imputation of the active Righteousnesse in that sence which looks a little too like Antinomianism our Friend told him he had delivered but his sence yet blamed him for that being so young he would so peremptorily declare himself in a point wherein it was possible he might live to be of another mind He replyed That it could not be he should alter his Mind in that matter but setting himself afterwards to preach at large about Justification he most professedly pleaded for the Imputation of the Active Righteousness and of that mind he is still Commend to his Reading three Non-conformists Mr. Fox De Christo gratis justificante Mr. Anthony Wotton De Reconciliatione c. Mr. William Bradshaw De Justificatione Bid him also consider whether if the Parliament should meet they might not find leisure enough to censure his Discourse as they did Mr. Mountagues who in vain pleaded for himself That he he had writ against the Puritans and was left alone to suffer though others had instigated him to write The Commons of England will scarce endure to find the Doctrine of the Church of England struck at though it be through the sides of Dr. Owen and Dr. Jaâ—… Nor can I think that the Reverend 〈…〉 of our Church read this Book of Mr. Sh 's without a Frown in their Foreheads common Fame is more than ordinarily false if some of them have not manifested their dislike of it These things you may if you please suggest to your Author Let Brotherly Love continue betwixt you and Your c. FINIS