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
of no great difficulty to answer all objections which were brought against it Where first it is to be confessed that the Iew hath eased us of much care in this particular the satisfying of their cavils having cleared the history and left it less suspected to the other adversary whether Greek or Roman Nor need we press them further then to gain this of them that they would not think those points impossible in the Christian Faith which in their own Authentick stories are accounted possible The Grecian Writers hath recorded it of Aeâ—â—ulapius that he restored a man to life by the power of Physick and for that cause hath been enrolled ever since amongst their gods And the best Authors of the Romans do affirm of Romulus that being murdered by the Senate he was seen in a more stately form then usual to ascend up into the Heavens Which lest it should not pass for current with the common people Proculus is suborned to testifie it on his corporal Oath Et pejurante Proculo deus ROMVLVS saith Minutius Felix The truth of these reports I dispute not here Only I make this use thereof that by the credit and report of their own best Writers it is neither to be thought impossible that a dead man should be restored again to life which was the case of Aesculapius amongst the Grecians or be advanced unto the top of heavenly honour which was the case of Romulus in the Roman stories Should they require more proof then they use to give we then refer them to the secret closets of Tiberius Caesar there to peruse a letter writ by Pontius Pilate in affirmation of this miracle Which wrought so far into the faith of that mighty Prince that he proposed it once in the open Senate to have CHRIST enrolled and registred amongst the other Deities of the Roman Empire And certainly it was a point in which the wisest men both of Greeks and Romans did quickly alter their opinion who as they were of excellent understanding in the works of nature so were they with less difficulty fitted for the acts of Grace then were the Iews whom prejudice and prepossession had so wholly blinded that they would not see the Sun of Righteousness when he shined most clearly And such assuredly is the condition of humane learning in those who have attained it in a full degree that it not only doth advance them above other men in the exercise of all moral virtues but brings them forwards on the way unto life eternal So from the substance of the Resurrection or the Quod sit of it which we have fully vindicated from the opposition both of Iew and Gentile we next proceed unto the circumstances which attend upon it one of the which hath given as much occasion of dispute amongst the Christians as did the main body of the Article to the Iews and Gentiles But this indeed is such a circumstance as comes exceeding neere the substance if it be not of it For whereas it is generally agreed on by all sorts of Christians that our Saviour rose again the third day according to the Scriptures yet there appears to be some difference amongst the Evangelists as unto the time of the day in which this wondrous work was wrought and no small difficulty amongst the learned Christian Writers how to finde out three days precisely upon good account in which he was to lie in the grave of death for the fulfilling of those Scriptures The third day was the time of his Resurrection that 's agreed on all hands and that aswell to hold compliance with the sign or figure of the Prophet Ionah as to keep pace with the prediction of the Prophet Hosea Before that time he did not and he would not rise because perhaps some captious people might have doubted whether he had been really and truly dead if he had raised himself with more celerity Nor longer would he put it off ne Discipulorum fides labasceret so to consult the wavering and unsetled hopes of his Disciples not yet improved into a Faith The business is how to accommodate the time of his being in the grave to the three days and three nights of the Prophet Ionah according to the intimation which himself had made how to finde out those three days which the Scripture speaks of For being that our Saviour was interred on the sixt day or Friday about Sun-setting and rose again the first day Sunday about the rising of the Sun or a little before it the longest time of his imprisonment in the grave can be but thirty six or thrice twelve houres which comes exceeding short of three days and nights To salve this sore there hath been many several plasters made by the learned Writers and Interpreters of holy Scripture every one thinking best of that which himself prescribeth and finding some exceptions against those which have perhaps as happily been devised by others Some do conceive our Saviours lying in the womb of the earth may be most clearly resolved by that construction which Lawyers sometimes make in Favorabilibus for the greater part of three days and nights so that if he continued in the heart of the earth but an hour or less above the six and thirty houres before accounted he then made good the sign of the Prophet Ionah according to the Legal construction of it And some there be and those indeed the most in number which think they have resolved the doubt by that Synecdoche which is allowed in common cases where the part is reckoned for the whole as if a man should make an Affidavit as we use to call it that he had attended in the Court three days together it could not be intended nor interpreted that he attended three whole days from morning to evening but only at such competent hours in every day as my Lords the Iudges use to sit The reason of which Legal allowances and Rhetorical Synecdoches is grounded upon this unquestionable rule of Logick i. e. Ad veritatem indefinitae Propositionis astruendam sufficit veritas unius vel alterius particularis And then according unto this Synecdoche or just allowance our Saviour both in a Logical and a Legal construction may be truly said to be three days and three nights in the bowels of the earth that is to say some part of Friday all Saturday and some part of Sunday And this hath generally been entertained for the clearest and most expedite solution of the present difficultie Who also adde this note of Leo That though our Saviour had fore-signified that he would rest in the grave three whole days and nights or the far greater part at least yet to revive the drooping souls of his Disciples Denunciatam tridui moram mira celeritate breviavit he cut off a great deal of the time taking the last part only of the first day and the first part only of the last that he might both abbreviate the time and make
body CHAP. VII Of the crucifying death and burial of the Lord JESUS CHRIST with the diquisition of all particulars incident thereunto THe death of Christ prefigured both in that of Abel and of Abels lamb The definition of a Sacrifice how abused by Bellarmine and on what design The Sacrifices of the Law how accounted expiatory Several resemblances between the Sacrifices of Christ and the legal sacrifices A parallel beawixt Christ and Isaac and betwixt Christ and the Brazen Serpent Calvins interpretation and the practise of the Papists much alike unsound How Christ is said to be made a curse The cruel intention of the Iews to prolong Christs miseries under the false disguise of pity Several sorts of Dereliction and in what sort our Saviour Christ complained that he was forsaken Whether Christ spake those words in his own Person or in the person of his members the Schoolmen in this point very sound and solid Why vinegar was given to Christ at the time of his passion The meaning of those words Consummatum est That the death of Christ is rather to be counted voluntary then either violent or natural and upon what reasons The death of Christ upon the Cross a full Propitiation for the sins of man both in the judgement of Scriptures and the Antient Fathers That Christ suffered not the death of the soul as impiously is affirmed by some The Eucharist ordained for a Sacrifice by our Lord and Saviour The Sacrifice or Oblation of Bread and Wine used antiently by that very name in the Church of Christ why called Commemorative and why an Eucharistical sacrifice and why the Sacrament of the Altar The Sacrifice asserted by the Antient Writers corrupted by the Church of Rome and piously restored by the Church of England St. Cyprian wrested by the Papists to defend their Mass. A parallel between the Peace-offerings and the blessed Eucharist The renting of the Vail at our Saviours passion what it might portend The Earthquake and Eclipse then happening testified out of Heathen writers The reconciliation of St. Mark and St. Iohn about the time and hour of our Saviours suffering Various opinions in that point and which most improbable Vniversality of redemption defended by the Church of England Both Sacraments how said to issue from our Saviours side The breaking of our Saviours body in the holy Eucharist how it agreeth with the not breaking of his bones The true and proper meaning of the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Certain considerations on our Saviours buriall and of the weekly fasting dayes thereupon occasioned That Iudas hanged himself made good from the antient Fathers against the new devise of Daniel Heinsius The fearfull and calamitous ends of Pontius Pilate Annas Cajaphas and the whole nation of the Iews CHAP. VIII Of the locall descent of Christ into hell Hades and inferi what they signifie in the best Greek and Latine authors and in the text of holy Scripture an examination and confutation of the contrary opinions CHrists descent into hell the first degree of his Exaltation and so esteemed by many of the antient Fathers The drift and project of this Chapter Severall Etymologies of the Greek word HADES The Greek word HADES used most commonly by the old Greek writers to signifie hell the place of torments sometimes to signifie Pluto the King of hell the word so used also by the sacred Penmen of the new Testament The faultinesse of our last translators in rendring the Greek HADES by the English grave 1 Cor. 15.55 c. contrary to the exposition of the best interpreters By HADES in the Ecclesiasticall notion of it is meant only hell in the opinion of all Greek writers of the elder and middle times The Latine word inferi whence derived and what it signifyeth Inferi generally used by the Antient writers for the place of torments not for the receptacles or repositories of the righteous souls The Greek word Hades generally rendered in the new Testament by the Latine inferi The meaning of these words viz. He descended into hell Grammatically gathered from the Premises Arguments for the locall descent of Christ into hell from St. Pauls words Rom. 10.6 7. and Ephes. 4.8 9 c. with the explication of both places The leading of captivity captive Ephes. 4. and the spoiling of principalities and powers Col. 2.15 used by the antients as arguments for Christs descent into hell the like proved by St Peters argument Act. 2.27 c. the pains of death mentioned vers 2.24 in the latter editions of that book the very same with the pains of hell in some antient copies The Locall descent of Christ into hell proved by the constant and successive testimonies of the old Greek Fathers and by the general current of the Latine writers together with the reasons which induced him to it Considerations on this point viz. whether Christ by his descent into hell delivered thence the souls of such holy men as either dyed under or before the Law Bullengers moderation in it CHAP. IX The Doctrine of the Church of England touching Christs descent into Hell asserted from all contrary opinions which are here examined and disproved THe Doctrine of the Church of England touching the local descent of Christ into Hell delivered in the book of Articles in the book of Homilies and Catechismes publickly allowed The errour of Mr. Rogers in that point charged upon the Church The Doctrine of a locall descent defended by the most eminent writers in the Protestant Churches and of some of the Reformed also The first objection against the locall descent viz. that there was no such clause in the old Creed or Symbol of the Church of Rome The second objection that our Saviour went on the day of his passion with the Theef to Paradise The third objection that Christ at the instant of his death commended his soul into the hands of God the Father The pertinency and profitablenesse of the locall descent declared and stated and freed from all the Cavils which are made against it The false construction of this Article by our Masters in the Church of Rome Brentius and Calvin falsly charged by Bellarmine The Article of Christs descent by whom first made the same with his burial the inconvenience of that sense and the absurdities of Beza in indevoring to make it good The new devise which makes the descent into hell to be nothing else but a continuance for three days in the state of death proposed and answered A Theologicall Dictionary necessary for young Divines The Author and progresse of the new opinion touching the suffering of hell paines in our Saviours soul. A particular of the torments in hell that is to say remorse of conscience 2. rejection from the favour of God 3. despaire of Gods mercy 4. the fiery flames there being That none of all these could finde place in our Saviours soul. The blasphemy of some who teach that Christ descended into hell to suffer there the torments of
he only made a shew of faith which he never had Why so Quia Lucas aperte testatur eum credidisse because S. Luke affirms that he did believe being convinced by the signs and miracles which S. Philip wrought as many others of Samaria at the same time were And yet no doubt but Simon Magus was a Reprobate a man rejected by the Lord in regard of his wickedness and that his heart was not right in the sight of God and afterwards an author of such mischief in the Church of God that Ignatius who lived neer those times very rightly cals him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first begotten of the Devil The like mâ—y be affirmed also of Alexander Hymeneus and Philetus who had been made partakers of the Faith of CHRIST and were zealous in it for the time but afterwards made shipwrack of it denying amongst other Articles of the Christian faith that of the resurrection of the dead and thereby overthrowing the faith of some Men questionless given over to a reprobate sense or else we may be well assured St. Paul had never given them over to the hands of Satan as it is plain he did But what need search be made into these particulars when Calvin himself affirms in general Reprobis fidem tribui eosdem interdum simili fere sensu atque Electos affici eosque merito dici Deum sibi propitium credere c. that Faith is given unto the Reprobate that sometimes they are touched with the like sense of Gods grace as the Elect ones are and may deservedly be said to believe that God is favourable and propitious to them God sometimes makes the Sun of Righteousness as well as the Sun of Heaven to shine on the evil and on the good Which notwithstanding Faith is called and that most properly Fides Electorum the Faith of Gods Elect in that and other places of the Book of God because the fruits thereof are in them more visible the confession of the same more fervent the seeds thereof more fastly rooted and the fruit more durable For which cause possibly the Apostle doth there join together the faith of Gods Elect and the knowledge of the truth which is after godliness Which is indeed the special difference which is between the faith of the Elect and the faith of the Reprobates For if the fruit be unto holiness no question but the end thereof will be life everlasting It is not then the weakness or the want of faith which doth alone exclude the Reprobate from the Kingdom of Heaven and make him finally uncapable of the grace and favour of the Lord in the day of judgement but the want of a good conscience in the sight of God And therefore if we mark it well St. Peter did not charge it upon Simon Magus that he wanted faith or that his faith was only a dissembled hypocritical faith upbraiding him as formerly Ananias in another case that he had not only lyed unto men but unto God but that he was in the gall of bitterness and in the bonds of iniquity not having his heart right in the sight of God Nor did St. Paul accuse the said three Apostates that they never had received the faith or that the faith which they received was not true and real but that first having put away a good conscience they afterwards made shipwrack of the faith also blaspheming God and scattering abroad their dangerous errours to the seducing of their brethren If Simon had repented of his wickedness as St. Peter advised it may be charitably supposed that the thoughts of his heart had been forgiven him And Hymeneus and Alexander if they had made good use of the Apostles censure when he delivered them unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh no question but their spirits might have been saved in the day of the Lord IESUS Which may suffice for answer to the first objection touching the faith of reprobates as they use to call them whose firm assent to supernatural truths revealed makes them not inheritable to the Kingdom of Heaven because they hold the truth revealed in unrighteousness and so become without excuse as St. Paul tels us in another case of the antient Gentiles The next Objection is that if this phrase in Deum credere import no more then this that there is a God and that all his words are Divine truths and all the world the workmanship of his hands alone the Devils do belieue as much as St. Iames assures us Thou believest saith he that there is one God thou dost well the Devils also believe and tremble Iam. 1.19 The answer unto this is easie St. Iames assures us of the Devils that they believe there is one God but doth withall assure us this that this belief of theirs confirms them in the certainty and foreknowledge of their everlasting damnation the apprehension of the which produceth nothing in them but fear and horrour The Devils do believe that there is a God and that this God is just in all his actions and righteous in all his ways unchangeable in his Decrees Yesterday and to day and the same for ever What other comfort can they reap from this faith of theirs but that being once condemned by God to eternal fire they are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness to the judgement of the great and terrible day For knowing that the judgements of the Lord are just and his doom unchangeable they must needs know withall the certainty of their own damnation or else they cannot properly be affirmed to believe this truth that there is a God And as they do believe that there is a God so they believe also that he is the Maker of heaven and earth For being at the first created by Almighty God with so great perspicacity and clearness of the understanding they could not choose but know the hand that made them and consequently believe that he made all those things which are ascribed to God in the holy Scripture Though by their fall they lost the favour of the Lord their first estate in which they were created by Almighty God the grace by which they stood and the glories which they did possess yet lost they not that quickness and agility of motion that perspicacity and clearness of the understanding wherewith they were endowed by God at their first Creation But what makes this unto their comfort when the same knowledge or belief call it which you will by which they are assured that God made the Heavens and the Earth and all the things therein contained will keep them always in remembrance of this most sad truth that he also made an Hell of fire where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth prepared for the Devill and his Angels To go a little farther yet the Devils did not only believe long since that CHRIST was come in the flesh but publickly proclaimed him in the open
Rome relapsed to her antient Gentilism revived again so many of her Gods and Goddesses that both the Iews and Infidels may have cause to question whether she doth believe in one God alone or that he only is the Father Almighty whom the Creed here mentioneth Of which and other of the Attributes of Almighty God I am next to speak Articuli 1. pars 2da 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Patrem Omnipotentem i. e. The Father Almighty CHAP. III. Of the Essence and Attributes of God according to the holy Scripture The name of Father how applyed unto God of his Mercy Justice and Omnipotency BY that which hath been said in the former Chapter out of the Monuments and Records of the antient Gentiles it is apparent that they knew that there is a GOD that he was one only and that this one God was an Eternal and Immortal Spirit existing of himself without any beginning invisible incomprehensible omnipotent without change or passion In which description we have all those Epithels summed up together out of the works and writings of those reverend Sages which Ruffinus a good Christian Writer of the Primitive times hath bestowed upon him in his Exposition of the Creed Deum cum audis substantiam intellige sine initio sine fine simplicem sine ulla admixtione invisibilem incorpoream ineffabilem inaestimabilem in quo nihil adjunctum nihil creatum And though it could not be expected that the Gentiles guided only by the light of Nature should have said so much yet for the better knowledge of the Essence Attributes and works of GOD we must not rest our selves contented with that measure of light which was discovered unto them but make a more exact search for it in the holy Scriptures Concerning which there is a memorable story of Iustin Martyr which he relateth in his Dialogue with Trypho the Iew. St. Paul hath noted of the Greeks that they seek after wisdome and never was the note more exactly true then in that particular For being inflamed with a desire of coming to a more perfect knowledge of the Nature of GOD then had been generally attained by the common people first he applyed himself unto the Stoicks who by the gravity and preciseness of their conversation did seem most likely to direct him But this knowledge was not with the Stoick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor could he learn much there of the nature of God Next he betook himself to the Peripateticks men most renowned for their knowledge in the works of Nature and the subtilties of disputation But there he profited less then before with the Stoicks the Peripateticks being more irresolute and speaking less divinely of the things of GOD then any of the other Sects of Philosophie Then had he severally recourse unto the Pythagorean and the Platonist who were most eminent in those times for the contemplative parts of learning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the search of immaterials But true Divinity was not to be found in all the writings either of the Pythagoreans or the Platonists although these last did seeme to come more neer the truth then either the Peripatetick or the Stoick At last he was encountred by a Reverend old man a Christian Father and was by him directed to the Book of God writ by the Prophets and Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as they which only knew the truth and which alone were able to unfold it rightly The counsel of which Reverend man he obeyed full gladly and profited so well in the Schools of CHRIST that he became a Martyr for the Faith and Gospel So we if we would come unto the perfect knowledge of GOD though we may sport our selves and refresh our thoughts in the pleasant walks and prospects of Philosophy must at the last apply our selves to the holy Scriptures where we shall be as far instructed in the things of GOD as he thinks fit to be communicated to the sons of men Now for our better method in the present search we will consider GOD in those names and Attributes by which he hath made known himself in his holy Covenants And first we meet with that of the Lord IEHOVAH which the Greeks usually called the Tetragrammaton or the name consisting of four letters for of no more it doth consist in the Hebrew language the Iews more properly nomen appropriatum gloriosum the most peculiar and most glorious name of the Lord our God appropriated unto him in so strict a manner that it was not lawful to communicate it unto any Creature By this name was he first pleased to make himself known unto Moses saying that he had appeared to Abraham Isaac and Jacob by the name of God Almighty but by this Name of Jehovah he had not made himself known unto them And in the Prophet Esay thus Ego sum Jehovah illud est nomen meum i. e. I am Jehovah that is my Name and my glory will I not give unto another Derived it is from Iah an old Hebrew root which signifieth ens existens Being or existing And hereupon was that when Moses in the third of Exod. v. 14. asked the name of GOD the Lord returned this answer to him I Am that I Am and thus shalt thou say unto the people I AM hath sent me unto you And hereupon it was that St. IOHN calleth him in the Book of the Revelation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is which was and which is to come Nor doth it signifie alone a self-existence by which he hath a Beeing in and of himself and doth communicate a beeing unto all the creatures but it is used in Scripture for a name of power by which he governeth all those creatures on which he hath been pleased to bestow a beeing And therefore if we mark it well though he appear unto us by the name of God in the first of Genesis when the Creation was an Embryo an imperfect work yet he is no where called by the name of the Lord Iehovah till the Creation was accomplished and his works made perfect The Fathers heereupon observe and the note is handsome that the name of GOD is absolute essential and coeternal with the Deitie but that of IEHOVAH or the Lord not used except in reference to the creature And it is noted by Tertullian in his Book against Hermogenes that in the first of Genesis it is often said Deus dixit Deus vidit Deus fecit God said and God saw and God created But that he was not called the Lord by the name of IEHOVAH till the second Chapter when he had finished all his works the Heaven and Earth and all things in the same contained and that there was some creature framed on which to exercise his Power and Supreme command Ex quo creata sunt in quae potestas ejus ageret ex eo factus est dictus DOMINVS for by the word Dominus do the Latines render
whom with thee and the holy Ghost be praise for ever But leaving these more intricate speculations to more subtill heads The name of Father in this sense is ascribed to God by two severall titles First Iure Creationis by the right of Creation by which he is the Father of all mankinde And secondly Iure Adoptionis by the right and title of Adoption by which he hath anew begotten us in St. Peters language to an inheritance immortall undefiled and that fadeth not away reserved for us in the Heavens First GOD is said to be our Father in the right of Creation by which as all the World and all things in the same contained may be called the workmanship of his hands so may all mankinde be called his children not only those which trust and believe in him but also those which know him not nor ever read so much of him as the Book of nature those which yet live as out-lawes from the rule of reason and barbarous and savage people of both the Indies Thus Malachi the last Prophet of the Iewes Have we not all one Father hath not God created us Thus the Apostle of the Gentiles doth affirme of GOD that out of one bloud he hath made all kindreds of men And CHRIST himself who brake down the partition wall between Iew and Gentile Call no man Father on Earth for one is your Father which is in Heaven Not that the Lord would have us disobedient to our naturall Parents or ashamed to own them for this is plainly contrary both to Law and Gospeâ—t but that we should refer our being unto him alone which is the fountain of all beeing Solus vocandus est Pater qui creavit said Lactantius truly Now God is said to be our Father by the right of Creation for these following reasons as first because he was the Father of the first man Adam out of whose loyns we are descended or of whose likeness since the fall we are all begotten Therefore St. Luke when he had made the Genealogie of our Saviour CHRIST in the way of ascent doth conclude it thus which was the son of Seth which was the son of Adam which was the Son of God the son of God but not by generation for so our Saviour only was the Son of God and therefore it must be by Creation only Secondly GOD is called our Father because he hath implanted in our Parents the vertue Generative moulded and fashioned us in the secret closets of the Womb. Thy hands have made me and fashioned me Thine eyes did see my substance being yet imperfect and in thy book were all my members written saith the Royal Psalmist The bodies of us men are too brave a building for man and Nature to erect And therefore said Lactantius truly Hominem non patrem esse sed generandi ministrum Man only is the instrument which the Lord doth use for the effecting of his purpose to raise that godly edifice of flesh and bloud which he contemplates in his children Last of all for our souls which are the better part of us by which we live and move and have our beeing they are infused by GOD alone man hath no hand in it God breathes into our nosthrils the breath of life and by his mighty power doth animate and inform that matter which of it self is meerly passive in so great a wonder In each of these respects and in all together we may conclude with that of Aratus an old Greek Poet as he is cited by S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for we are all his off-spring all of us his children The second Interest which GOD hath in us as a Father in the way of adoption by which we are regenerate or anew begotten to a lively hope of being heirs unto the promises and in the end partakers of eternal glories by which we are transplanted from our Fathers house and out of the Wilderness and unprofitable Thickets of this present world and graffed or inoculated on the Tree of life Adoptare enim est juxta delectum sibi quos quisque velit in filios eligere Adoption is the taking of a childe from another family to plant and cherish in our own say the Civil Lawyers and he that so adopteth may be called our Father by approbation of the laws though not by nature Examples of this case have been very ordinary from Moses who was adopted for her son by the daughter of Pharaoh though he refused to be called the son of Pharaohs daughter as St. Paul said of him down through all the stories both of Greece and Rome And if it may be lawful to make such resemblances the motives which induced GOD to proceed this way and other the particulars of most moment in it do seem to carry a fair proportion or correspondency with such inducements and particulars as hath been used by men on the same occasions For in the Laws adoption was to be allowed but in these four cases First Quod quidam Matrimonii onera detrectarent because some men could not away with the cares of Wedlock Secondly Quod conjugium esset sterile because God had not blessed the marriage with a fruitful issue Thirdly Quod liberi ipsorum morerentur because their own children by untimely death or the unluckie chance of War had been taken from them in which last case adoption by especial dispensation was allowed to women Fourthy Quod liberi ipsorum improbi essent degeneres because their own children were debauched and shameless likely to ruine that estate and disgrace that family into which they were born And upon such grounds as these is GOD in Scripture said to adopt the Gentiles to make them who by nature were the sons of wrath and seemed to be excluded from the Covenant which he made with Abraham to be the heirs of God and Coheirs with Christ. God looked upon the Iews as his natural children And at the first one might have known them easily for the sons of God by the exemplarie piety of their lives and actions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. as men know commonly their neighbour children by a resemblance to their Fathers St. Paul hath made a muster of some chiefs amongst them in the 11. chap. to the Heb. But they being took away by the hand of death there next succeeded in their room a gâ—neration little like them in the course of their lives and therefore little to the comfort of their heavenly Father For his part he was never wanting unto his Vineyard nor could there any thing be done to it which he did not do yet when he looked for grapes in their proper season it brought forth nothing but wilde grapes sit only for the wine-press of his indignation So that the Lord was either childless or else the Father of a stubborn and perverse generation of whose reclaim there was no hopes or but small if any
ordained that having made compensation to his neighbour for the injury done he shall bring his trespass offering to the Lord a Ram without blemish out of the flock And the Priest shall make atonement for him before the Lord and it shall be forgiven him In which we finde that satisfaction for the wrong in regard of man was to be made by restitution but the forgiveness of the sin in regard of God to be procured by the sacrifice of the bloud of Rams But what need search be made into more particulars when the atonement for their sins and sanctifying them to the Lord their God is generally ascribed to the sacrifices and bloud of beasts as if the burden of mens sins had been laid on them For thus saith God by Moses to the sons of Aaron Wherefore have ye not eaten the sin-offering in the holy place seeing it is most holy and God hath given it you to bear the iniquity of the Congregation to make atonement for them before the Lord Thus when he doth restrain that people from eating bloud he gives this reason of the same because I have given it to you upon the Altar to make atonement for your souls for it is the bloud that makes an atonement for the soul Thus also saith S. Paul that both the Book and all the people the Tabernacle and all the vessels of the Ministry and almost all things by the Law were purged with bloud and that without shedding of bloud there was no remission If without shedding of the bloud of beasts there was no remission then certainly it followeth by St. Pauls illation that by shedding of their bloud there was Or that the sacrifices both before and under the law may seem to have the same effect in remission of sins which is conferred on Baptism in the time of the Gospel A power not natural to either ex natura sua for naturally it is as impossible for water as for the bloud of Buls and Goats to take away sins but Ex vi divinae institutionis conferred upon them by the Institution of Almighty God who being the Physitian of the soul of man might choose what medicines he thought fittest for the Patients ease And possibly enough it is that besides this Expiatory power affixed to these legal Sacrifices they might occasionally produce repentance in the hearts of the people when they beheld the innocent dumb beasts brought unto the slaughter and brought unto the slaughter for no other reason but to make reconciliation for the sin of man For if a generous young Prince that sees his negligences punished on the back of another according to the usage of former times doth thereby both grow more industrious in his course of studies and more conform and regular in his course of life why may we not conceive so favourably of the people of Israel that seeing the brute beasts punished for mans offences they might repent with shame and sorrow of their former wickednesses and cry out passionately and afflictedly in the words of DAVID It is I that have sinned and done wickedly but what have these sheep done that they should be slaughtered Me me adsum qui feci in me convertile ferrum Let thy hand be against me that have done this wickedness So that for ought appeareth unto the contrary the Sacrifices both before and under the Law had in themselves a power of Propitiation by vertue of the ordinance and justification of Almighty God and not a relative vertue only in reference to the Al-sufficient sacrifice of our Saviour CHRIST But then admitting that those Sacrifices were ordained but as types and figures of that which Christ was in the fulnesse of time to make for the sins of mankind yet is this to be understood of Gods minde and purpose and not of any such respect which the people had of them For that the people when they brought their sacrifices before the Altar had any such relation to the death of CHRIST as to conceive the same to be represented in the slaughter of beasts is no where to be found I dare boldly say it in all the Volume and context of the book of God Or if the people in their sacrifices had respect to CHRIST or looked upon them but as types and figures of that perfect sacrifice which he was afterwards to offer unto God the Father think we that God would have rejected or disliked them professe himself to be full of the burnt offerings of Rams and the fat of fed beasts that he delighted not in the bloud of bullocks or of lambs and goates and more then so that their sacrifices were become such an abomination to him that he who sacrificed a lamb was as if he had cut off a dogs neck and he that sacrificed an Oxe as if he had killed a man Assuredly God could not entertain such a vile esteem of the Iewish sacrifices however they might have some mixture of impure affection had they been offered only in relation to the death of Christ. And though the Lord Du Plessis seem to be of opinion that the sacrificing of men and women was first taken up upon some knowledge that the bloud of the son of man would prove a fuller expiation for their sins and wickednesses then of all the sheep upon the hils and the beasts of the forrest and therefore that their sacrifices did relate to Christ howsoever horribly mis-applyed in that particular yet is this only gratis dictum without proof at all there being another cause as bad of such humane sacrifices which we shall touch upon hereafter If it be asked in the mean time how CHRIST is said in Scripture to be the end of the Law Rom. 10.4 or how the Law is said to be our Schoole-master to bring us to Christ Gal. 3.24 except the sacrifices of the Law were as types and figures of the sacrifice which was made by Christ I answer that the Law had other and more proper means to bring men to Christ then to conduct them by the hand of such types and figures in case the sacrifices of the Iewes had been only such For CHRIST is therefore said to be the end of the Law for righteousness unto those that believe for so it followeth in the Text because he doth performe that unto those which believe which the Law propounded for its end but could not attain that is to say the Iustification of a sinner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what did the Law aime at saith St. Chrysostome to make man righteous but it could not because man will not keep the Law To what end served the feasts and ordinances the sacrifices and the rest of the Mosaical institutes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that they might contribute to mans Iustification Which when they could not bring to passe then was CHRIST fain to undertake it and so became the end of the Law for righteousness Theophylact following him in this as
Servator on us in the place thereof Concerning which St. Augustine hath this observation that antiently Salvator was no Latine word but was first devised by the Christians to express the greatness of the mercies which they had in Christ. For thus the Father Qui est Hebraice JESUS Graece 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nostra autem locutione Salvator Quod verbum Latina lingua non habebat sed habere poterat sicut potuit quando voluit Nay Cicero the great Master of the Roman elegancies doth himself confess that the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a word of too high a nature to be expressed by any one word of the Latine tongue For shewing how that Verres being Praetor in Syracusa the chief town in Sicily had caused himself to be entituled by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he addes immediately hoc ita magnum est ut Latino uno verbo exprimi non possit And thereupon he is compelled to use this Paraphrase or circumlocution Is est nimirum Soter qui salutem dedit i. e. He properly may be called Soter who is giver of health So that the Latine word Servator being insufficient to express the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and consequently the Hebrew IESVS the Christians of the first times were necessitated to devise some other and at last pitched upon Salvator which to this purpose hath been used by Arnobius l. 1. adv Gentes Ambros. in Luk. c. 2. Hieron in Ezek. c. 40. August de doctr Chr. l. 2. c. 13. contr Crescon l. 2. c. 1. besides the passages from Ruffinus and the same St. Augustine before alleadged So then the name of Iesus doth import a Saviour and the name of IESVS given to the Son of God intimates or implieth rather such a Saviour as shall save his people from their sins This differenceth IESVS our most blessed Saviour from all which bare that name in the times foregoing Iesus or Ioshua the son of Nun did only save the people from their temporal enemies but IESVS CHRIST the Son of the living God doth save us from the bonds of sin from our ghostly enemies IESVS the son of Iosedech the Priest of the Order of Aaron did only build up the material Altar in the holy Temple but IESVS the High Priest for ever after the Order of Melchisedech not only buildeth up the spiritual Temple but is himself the very Altar which sanctifieth all those oblations which we make to God Iesus the son of Sirach hath no higher honour but that he was Author of the book called Ecclesiasticus a book not reckoned in the Canon of the holy Scripture but IESVS CHRIST the Son of God and the Virgin Mary not only is the subject of a great part of Scripture but even the Word it self and the very Canon by which we are to square all our lives and actions I am the way the truth and the life as himself telleth us in St. Iohn Look on him in all these capacities he is still a IESVS a Saviour of his people from their sins and wickednesses a builder of them up to a holy Temple fit for the habitation of the holy Ghost a bringer of them by the truth and way of righteousness unto the gates of life eternal a true IESVS still So properly a IESVS and so perfectly a Saviour to us that there is no salvation to be found in any other nor is there any other name under Heaven given amongst men whereby they must be saved but this name of IESVS Aâ— name if rightly pondered above every name and given him to this end by Almighty God that at the Name of Jesus every knee should bow of those in Heaven and earth and under the earth And there may be good reason besides Gods appointment why such a sign of reverence should be given to the very name not only a name above other names and therefore to be reverenced with the greater piety but as a pregnant testimony of that exaltation to which God hath advanced him above all other persons We bow the knee unto the persons of Kings and Princes And therefore Pharaoh when he purposed to honour Ioseph above all the Egyptians appointed certain Officers to cry before him saying bow the knee CHRIST had not been exalted more then Ioseph was had bowing of the knee been required to his Person only and therefore that there might appear some difference betwixt him and others the Lord requires it at his name And though the Angels in the heavens and the Spirits beneath have no knees to bow which is the principal objection of our Innovators against the reverent use of bowing at the Name of Iesus used and enjoyned to be used in the Church of England yet out of doubt the spirits of both kindes both in Heaven and Hell as they acknowledge a subjection to his Throne and Scepter so have they their peculiar ways such as are most agreeable to their several natures of yeilding the commanded reverence to his very Name Certain I am St. Ambrose understood the words in the literal sense where speaking of the several parts of the body of man he maketh the bowing at the name of JESUS the use and duty of the knee Flexibile genu quo prae caeteris Domini mitigatur offensa gratia provocatur Hoc enim patris summi erga filium donum est ut in nomine JESU omne genu curvetur The knee is flexible faith the Father whereby the anger of the Lord is mitigated and his grace obtained And with this gift did God the Father gratifie his beloved Son that at the Name of JESUS every knee should bow Nor did St. Ambrose only so expound the Text and take it in the literal sense as the words import but as it is affirmed by our Reverend Andrews there is no antient Writer upon the place save he that turned all into Allegories but literally understands it and liketh well enough that we should actually perform it Conform unto which Exposition of the Antient Writers and the received usâ—ge of the Church of Christ it was religiously ordained by our first Reformers that Whensoever the Name of IESVS shall be pronounced in any Lesson Sermon or otherwise in the Church due reverence be made of all persons young and old with lowness of curâ—esie and uncovering of the heads of the mankinde as thereunto doth necesâ—aâ—ily belong and heretofore hath been accustomed Which being first established by the Queens Injunctions in the yeer 1559. was afterwards incorporated into the Canons of King Iames his reign And if of so long standing in the Church of England then sure no Innovation or new fancy taken up of late and bâ—t of laâ—e obtruded on the Church by some Popish Bishops as the Novators and Novatians of this present age the Enemies of Iesu-Worship as they idlely call it have been pleased to say And should we grant that this were no duty of
distinct natures in the Person of CHRIST and yet a communication of Properties or Idioms as they call them of the one nature to the other that CHRIST in one Person should have two distinct wils all who opined the contrary being branded and condemned by the name of Monothelites Not to say any thing in this place of those dark expressions in which the eternal generation of the Son of God and the nature of the Hypostatical Vnion have been delivered by some Writers of whom a man may say with a sober confidence that they hardly understood what they said themselves Assuredly that antient diverb Ingeniosa res est esse Christianum was not made for nought The best way therefore is to contain our selves within those bounds which are prescribed us in the Word of God in which though all things are not written which concern our Saviour yet those things which are written are sufficient doubtless to make us wise unto salvation that so we may believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that believing we may have life through his Name And now as far as I can go by the light of Scripture I should proceed unto the incarnation of the Son of God but that we must first behold him as he is our LORD which is the last of those two relations in which he is presented to us in this present Article Of this as it belongeth to God the Father we have already spoken in the first Article under the title of Iehovah the proper and peculiar name of the Lord our God a name so proper and peculiar to the Father of our Lord IESVS CHRIST that it is thought by very learned men not to be understood of the Son of God or of God the Son in the whole Old Testament who is most usually expressed by the name of Adonai Thus in that celebrated place of the Psalms of David whereas we read in English thus the Lord said unto my Lord it is in the Original thus Iehovah said to Adonai or the Lord Jehovah said unto my Lord Adonai Where clearly the name of Iehovah doth denote the Father as that of Adonai the Son though both be generally Englished by the name of Lord. Now the name Adonai is derived as before was noted from the Hebrew word Eden which signifieth the basis or foundation on which the whole building doth relie and therefore very fitly doth express his nature by whom as all things were created in the first beginning as St. Iohn telleth us in his Gospel so doth he still support the Earth and the pillars of it as it is told us in the Psalms But for the name or style of Lord both in Greek and Latine it seemed to be a title of such power and soveraignty that great Augustus though the Master of the Roman Empire did forbear to use it Nay which is more gravissimo corripuit edicto as Suetonius hath it he interdicted the applying of it to himself by a publick Edict The like by Dion is reported of Tiberius also a Prince who cherished flattery more then any vertue and in whose Court no men were more esteemed of then the basest sycophants This by the Statists of those times imputed to policy or Kings-craâ—t ne speciem Principatus in Regni formam converterent for fear they should be thought in that conjuncture of time when their affairs were yet unsetled to affect the title of Kings as they had the power which was most odious to the Romans But in my minde Orosius gives a better reason who thinks that this was rather done by Gods special Providence then on any foresight of those Princes His reason is because that Christ during the reign of those two Emperours had took our flesh upon him and did live amongst us Nor was it fit saith he that any man should take upon himself the name of LORD ex eo tempore quo verus totius geneâ—is humani Dominus inter nos homines natus esset whilest the undoubted Lord of all mankinde was conversant amongst us here upon the Earth And this we may the rather credit to have been done by Gods special providence because Caligula who next succeeded in the Empire our Saviour Christ having then withdrawn his bodily presence was not alone content to admit this Title but did command it to be given him by all the people Et primus Dominum se jussit appellari as it is in Victor But whether this observation of Orosius will hold good or not certain it is that from the time and instant of the Resurrection the style of LORD did properly belong unto CHRIST our Saviour Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God hath made that same Jesâ—s whom ye have crucified both Lord and Christ Not made that is to say not declared LORD by his heavenly Father before that time when he had overcome the sharpness of death and trampled on the grave in his Resurrection though called so sometimes before in the way of Anticipation or of civil complement Then only called now made and publickly declared the Lord of all things And certainly it might seem to stand with reason that seeing all power was given to the man Christ Jesus both in heaven and earth for now we look upon him only in that capacity that with the power he also should partake of the highest title by which that power was usually expressed and signified From that time forwards unto this there is not any thing more ordinary in the Book of God or in the Liturgies of the Church or in the common speech of good Christian people then to entitle our Redeemer by the name of the LORD and to entitle him thereby in so clear a manner as to make it more peculiar to him then to God the Father So that in all the antient Liturgies both Greek and Latine when the name of God the Father and of God the Son occur in the same Prayer or Hymne as they often do the name of Lord is constantly appropriated unto God the Son And so we also finde it in our English Liturgie According to thy promises declared unto mankinde in Christ Jesu our Lord as in the general Confession Almighty God the Father of our Lord IESVS CHRIST in the Absolution through Jesus Christ our Lord who liveth and reigneth with thee and the holy Ghost as in some of the Collects And this the Church did learn no doubt from the like expression of St. Paul who thus gives the blessing The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and not of the Lord God and the fellowship of the holy Ghost and not of the Lord holy Ghost be with you all Amen And thus it also stands in the present Creed in which the title of Lord is appropriated only to the Son and neither added to the Father nor the holy Ghost Nor is he called LORD only in general tearms
is not concerned who by the power of the most High understands here the very person of God the Son and by this over-shadowing of the blessed Virgin his voluntary Incarnation in her sanctified womb His words are these Per virtutem Altissimi intelligi ipsum Dei Filium qui est virtus brachium potentia Patris quique obumbraturus significatur Virginem illapsu suo in uterum Virginis per occultum Incarnationis mysterium But by his leave I cannot herein yeild unto his opinion though Chrysostom and Gregory for the antient Writers Beda and Damascene for the Authors of the middle times do seem to contenance it For not St. Augustine only as himself confesseth and Euthymius a good writer also are against him in it but the plain text and context of the holy Scripture which makes the quickning of the womb of this blessed Virgin to be the work only of one Agent though it be expressed by different titles Nor are such repetitions strange or extraordinary in the Book of God nor can it give any colour to distinguish the power of the most High from the holy Ghost as if they were two different Agents unless we can distinguish the Lord our God from him that dweleth in the Heavens because we finde them both together in the 2. Psalm He that dwelleth in the Heavens shall laugh them to scorn the Lord shall have them in derision And though it cannot be denyed but that the Son of God is the very power and strength of his Father yet himself doth give this very name of power to the holy Ghost For when he commanded the Apostles to abide in the City of Hierusalem donec induantur virtute ex alto i. e. until they were â—ndued with power from on high what else did he intend thereby but that they should continue there until they were endued with the holy Ghost Of which see Act. 2.4 Besides if this opinion should be once admitted we must exclude the holy Ghâ—st from having any thing to do in so great a mysterie and so not only bring the Creed under an Expurgatorius Index but the Scripture too Letting this therefore stand for a truth undeniable that the over-shadowing as the Text calleth it of the blessed Virgin was the proper and peculiar work of the holy Ghost let us next see whether the nature of the miracle be not agreeable to the operatioâ—s of the holy Spirit or such as may not be admitted for a truth undoubted by equal and indifferent men though they be not Christians nor take it up upon the credit of the Word of God And first that of it self it is agreeable to the operations of the Spirit the course of his Divine power in the works of nature doth expresly manifest For as in the spiritual regeneration though it be Paul that planteth and Apollo that watereth yet it is God who gives the increase without whose blessing on their labours their labours will prove fruitless and ineffectual so also in the act of carnal generation though the man and woman do their parts for the pro creation of children yet if the quickning Spirit of God do not bless them in it and stir up the emplastick virtue of the natural seed they may go childless to their graves It is the Spirit which quickneth what the womb doth breed And therefore in my minde Lactantius noted very well Hominem non Patrem esse sed generandi Ministrum that man was nothing but the instrument which the Lord did use for the effecting of his purpose to raise that goodly edifice of flesh and bloud which he contemplates in his children It is the Spirit of God as the Scripture tels us which first gave form unto the world from whence that known passage of the Poet Spiritus intus alit had its first Original of which we have made use in our former book And if the chief work or rather the principal part in the work of nature in the ordinary course of Generation and first production of the Word may be ascribed as most undoubtedly it must unto the powerful influence of this quickning Spirit with how much more assurance may he be entituled to the Incarnation of the Word to which one sex only did contribute and that the weakest without the mutual help and co-operation of the seed of man Nor is the greatness of the Miracle so beyond belief but that there is sufficient in the holy Scripture to convince the Iew and in the writings of the Poets to perswade the Gentiles to the admission of this truth and consequently to confirm all good Christians in it Out of the Virgin-Earth did God first make Adam and out of Virgin Adam he created Eve Adam first made without the help of man or woman and Eve made after out of Adam who had no wife but this which was made out of him Why might not then the blessed Virgin be as capable of conceiving a Son by the sole power and influence of the holy Ghost without help of man as Adam was of being Father unto Eve by the self same power without the use of a woman Without a Mother Eve without Father CHRIST Adam without both Father and Mother but all the handy-work of God by the holy Spirit Equivalent in effect to the creation of Adam and the production of Eve was the birth of Isaac conceived by Sarah when it had ceased to be with her after the manner of women by consequence as indisposed to the act of conception as if she had been still a Virgin or which is more then that under years of marriage The strength that Sarah had to bring forth that Son was not natural to her for she was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 past the age of childe-bearing as the Text informs us but a strength supernatural given from God on high and therefore called a received strength she received strength to conceive seed Heb. 11.11 because not naturally her own but received extraordinarily from God As Isaac was in many things a Type of CHRIST so in no one thing more exactly then that he was the only Son or the dearly beloved Son of his Father begotten on a woman past the time of her age whose dead womb could not but by such a miracle be revived again To this the Iews most cheerfully do give assent boasting themselves to be the children of Abraham by this very venter What reason have they then not to yeild to this but that they resolved not to yeild to reason Next for the Gentiles do we not finde it in their Poets that Venus was ingendred of the froth of the Sea animated by the warmth and influence of the Sun that Pallas issued from Ioves brain and Bacchus from the thigh of Iupiter Do we not read that most of their Heroes so much famed of old were begotten by their Gods upon mortal creatures as Hercules on Alcmena by Iupiter Phaeton on Clymene by Phoebus and Paâ—
as good authority as the Laws and Statutes of the Realm can give unto it Which holy time had it been as carefully and conscionably observed by all sorts of people as it was prudently and piously ordained at first we had no doubt escaped many of those grievous plagues with which the Lord of late hath scourged us and even consumed us unto nothing by our own licentiousness But to proceed to the third general point contained in the story of the Lords temptation in which there is a doubt as before was said touching the very moment and point of time which the old Tempter took to give the onset occasioned by the different narrations of the three Evangelists that is to say whether the Devil tempted him all those forty days and then gave him over or that he did not trouble him and begin the business until the forty days were past and his fast was ended St. Matthews words do seem to intimate nay to say expresly that the Tempter did not come unto him till his fast was ended and that afterwards he was an hungred and this more literally agrees with the particulars of the following story But on the other side it is said in Luke that he was led into the Wilderness being forty days tempted by the Devil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Greek text reads it and then how could the Devil set him upon one of the Pinnacles of the Temple if he were all the time of his Temptation within the bowels of that Desert For resolution of which point Eusebius and St. Cyril two Greek Fathers though they keep the words yet they do point them otherwise then we read them now in our printed copies referring the forty days which are there spoken of not to his being tempted of the Devil but to his being in the Wilderness And then the reading will be thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say And he was led into the Wilderness forty days being tempted of the Devil c. And so it seems it stood in those antient copies which were consulted by the Author of the Vulgar Latine whosoever he was in which we read Et agebatur in Spiritu in deserto diebus quadraginta tentatur a Diabolo Which reading if it be allowed of as I see no reason but it may then the doubt is ended and the appearing difference fairly reconciled Otherwise we may say and no doubt most safely that he was tempted by the Devil all those forty days as is said by Luke and after they were ended also as we finde in Matthew that is to say as Euthymius very rightly noteth the Devil tempted him in those days the said forty days as it were a far off by sleep sloth heaviness and the like but after he knew him once to be hungry then he set upon him prope manifeste as the Author hath it more visibly and hand to hand namely in those three great temptations which the story mentioneth So then the nick and point of time in which the Devil did apply himself most closely to the work intended was cum esuriret when he began to be an hungry As long as our Redeemer kept himself unto prayer and fasting the Devil either did not trouble him or it was either with such trivial and light temptations as made no impression and neither interrupted him in his holy course nor caused him to intermit the business he was then upon by making any necessary replies to his lewd suggestions But when he began to be an hungry when his minde seemed to be upon his belly if I may so say then did the Devil think it was time to work him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it was notably well observed by Chrysostom to this very purpose So excellent is the force and efficacy of an holy fast that it keeps the Devil at a distance This difficulty thus passed over we shall next look on the particular temptations which those Gospels speak of In which it is to be observed that whereas St. Iohn makes mention of three kindes of lust which mightily prevail on the affections of us mortal men viz. the lust of the flesh the lust of the eyes and the pride of life the Devil tempted CHRIST in all and in all was vanquished He tempted him in the first place with the lust of the flesh when he found that after such and so long a fast he began to be hungry and was reduced to such extremities as to be forced to seek his bread even in desolate places and said unto him if that thou beest the Son of God as the late voyce from heaven did seem to signifie command that these stones be made bread to appease thy hunger and satisfie that natural necessity which is now upon thee An opportunity well taken and as strongly followed had it been answered with success For commonly when men are in distress and want they are then most apt either to distrust the Lord their God as if he left them to themselves without hope of relief or else to use unlawful means to relieve themselves which was the point the Devil thought to bring him to by this first temptation But when he failed of this design he pressed him in the next place with the lust of the eye taking him up upon an exceeding high mountain shewing him all the Kingdomes of the World and the glories of them and offering to bestow them all upon him if he would only yeild so far as to fall down and worship him Impudent wretch thou worst of all wicked spirits saith Ignatius how was it that thou didst not fear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to utter such a sawcy voyce to the Lord of all things And yet a far more impudent braggart to make an offer of those things which he had no power of the Kingdomes of the earth and the glories of them being holden of no other Lord then the Lord our God And here it is to be observed that whereas in the former onset which only did relate unto Christ himself he only did reply upon him with a Scriptum est in this wherein the glorie of his heavenly Father was concerned so highly he addes an Apage or rebuke Get thee hence thou Satan So that the Devil failing at the two first weapons betakes himself unto the last the pride of life setting him on a pinnacle of the holy Temple saying if thou bee the Son of God as credulous men are made believe by the late great miracle of a voyce supposed to be from heaven do somewhat to confirm them in that belief teque assere coelo somewhat which may indeed make manifest that thou art from heaven and answerable to the testimony which that voyce gave of thee and a more sure and easie trial thou canst never meet with then by casting thy self down from hence knowing so well how all the Angels are at hand to attend upon thee and carry thee upon their
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
In quibus etiam hoc est quod apud Inferos fuit c. Amongst which this is one point also that he was in Hell and loosed the sorrows of the same of which it was impossible that he should be holden In which last words the Father plainly doth relate to the 24. verse being the beginning almost of St. Peters Sermon Where though the Copies of the Testaments which are extant now read not as Augustine doth Solutis doloribus inferni having loosed the pains of Hell but the pains of death yet many of the antient Copies were as St. Augustine readeth it For Athanasius sometimes useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he loosed the pains of Hell and sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sorrows of death Epiphanius in two places reads it thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it was impossible for Christ to be holden or detained in Hell And the same Copies as it seemes were followed also by Irenaeus l. 3. c. 12. by Cyprian in his tract de Passione Christi by Fulgentius l 3. ad Thrasimundum and by Bede also in his Retractations on the Acts. Which strong agreement of the Antients with the sight perhaps of some of the antient Copies did prevail so far on Robert Stephans the famous Printer of Paris that in the New Testament in Greek of the larger volume of the year 1550. he caused this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be put in the margin as a different reading remaining still in divers copies But this is only by the way not out of it as that which did afford another argument unto the Antients for proof of Christs descent into hell and his short stay in it by the pains or sorrows whereof it was impossible that he should be holden Nor did it only serve as a good argument for them in their several times and is to be of no use since the Text went otherwise I believe not so For since both readings have been found in the antient Writers and neither can be rejected as false the word death must be so expounded where it is retained as that it may not contradict that of Hell or Hades For being that death hath a double power place and subject upon the body here on earth and on the soul in Hell hereafter the Text may not unfitly be understood of the later death the pains and sorrows whereof were loosed by Christ because it was impossible they should fasten on him But to return unto the not leaving of Christs soul in Hell the tricks and shifts for the eluding of which Text we shall see hereafter it could not be intended of the grave only as some men would have it or to relate only to the Resurrection as they give it out For to rise simply from the grave was not sufficient to shew the soveraignty of Christ as the Lord of all Heaven Earth and Hell being made subject to his Throne nor to express and signifie the eternity of it which was to last till all his Enemies were made his footstool Some had been raised from death to life by the two famous Prophets in the Old Testament some by our Saviour in the New none of which could lay claim under that pretence to the Throne of David or to be Lord of all things as our Saviour was Besides this passage being recorded by St. Luke who in his Gospel useth the same word Hades for the place of torments as before was shewn it is not probable that he should use it here in another sense or if he did that none of all the Latine Fathers and Interpreters should ever observe it who render it by Infernus Hell as often as they have occasion to speak thereof I close this point with that of Augustine who speaking of this Prophesie of David concerning Christ he saith it is not to be contradicted nor otherwise to be expounded then it is there interpreted by St. Peter himself and then addes this for a conclusion of the whole Who but an Infidel will deny Christs descent into Hell So far the light of holy Scripture interpreted according to the general consent and Exposition of the Antient Fathers hath directed us in this enquiry and we have found such good assurance in the cause that the addition of more evidence would but seem unnecessary yet that the Catholick Tradition of the Church of Christ may be found to incline the same way also we will draw down the line thereof from the very times of the Apostles to those days of darkness in which all good learning was devoured and swallowed up in the night of ignorance For first Thaddaeus whom St. Thomas sent to preach the Gospel to Abgarus the King or Prince of Edessa taught him and his amongst other Catechetical points contained in the Apostles Creed that they must believe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. that is to say that Christ descended into Hell and broke the wall which had been never broke before since the world began and rose again and raised the dead some of the which had slept from the first creation I know this story of Thaddaeus hath been called in question in these later dayes nor have I time and leisure to assert it now All I shall say is that Eusebius who relates it refers himself unto the monuments and Records of the City of Edessa out of which he had it and 't is well known Eusebius never was reputed either to be a fabulous or too credulous Author Next to Thaddaeus comes Ignatius the Apostles scholar who speaks of Christs descent into Hades in the same tearms as before adding withall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he went down alone to Hades but ascended with a great multitude unto his Father And this he saith after he had made mention of his death and burial in a former passage of the same Epistle St. Irenaeus he comes next and he tels us this that David prophecyed thus of CHRIST thou shalt not leave my soul in the neathermost Hell After him Origen Christ saith he having bound the strong man and conquered him by his Cross went even unto his house to the house of death and unto Hell and thence took his goods that is the souls which he possessed Then cometh Eusebius next in order To him only saith he speaking of Christ were the gates of death opened and him only the keepers of Hell-gates seeing shrunk for fear and the chief Ruler of death the Devil knowing him alone to be his Lord rose out of his Throne and spake unto him fearfully with supplications and intreaty Next him another Eusebius surnamed Emisenus The Lord saith he descending darkness trembled at the sudden coming of an unknown light and the deepness of the dark mists of Hell saw the bright star of Heaven Deposito corpore imas atque abditas Tartari sedes filius hominis penetravit and the Son of man laying by his body penetrated to the lowest and
favour of God pronounced against them in that day by the dreadful Judge in the word Discedite depart ye cursed by which they are not only excluded from the Kingdome of God but utterly confounded with the grief and shame of that rejection which they shall suffer at his hands before men and Angels This is that curse our Saviour speaks of in his holy Gospel where he affirmed unto the Iews that there should be weeping and gnashing of Teeth when they should see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the Prophets in the Kingdom of God and themselves thrust out Of this it is St. Augustine telleth us that to be banished for ever from the Kingdome of God to want that plentiful aboundance of the sweetness of God which he hath aboundantly laid up in store for those that fear him tam grandis poena est ut ei nulla quae novimus tormenta possint comparari is such a grievous pain or punishment that no torments which we know can compare unto it St. Chrysostom is more express where he speaks of those who seem to make it their only desire to scape the miseries of hell whereas I saith he am of opinion that to fall or be rejected from the glories of heaven multo durius est tormentum quam gehena ipsa is a far more insupportable torment then hell it self Nor do I think saith he that we ought so much to grieve at the evill of hell as at the loss of heaven and the glories of it Qui nimirum cruciatus est omnium durissimus the sense whereof will be more grievous then of all the rest And so much saith St. Basil briefly affirming that the estranging or rejecting from God is a more intolerable evil then any that is to be feared or expected in hell And yet these torments might be borne with the greater courage if there were any hope of release in time if their damnation were not so confirmed in the Court of Heaven that they are utterly deprived of all expectation of having any favour from God in the times to come if there were any end to be expected of those unsufferable torments which are laid upon them Hope makes an heavy burden light whereas despair of being eased makes a light burden insupportable And this despair is that which doth most afflict them when they are once condemned to the pit of torments Omni tormento atrocius desperatio condemnatos affliget No torment saith the same St. Basil afflicts the damned like despair So much the more by reason that to hope that Gods irrevocable judgment shall be altered or his counsel changed were to hope that God would be false in his word or wavering in his will so publickly and solemnly pronounced which were a sin that would deserve an heavier punishment then they suffer yet The punishment of the damned shal be everlasting no hope that ever it will end And it shall be an everlasting fire as the scriptures tell us a fire which shall prey upon the body and torment the soul and yet neither devour the one nor consume the other I know some late Divines do perswade themselves that the fire of hell is allegorical that there is no such real fire to be found therein as the world hath hitherto been made beleive But when I hear our Saviour Christ pronounce this sentence sitting in his most dreadful Court of Iudgement when there shall be but little use of tropes and figures Depart ye cursed into everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his Angels I must crave leave to tie my faith to express words of Scripture rather then to the quaint conceits of deceitful men Of this I shall speak more at large in another place but whether in the Article of Christs coming to judgement or in that of everlasting life is not yet resolved In the mean time I take it for a good rule which we finde in Augustine that in expounding of the Scriptures we flie not unto Tropes or Figures unless the proper signification of the words in any place be either against the truth of faith or against the honestly of manners as in these it is not Which grounds thus laid I would fain know of Calvin or any of his followers whether that all or any of these punishments which belong properly to the damned and may be truly and directly called the pains of hell were suffered by our Saviour in his soul and body or his soul alone It could not be remorse of conscience for where there is no sin there is no Compunction Christ might be sorrowful and afflicted for the sins of man upon a knowledge of those miseries which attended on them Remorse there could be none where there was no guilt and guilt there could be none where there was no sin And he alone it was who could do no sin and in whose mouth was found no guile as St. Peter tels us Rejected he was never from the favour of God it were indeed an hellish blasphemy to conceive so of him The sentence of rejection is denounced against those alone who have provoked God unto anger by their sins and wickednesses and made him of a friend and Father to become an Adversary But God was neither angry with nor adversary to his Son CHRIST IESVS his well beloved Son at first in whom he was well pleased to the very end And so much Calvin doth confess Nec tamen innuimus unquam Deum fuisse adversarium illi vel iratum And yet saith he we do not intimate hereby that God was either set against him or offended with him Nor doth he say it only but gives reason for it For how saith he could God be angry with his beloved Son in whom only he was well pleased or with what confidence could Christ intercede for us with Almighty God si infensum haberet ipse sibi with whom he stood in need of a Mediator to reconcile him to himself As for despair if he were neither touched for remorse of conscience nor fallen from the love and favour of his heavenly Father there was nothing that he could despair of but a release in time from the fires of hell which though they might afflict his body could not hurt his soul. And Calvin takes it for a grievous calumny which was charged upon him Me desperationem ascribere filio Dei quae fidei contraria sit that he ascribed to Christ any such despair which was not consistent with true faith For wiping off such stain he declares expresly that though our Saviour did complain of his being forsaken ne tantillum quidem deflexit a bonitatis ejus fiducia yet he did never start nor waver in that confidence which he had in the goodness of the Lord and useth this for an especial argument to confirm the same as indeed it is that whilest he did complain that he was forsaken Non desinit vocare Deum suum he ceased not
dark as St. Iohn hath it or very early in the morning at the breaking or dawning of the day as St. Matthew tels us but that they came not to the Sepulchre till the Sun was risen Or else we may resolve it thus and perhaps with greater satisfaction to the text and truth that Mary Magdalen whose love was most impatient of a long delay went first alone for St. Iohn speaks of her alone when it was yet dark but having signified to Peter what she had discovered she went to make the other women acquainted with it and then came all together as the Sun was rising to behold the issue of the business As for the seeming contradiction in St. Matthews words we shall best see the way to discharge him of it if passing by the Vulgar Latine from whence the contradiction took its first Original we have recourse unto the Greek In the Vulgar Latine it is Vespere Sabbati in the Evening of the Sabbath and that according to the Iewish computation must be on Friday about six of the clock for with them the Evening did begin the day as we saw before But in the Greek it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we English in the end of the Sabbath and then it is the same with St. Marks expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when the Sabbath was past And this construction comes more neer to the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which points unto a thing which is long since past as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hour being now a good while spent and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you lost your opportunity by your tardy coming And so the word is here interpreted by Gregory Nyssen by birth a Grecian and therefore doubtlesse one that well understood the Idiotisme of his own language in whom the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Matthew is made to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very hour and moment of the resurrection Which ground so laid let us subjoyne these words in St. Matthews Gospel Chap. 18. to the last words of St. Lukes Gospel Chap. 23. and then this seeming contradiction will be brought to nothing St. Luke informes us of the women who had attended on our Saviour at his death and burial that having bought spices to imbalme his body they rested on the Sabbath day according to the Scripture v. 56. And then comes in St. Matthew to make up the story as all the four Evangelists do make but one ful history of our Saviours actions which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that when the Sabbath was now past and that the first day of the week did begin to dawn they went unto the Sepulchre as they first intended We have not done yet with the time of his resurrection although the difficulties which concern that time have been debated and passed over We finde it generally agreed on by all four Evangelists that the resurrection was accomplished 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the first day of the week and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about the dawning of the day as St. Matthew hath it or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about the rising of the Sun as St. Marke informes About the dawning of the day for certainly it was not fit that the Sun of Heaven should shine upon the earth before the heavenly Sun of righteousnesse Nay therefore did our Saviour prevent the sun by his early rising to teach us that the whole world is enlightned only by the beams of his most sacred Gospell and that he only is the light to lighten the Gentiles and to be the glory of his people Israel And there was very good reason also why he should choose the first day of the week to be the day of the resurrection more then any other that as God the Father on that day did begin the creation of the world in which we live the life of nature so God the Son should on the same day also begin the creation of a new heaven and a new earth in the souls of men by which they live the life of grace here and are thereby prepared for the life of glory in the world to come The sixt day in which our father Adam did begin to live was the same day in which the second Adam did begin to die And the seventh day on which God rested from his labours in the great work of our Creation was also rested by our Saviour in the far greater businesse of our Redemption Rested I say by him not sanctifyed For Christ did therefore pretermit and sleep out as it were the Iewish Sabbath that from thenceforth the observation of that day should be laid aside and that in that neglect of his there should no further care be taken of the legal Ceremonies And as God sanctifyed that day in which he rested from the work of the worlds Creation so the Apostles first as it was conceived and afterwards the Church of Christ by their example did sanctifie and set apart that day for religious offices in which our Saviour cancelled the bonds of death and finished the great work of our Redemption The Israelites were commanded by the Lord their God immediately on their escape from the hands of Pharaoh to change the beginning of the year in a perpetuall memory of that deliverance With very good reason therefore did the Church determine to celebrate the Christian Sabbath if I may so call it upon a day not used before but changed in due remembrance of so great a miracle as that of our Saviours resurrection from the power of the grave and our deliverance thereby from the Prince of darknesse The Parallel of the worlds Creation and the Redemption on all mankind by Christ our Saviour with the change which followed thereupon in the day of worship is very happily expressed by Gregory Nyssen in his first Sermon upon Easter or the Resurrection where speaking of Gods rest of the Sabbath day he thus proceedeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. By that first Sabbath saith the father thou mayest conjecture at the nature of this this day of rest which God hath blessed above all dayes For on this the only begotten Son of God or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his own words are who out of a divine purpose of restoring mankind did give his body rest in the house of death and afterwards revived again by his resurrection became the resurrection and the life the day-spring from on high the light to them that sit in darknesse and the shadow of death Finally to insist upon this point no longer three days our Saviour set apart for the performance of this work and wonder of the resurrection and answerably thereunto the Church did antiently set apart three days for the commemoration of that work and wonder which was then performed In which respect the feast of Easter is entituled by the said Gregory Nyssen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the three days festivall The next considerable circumstance of the
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
for an Historical truth it might as well be made appliable to Pauls negative Character according to the former interpretation as that Melchisedech should be Sem whose Ancestors and posterity both are upon record in the old Testament and the new though not delivered us as his by the name of Melchisedech But leaving this unto the credit of the Authors we must next look upon Melchisedech whosoever he was as the Priest of God And Melchisedech King of Salem saith the text brought forth bread and wine And he was the Priest of the most high God And he blessed him Abram and said Blessed be Abram c. And Abram gave him tithes of all In this we finde Melchisedech invested with the two great offices of a King and a Priest the King of Salem and the Priest of the most high God Nor was it strange or extraordinary in those times that it should be so the Principality and the Priesthood in those early dayes yea and a long time after in the Roman Empire being commonly united in the self same person Look on him as a King one that did share in the successe of Abrams victory and then we finde him entertaining this triumphant Conquerour with a royal feast And Melchisedech King of Salem brought forth bread and wine That he did only as a King as a Princely friend willing to set forth some refreshment to the wearied Souldiers Melchisedech King of Salem brought forth bread and wine It was the Kings act as a King and for such recorded before we finde any thing spoken of him as the Priest of God And when we finde him spoken of as the Priest of God we finde no mention of his entertainment of his bread and wine That belonged to him as a King but only that he blessed Abram and received tithes of him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the text that is to say he tithed him or took tithes of him not as the gift of Abram but his own just dues By these two acts of blessing and receiving tithes the Priesthood of Melchisedech is described by Moses and by the same only doth St. Paul describe it not obiter or on the by but where he speaks of him in a set discourse and from his Priesthood doth proceed unto that of Christ whom God ordained a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech Nothing in the Apostle of the bread and wine for that concerned him not as he was a Priest in which capacity only St. Paul looks upon him and looking on him only in that capacity he findeth him only as a Priest to blesse and to tithe He met Abraham saith St. Paul returning from the slaughter of the Kings and blessed him To whom also Abraham gave the tithes of all Nothing here spoken of the bread and wine as an entertainment given by a Royall and magnificent Prince to a friend and neighbour nor as a Sacrifice neither to the most high God as he was a Priest which thing the Papists mainly stand for and marvail that S. Paul took no notice of it Miror in hoc capite inter tot Similitudines quibus Melchisedech Christum repraesentat nihil dixisse de Sacrificio panis vini c. I wonder saith Mariana that in this Chapter Heb. 7. amongst so many resemblances wherein Christ is made like unto Melchisedech there is no mention made of the Sacrifice of bread and wine which Melchisedech offered Gen. 14.18 being a type or Symbol of the sacrifice of the holy Eucharist But the best is St. Paul knew better what Melchisedech did and knew much better how impertinent it would be for his present purpose which was to parallel Christs priesthood with Melchisedechs then any the best learned man in the Church of Rome And therefore here is nothing to be wondred at if speaking of him as the Priest of the most high God he takes no notice of his actions as he was a King And for the Sacrifice which they dream of and would force from thence the better to advance the pedegree of the Romish Masse it is a thing so inconsistent with the meaning of Moses that neither the letter of the text nor any circumstance of the History nor the generall consent of Fathers nor any Orthodox Rule of interpretation doth give any countenance at all â—nto it As for the parallel made by the Apostle betwixt Christ and him which is the third thing to be considered it consists most especially in these two points first in the identity of their titles and then in the performance of their severall Offices First for their titles St. Paul telleth us that Melchisedech by interpretation is the King of righteousnesse and that King of Salem signifyeth a King of Peace Such also is our blessed Saviour not only called in Scripture the Prince of peace but our peace it self Ephes. 2.14 not only acknowledged by his enemies for a man of righteousnesse but righteousnesse it self in the very abstract and therefore said by the Apostle to be made our righteousnesse 1 Cor. 1.30 Melchisedech was the only King that ever by divine providence or an heavenly calling was a Priest also of the most high God and therein a fit parallel for Christ our Saviour whom God having raised him from the dead made both Lord and CHRIST that is to say both King and Priest Lord over all the Kings of the earth and clothed in a garment down to the feet girded about the pappes with a golden girdle such as the high Priest used to wear as St. Iohn describes him Melchisedech was King of Salem which afterwards being called Hierusalem became the royall seat of David and the Kings of Iudah our Saviour Christ was publickly acknowledged to be King of the Iews and crowned though with a Crown of thornes within Hierusalem it self the imperiall City and doth now reigne and shall for ever in the new Hierusalem whereof more hereafter The greatest difficulty lieth in the Negative Character that he was without Father without Mother without descent or Genealogie having neither beginning of dayes nor end of life and how he may be likened unto Christ in this or Christ to him in all these particulars hath very much perplexed the brains of some learned men For admitting Melchisedech to have neither father nor mother nor genealogie nor descent according to the former construction of it yet this can no ways be applyed unto Christ our Saviour whose genealogie is recorded by two Evangelists who had a Mother on the earth and a Father in Heaven Therefore the best solution is for ought I can see to say that those particulars of this negative Character without father without mother without descent do all but serve to usher in that which followeth next viz. that he was without beginning of dayes or end of life no mention being made of his predecessors or of any one that did succeed him in that sacred office Or else because it followeth
place where he brings in our Saviour sitting at the right hand of God and making intercession for us In this respect he is called the Mediator of the New Testament Heb. 12.24 that is to say one that doth intercede betwixt God and man to make up the breach that was between them and reconcile poor man to Almighty God And this is such a trust such an high imployment as never was committed unto Saints or Angels but purposely resolved by God for this great High Priest As we acknowledge but one God so can we have no more then one Mediatour and this can be no other then our Lord and Saviour There is one God saith the Apostle and one Mediator between God and man even the man CHRIST IESVS Do we desire to know more of him in this Office from the holy Scriptures hear him then speaking of himself and saying I am the way the truth and the life no man cometh unto the Father but by me So excellently true is that gloss of Augustines Non est quo eas nisi ad me non est qua eas nisi per me Our Saviour in this case saith he is both the journeys end and the way also Do you desire to hear more from him in this Office from the holy Fathers take then this passage of S. Ambrose Ipse est Os nostrum per quod Patri loquimur he is the mouth by which we speak unto the Father if we hope to speed To state this point more fully as a point in Controversie we are to lay these two truths for a certain ground of our proceeding the first that men are sinners from the very womb and all their righteousness no other then a menstruous cloth the second that God is a God of pure eyes and such as cannot patiently behold our iniquities Such being then the disproportion between God and man how could God look on man without indignation or man lift up his eyes to God without confusion God therefore out of his most infinite mercy gave his Son unto us first for a Sacrifice to be the Propitiation for the sins of the world and after for an High Priest to intercede an Advocate to plead for us unto God the Father to be the Mediator between God and man in all cases of difference and as it were the General Solicitour of our suites and businesses in the Court of Heaven Nay having raised him from the dead and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places he made him Master of the Requests appointing him and him alone to receive those petitions and addresses which we make to God and in our name to tender them unto his Father adding his own incense unto our sweet odours that so they might finde welcome at the hands of God And here me thinks this story of Themistocles will not seem impertinent who being banished from Athens his own native soyl was fain to have recourse to Admetus King of the Molossians hoping to finde that safety in a strange land which his own Country could not give him Being admitted into the Kings Chappell he snatcheth up the young Prince into his arms kneels down with him before the Altar and so presented his desires and himself to the King the young Princes Father Which kinde of suing or Petitioning as my Author tels me the Molossians held 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the most effectual means of dealing with him and such as could not be denyed I think the Application were superfluous to ingenious ears yet for the driving of it home to our present point take it briefly thus We by our Covenant made to God in holy Baptism are become Aliens to the world and as much hated by it as he at Athens in that respect as much necessitated to cast our selves upon the love and mercy of the Lord our God as he to seek protection in the Court of Admetus And as the young Prince whom he used as his Mediator was of a mixt condition between a King and a subject the Heir not differing from a servant when he is a childe So is our Saviour also between God and man God of the substance of his Father before all worlds man of the substance of his mother born in the world as Athanasius in his Creed Finally as Themistocles did assure himself that he should speed in his requests with King Admetus because the Kings son seemed to solicite for him so we with greater confidence may proceed in our prayers to God the Son of God making continual intercession for us that they may be granted Where note that not our pressing into the Chappel as a thing of course nor falling down before the Altar as a point of ceremony but taking Christ into our arms as he did that Prince will make our prayers to be effectual This verified by Christ himself in his holy Gospel Whatsoever ye shall ask in my Name saith he that will I do that the Father may be glorified in the Son And in another place of the same chapter also Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my Name ask and you shall receive that your joy may be full If on these grounds we make no other Mediators of Intercession then him that was the Mediator of Redemption too for such a nice distinction have some men found out the better to deceive their own souls and rob Christ of his glory Let us not stand accused for Hereticks in the Court of Rome or if we must so stand accused yet let us still worship the God of our Fathers after the way which they call Heresie Certain I am that in the way which they call heresie the Lord was worshipped by our Fathers in the Primitive times Ignatius who lived neer the time of the Apostles and conversed with some of them willeth us to have Christ only before our eyes when we make our prayers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Irenaeus who lived next to him I mean in time and not in place gives this counsel also Orationes nostras ad Deum dirigere qui fecit omnia that we address our prayers to him only by whom all things were made Origen goes the right way too though in many other things he was out extreamly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we should make our supplications unto God alone who is over all things to God alone as the chief Donour of the blessing but unto God by Christ as the means to gain it Remember what was said before out of St. Ambrose and St. Augustine to the point in hand and we shall finde no other Mediatours of intercession in the times of the Fathers then the man CHRIST IESVS though those of Rome in pity as it were to our Saviour Christ whom they would gladly ease of so great a burden have liberally bestowed the Office on the Saints departed And though a fullerâ—search into their Position is to be made hereafter in a place more proper when
and then subjoyns Glorifie God therefore in your body And doth not the same Father infer from thence the Deitie or Godhead of the Holy Ghost Ne quisquam Spiritum Sanctum negaret Deum continuo sequutus ait Glorificate portate Deum in corpore vestro Lest any man saith he should possibly deny the Holy Ghost to be God he addes immediately Glorifie and bear God in your bodies To seek for Testimonies from more of the Fathers to confirm this point were to run into an endless Ocean of Allegations there being few who lived after the rising of the Arian and Macedonian Heresies who have not written whole Tracts in defence hereof and none at all who give not very pregnant evidence to the cause in hand But where the Scripture is so clear what need they come in And so exceeding clear is Scripture as is shewn already that I marvel with what confidence it could be said by Doctor Harding in his Reply to Bishop Iewel That though the Doctrine of the Church of England were true and Catholick in this point yet we had neither express Scripture for it nor any of the four first General Councils and thereon tacitely inferreth That the Deity of the Holy Ghost depended for the proof thereof not on holy Scripture but on the Tradition of the Church and the Authority of some subsequent Councils of the Popes confirming To which that learned Prelate wittily replieth That if God cannot be God unless he be allowed of by the Pope and Church of Râ—me then we are come again to that which Tertullian wrote merrily of the Heathens saying Nisi homini Deus placuerit Deus non erit Homo jam Deo propitius esse debebit i.e. Unless God humor man he shall not be God Some further Arguments may be used to confirm this Truth and they no less concludent than those before As namely from the Form of Baptism ordained by Christ In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost From the Form of Benediction used by St. Paul The Grace of our Lord Iesus Christ and the Love of God and the Fellowship of the Holy Ghost From the Doxologie or Form of giving glory used in the Church and used as St. Basil confidently averreth from the first beginning Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost And finally from the place it holds in the present Creed composed by the joynt concurrence of the Blessed Apostles But that which I shall specially insist upon is that passage in three of the Evangelists touching the sinâ—t â—t blasphemy against the Holy Spirit of God which is there said to be of that heinous nature that it shall neither be forgiven in this world nor in the world to come Matth. 12.32 That is to say It shall never have forgiveness as S. Mark expounds it Mark 3.29 St. Ambrose gathereth from this Text a concluding Argument against the Macedonian and Eunomian Hereticks who held the Holy Ghost to be onely a created power Quomodo inter Creaturas aâ—det quisquam Spiritum Sanctum computare c. How dareth any man saith he compute the Holy Ghost amongst the rest of the Creatures considering that it is affirmed by the Lord himself That whosoever speaketh against the Son of Man it shall be forgiven him but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven him And to this inference of his we may well subscribe though the sin or blasphemy spoken of by our Lord and Saviour was not against the Person of the Holy Ghost but against his Power For that no sin or heresie against his person was so irremissible as to exclude the offending party from all hope of pardon is evident by the constant practise of the Primitive Church which as St. Chrysostom observeth used daily to receive again to the Word and Sacraments the Eunomian Hereticks on the recanting of their Error That therefore being not the siâ— which is here intended it would be worth the while and very pertinent to our present business to enquire into it though as St. Augustine notes right well In omnibus Scripturis sanctis nulla major quaestio nulla difficilior That there is not a greater nor more difficult question in all the Scripture And well might he say so of all men who in delivering his own judgement upon the point doth so much vary from himself that it is impossible to finde what he doth resolve on For sometimes he makes it to be final impenitency as Lib. de fide ad Pet. c. 3. Sometimes to be despair of Gods mercy as in his Comment on the Romans Sometimes to be a denying of the Churches power to forgive sins as in his Eucheirid c. 83. Sometimes to be sins of malice as De Ser. Domini in monte l. 1. And sometimes neerer to the truth to be an ascribing of the works of the Holy Ghost to the power of the Devil as in his Tract De Quâ—st ex utroque Testam quaest 102. Nor do the Writers of the former or later times agree better in this point with one another than that Learned Father with himself Some holding it to be a renouncing of the Faith of Christ as the Novatians others the denying of the Divinity of Christ as Hilary Philastrius extending it unto every Heresie and Origen whom some of the Novatians also followed to every sin committed after Baptism For later Writers the Schoolmen generally make it to be sins of malice affirming sins of infirmity to be committed against the Father whose proper attribute is Power and sins of ignorance against the Son whose proper attribute is Wisdom and therefore sins against the Holy Ghost must be sins of malice because his attribute is Love And on the other side the Protestants as generally do make it to be final Apostasie or a wilful and malicious resisting of the Truth to the very last And so it is defined by Calvin who makes them to be guilty of this sin against the Holy Ghost Qui divinae veritati cujus fulgore sic per stringuntur ut ignorantiam causari nequeant tamen destinata malicia resistâ—nt in hoc tantum ut resistant that is to say Who out of determined malice resist the known Truth of God with the Beams whereof they are so dazled that they cannot pretend ignorance to the end onely to resist But God forbid that most if at all any of the sins before enumerated should come within the compass of that grievous sentence which is denounced against blaspheming of the Holy Ghost For if either every sin committed after Baptism or every sin of malice or despair of mercy or falling into heresie especially in that large sense as Philastrius takes it should be uncapable of pardon it were almost impossible for any man to be sayed And for the rest final Impenitency is not so properly a particular and distinct species
the Gospel as by no means to let it be accommodated to the times of the Law That by a name distinct they have called the Synagogue Synagoga Iudaeorum Ecclesia Christianorum est as St. Augustine hath it And the distinction may sort well enough with the state of the Church as it stood heretofore in the time of the Law and now under the Gospel though otherwise the names may be used promiscuously For properly Synagogue is no other than a Congregation derived from the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to congregate or gather together into one and the other in one word may be rendred a Convocation from calling the same men together to some certain end Both words of Ecclesiastical use and notion and both import the same thing though in divers words For both the Patriarks and other holy Men of God which lived under the Law may be called a Church that is to say a Convocation a Body Collective of men called by their God unto a participation of his Word and Ordinances And we which have the happiness to live under the Gospel may without any reproach or dishonor to us be called by the name of the Congregation Certain I am St. Augustine though much affected with the foresaid distinction doth yet allow the one to be called a Church Tamen illam dictam invenimus ecclesâ—am as his words there are and no less sure that the meetings of Christs faithful Servants are by St. Paul called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. A Congregation or gathering of themselves together as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word of the same Root and Origination is used by him to the same purpose in another place And yet I can by no means like the zeal of our first Translators who were it seems so out of love with the name of Church that wheresoever they found the word Ecclesia in Greek or Latine for I know not which of the two they consulted with they would not render it the Church but the Congregation And so it stands still in the Epistles and Gospels and several other passages of our Publick Liturgy which were taken out of that Translation A thing which Gregory Martin justly doth except against though he be out himself in saying That the Apostles never called the Church by the name of the Congregation But that Error is corrected in our late Translations and we are now no more afraid of the name of the Church than the Romanists are afraid of the name of Pope Audito Ecclesiae nomine hostis expalluit was a vain brag in Campians mouth when the times were queasiest more ayt to strain at Gnats than they have been since Much less can I approve of that false Collection which those of Rome have made from St. Augustines words For whereas he appropriating the name of Synagogue to the state of the Iews and that of the Church unto the Christians inserts I know not why this Grammatical note Congregatio magis pecorum convocatio magis hominum intelligi solet That to be convocated or called together doth belong to Men but to be congregated or gathered together appertains to Beasts the Authors of the Roman Catechism have from thence collected That the people under the Law were called a Synagogue because like brute Beasts they sought after nothing but temporal and earthly pleasures not being nourished in the hopes of eternal life The vanity of this Collection we have shewn before by bringing in St. Paul to witness how properly the word Congregation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek may be applied and understood of the Church of Christ. The falshood of the Tenet we shall shew hereafter when we are come to speak of the last Article that of Life Everlasting In the mean time the scornful Papist may be pleased to be put in minde that there is nothing more frequent in the Acts of the Council of Constance than Synodus in Spiritu Sancto congregata and yet I know they neither have the confidence nor the heart to say That the Bishops which were there assembled were gathered together like brute Beasts which Congregari doth import in the Tridentine Criticism Of the Quid nominis the name or notion of the Church as it is called Ecclesia both in Greek and Latine we have said enough Our English word Church hath another Root and is derived from the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the proper signification of it doth signifie Gods house the material Church the place appointed for the Meetings of Christian people to celebrate the Name of the Lord their God So witnesseth Eusebius saying That in as much as the Holy Houses and Temples of that time were dedicated unto God the chief Lord of all therefore they did receive his Name and were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dominicae in the Latine Tongue that is the Houses of the Lord A name saith he imposed upon them not by the will of man but the Lord himself In correspondence to the Greek they were called Dominica in the Latin and called so very early too in St. Cyprians time as appears by his reproof of a wealthy widow of whom he saith In Dominicum sine sacrificio Venis That she used to come into the Church without her Offering Of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as that famous Antiquaâ—y Sir Henry Spelman hath right well observed came the Saxon Cyric or Kirk which still the Scots retain without alteration which we by adding thereunto a double Aspirate have changed or mollified into Church A name which though at first it signified the Material Temple I mean the place of meeting for Gods Publick Worship yet came it easily to be applied to the Body Mystical to the Spiritual Temple built on the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles IESUS CHRIST himself being the chief corner stone As on the otherside the word Ecclesia which first the Christians used to signifie the Spiritual Temple the Collective Body of Gods people became in little time to denote the building the material edifice appointed for the meeting of the Congregation Tertullian hath it in this sense for the African Churches Conveniunt in ecclesiam confugiunt in ecclesiam They met together in the Church and they fled to the Church So hath St. Ierome for the Roman Aedificate ecclesias expensis publicis Let Churches be erected at the Publick charge And for the Eastern thus the Synod of Laodicea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. In the Church of the most holy Martyr Euphemia Many more instances of which kinde might be here alleged but that St. Paul is generally supposed by all sorts of Writers to speak of the Material Church when he charged those of Corinth for despising the Church of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Greek Original Concerning which consult St. August quaest 57. super Levit. St. Basil. in Moral Reg.
in several ranks appointing unto every rank the course of his ministery composing Psalms and Hymns to the praise of God prescribing how they should be sung with what kind of instrument and ordering with what vestments the Singing-men should be arayed in the act of their service We shall there finde the Feast of Purim ordained by Mordecai who then possessed the place of a Prince among them and that of the Dedication by the Princes of the Maccabean progeny yet both religiously observed in all times succeeding this last by Christ himself as the Gospel telleth us We shall there finde how Moses broke in peeces the Golden Calf and Hezekiah the Brazen Serpent how the high places were destroyed and the groves cut down by the command of Iehosaphat and what a Reformation was made in the Church of Iudah by the good King Iosiah Finally we shall therein finde how Aaron the High Priest was reproved by Moses Abiathar deposed by Solomon the arrogancy of the Priests restrained by Ioas Such power as this the godly Princes of the Iews did exercise by the Lords appointment to the glory of Almighty God and their own great honor If they took more than this upon them and medled as Vzziah did in offering incense which did of right belong to the Priests office A Leprosie shall stick upon him till the hour of his death nor shall he have a sepulchre amongst the rest of the Kings And such and none but such is that supream power which we ascribe unto the King in the Church of England The Papists if they please may put a scorn on Queen Elizabeth of most famous memory in saying Foeminam in Anglia esse caput ecclesiae that a woman was the head of the Church of England as once Bellarmine did and Calvin if he list may pick a quarrel with the Clergy of the times of King Henry the eighth as rash and inconsiderate men and not so onely but as guilty of the sin of blasphemy Erant enim blasphemi cum vocarunt eum summum caput ecclesiae sub Christo for giving to that King the title of Supream Head of the Church under Christ himself But Queen Elizabeth disclaimed all authority and power of ministring divine service in the Church of God as she declared in her Injunctions unto all Her Subjects And the Clergy in their Convocation Anno 1562. ascribe not to the Prince the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments nor any further power in matters which concern Religion than that onely Prerogative which was given by God himself to all godly Princes in the Holy Scriptures More than this as we do not give the Kings of England so less than this the Christian Emperors did not exercise in the Primitive times as might be made apparent by the Acts of Constantine and other godly Emperors in the times succeeding if it might stand with my design to pursue that Argument Take one for all this memorable passage in Socrates an old Ecclesiastical Historian who gives this Reason why he did intermix so much of the acts of Emperors with the affairs of holy Church viz. That from that time in which they first received the Faith Ecclesiae negotia ex illorum nutu perpendere visa sunt c The business of the Church did seem especially to depend on their will and pleasure insomuch as General Councils were summoned by them for the dispatch of such affairs as concerned Religion even in the main and fundamentals and other emergent occasions of the highest moment CHAP. III. Of the Invisibility and Infallibility of the Church of Christ And of the Churches power in Expounding Scripture Determining Controversies of the Faith and Ordaining Ceremonies BUt laying by those Matters of External Regiment we will look next on those which are more intrinsecal both to the nature of the Church and the present Article For when we say That we believe the Holy Catholick Church we do not mean That we do onely believe that there is a Church upon the Earth which for the latitude thereof may be called Catholick and for the piety of the Professors may be counted Holy but also that we do believe that this Church is led by the Spirit of God into all necessary Truths and being so taught becomes our Schoolâ—mistress unto Christ by making us acquainted with his will and pleasure and therefore that we are to yeeld obedience unto her Decisions determining according to the Word of God This is the sum of that which we believe in the present Artiâ—le more than the quod sit of the same which we have looked upon in the former Chapter and to the disquisition of these points we shall now proceed A matter very necessary as the world now goes in which so many Schisms and Factions do distract mens mindes that Truth is in danger to be lost by too much curiosity in enquiring after it For as the most Reverend Father the late Lord Bishop of Canterbury very well observes Whiles one Faction cries up the Church above the Scripture and the other side the Scripture to the contempt and neglect of the Church which the Scripture it self teacheth men both to honor and obey They have so far endangered the belief of the one and the authority of the other That neither hath its due from a great part of men The Church commends the Scripture to us as the Word of God which she hath carefully preserved from the time of Moses to this day and so far we are willing to give credence to her as to believe that therein she hath done the duty of a faithful witness not giving testimony to any supposititious or corrupted Text but to that onely which doth carry the impressions in it of the Image and Divine Character of the Spirit of God But if a difference do arise about the sense and meaning of this very Scripture or any controversie do break forth on the mis-understanding of it or the applying and perverting it to mens private purposes which is the general source and fountain of all Sects and Heresies we will not therein hearken to the voice of the Church but every man will be a Church to himself and follow the Dictamen or the illumination as they please to call it of their private Spirit It therefore was good counsel of a learned man of our own Not to indulge too much to our own affections or trust too much unto the strength of a single judgment in the controverted points of Faith but rather to relie on the authority and judgment of the Church therein For seeing saith he that the Controversies of Religion in our time are grown in number so many and in nature so intricate that few have time and leasure and fewer strength of understanding to examine them what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to search out which of all the Societies of men in
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 Moderns set as high an estimate upon it if they go not higher For Calvin placeth in repentance and forgiveness of sins the sum and substance of the Gospel Non abs re summa Evangelii statuitur in poenitentia remissione peccatorum And Beza maketh it a necessary preparation ad perendum recipienduns Christi beneficium for seeking and obtaining of those benefits which we have by Christ The like doth Zanchius in his Book De Relig. Cap. 18. Thes. 1. And it is generally agreed on also That confession of our sins must be made to God to whom alone belongs the proper and original power of forgiving sins and who alone is able to renew those heavenly characters of divine graces in our souls which had been formerly defaced by the continual batteries and assaults of sin If we confess our sins saith the Apostle he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness But if we say we have not sinned we both deceive our selves and make God a lyer Upon which words there cannot be a better gloss than that of Ambrose Considering saith he that there is no man free from the guilt of sin Negate hoc sacrilegum it was an high degree of sacrilege to affirm the contrary that being one of the Prerogatives of Almighty God and far above the common law of nature But on the other side Remedium confiteri It is â—aith he a present remedy to confess the same all manner of diseases being then most dangerous when they are hid from the Physician And it is generally agreed on by all parties too according to the holy Scripture that none but God hath proper and original power of forgiving sins for who can so forgive sins but God alone said the Pharisees rightly Luke 5.21 and that it appertains unto him alone to create in us a clean heart and renew a right spirit within us Psal. 5â— 10 Nor do I finde it much disputed amongst moderate men but that satisfaction unto men for the wrong sustained and to the Church for publick scandals hath always been accounted a concomitant of sincere repentance The old rule holds unquestionably true in the present times and non dimittitur peccatum nisi restituatur ablatum that sin is never fully pardoned till the party wronged have satisfaction either in fact or in the reality of our intentions is a good peece of Proâ—estant doctrine for ought I can tell And as for satisfaction to the Church in the case of scandal St. Augustine doth require it in his Encheiridion Vt fuit etiam satis ecclesiae in qua remittuntur peccata That the Church have also satisfaction in which sins are pardoned He must be very ignorant in all Antient writers who makes doubt of this and not much conversant in the writings of the late Divines who knows not how this satisfaction is insisted on by the strictest of our Reformators Nay I will go a little further and say according to the Scriptures and the Primitive Fathers That satisfaction also must be given to God Not satisfaction of condignity as the Schoolmen call it which is a just and equal compensation for the sin committed for so Christ onely satisfied for the sins of men but satisfaction of congruity and impetration by which God is incited on the part of man by his contrition and humiliation and other penitential actions to free him from the punishment which he hath deserved The Sacrifice of God is a broken spirit an humble and a contrite heart he will not despise With which and such like sacrifices is the Lord well pleased better than with a Bullock which hath horns and hoofs And in this sense not in relation unto temporal punishments remaining after the remission of the guilt it self as the Papists use it we are to understand the word in the Antient Fathers as Per delictorum poenitentiam Deo satisfacere in Tertullian Lib. de poenit Cap. 5. Precibus operibus suis Deo patri misericordi satisfacere in St. Cyprian Epist. 10. Per poenitentiae dolorem humilitatis gemitum cordis contriti sacrificium co-operantibus eleemosynis in St. Ambrose But the main matter in dispute for we will not trouble our selves further about this particular is Touching the confession of our sins to men and the authority of Sacerdotal Absolution In the first of which we differ from the Church of Rome and in the other from the Grandees of the Puritan faction First For confession to be made to the Priest or Minister it is agreeable both to the doctrine and intent of the Church of England though not so much in practise as it ought to be For in an Exhortation before the Sacrament of the Lords Supper the Priest as Minister is required to say unto the People That if there be any of them which otherwise cannot quiet his own conscience by the means aforesaid but requireth further comfort or counsel then let him come to me the Parish Minister or some other discreet and learned Minister of Gods Word and open his grief that he may receive such ghostly counsel advice and comfort as his conscience may be relieved and that by the ministery of Gods Word he may receive comfort and the benefit of absolution to the quieting of his conscience and the avoiding of all scruple and doubtfulness So also in the form of Visitation of the sick the infirm person is required to make a special confession to the Minister if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter after which confession the Priest shall absolve him in this sort But because men might be unwilling to make such confession for fear their secret sins should be brought to light both to their danger and disgrace in case some obligation lay not on the Priest or Minister for his concealing of the same the Church hath taken order for their security For in her Ecclesiastical Constitutions she hath thus ordained That if any man confess his secret and hidden sins to the Minister for the unburthening of his conscience and to receive spiritual consolation and ease of minde from him the said Minister shall not at any time reveal and make known to any person whatsoever any crime or offence so committed to his trust and secresie except they be such crimes as by the Laws of this Land his own life may be called into question for concealing the same under pain of irregularity And poena irregularitatis as the Canonists tell us not onely doth deprive a man of all his spiritual promotions for the present time but makes him utterly uncapable of any for the time to come and therefore is the greatest penalty except degradation from his Priesthood which possibly a Clergy-man can be subject to And finally because good Laws are nothing worth unless some care be taken for their execution it was made one of the enquiries in the Book of Articles
judicii pronouncing them with his own mouth to be forgiven in Heaven According to the promise made unto St. Peter or the Church in him when he delivered him the Keys that whatsoever he did loose on Earth should be loosed in Heaven And so we are to understand St. Chrysostomes words Iudex sedet in terris dominus sequitur servum The Judge remains upon the Earth the Lord followeth the servant His meaning is That what the servant doth here upon the Earth according to his Masters will the same the Lord himself will confirm and ratifie To which effect it is affirmed by others of the Antient Writers but in clearer words That the judgment of man goeth before the judgment of God The Priest is then a Iudge to pronounce the sentence and not a Cryer onely as some say to proclaim what the Judge pronounceth and as a Judge doth actually absolve or condemn the sinner by the same power of pardoning or retaining sins which he had from Christ or which Christ executes by him as his lawful deputy For as Kings are said to minister Justice to their Subjects though they do it not in their own persons but by a power devolved on subordinate Officers and as Christ himself may properly be said to have fed the multitudes though he gave the loaves onely unto his Disciples and his Disciples to the multitudes So he may also be affirmed to absolve the penitent although he do it by the mouth of the Priests or Ministers it being his act 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and theirs but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 originally his and ministerially theirs the same power in both And this may further be made good by that form of Speech used by our Saviour in the delegation of this power unto his Apostles and by them to his Ministers in all ages since being the very same with that which he himself hath given us in the Pater noster In his Commission it is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whose sins soever ye remit Iohn 20.23 And in the Lords Prayer it is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and forgive us our sins Luke 11.4 The same word used in the original for the one and the other And if it be a Solecism to say as no doubt it is That we desire no more of God in that clause of the Prayer than that he would signifie or declare that our sins are pardoned The Solecism must be as great for ought I can see to say That they are onely signified or declared to be pardoned by the mouth of the Minister Now that this is the meaning and intent of the Church of England some of our Romish adversaries do not stick to grant though others to calumniate this most Orthodox Church have given out the contrary For one of their great Controversors hath declared in print that it is the doctrine of some of the Protestants That Priests have power not onely to pronounce the remission of sins but to give it also And that this seemeth to be the doctrine of the Communion Book in the Visitation of the sick where the Priest saith And by his authority committed unto me I absolve thee from all thy sins c. And therefore when a foul-mouthed Iesuite had been pleased to charge us with denying power unto the Priests of forgiving sins Bishop Usher telleth him to his face That he doth us wrong and proves it by the very formal words in our Ordination Whose sins soever ye remit they are remitted and whose sins soever ye retain they are retained But no man can say more to this than hath been said already by Bishop Morton now Lord Bishop of Durham The power of absolution saith that learned Prelate whether it be general or particular whether in publick or in private is professed in our Church where both in our Publick Service is proclamed Pardon and Absolution upon all Penitents and a particular applying of particular Absolution unto Penitents by the Office of the Ministery And greater power than this hath no man received from God And this hath also been acknowledged by the Leaders of the Puritan faction who in their Petition to King Iames at his first coming to this Crown excepted against the very name of Absolution as being a Forinsecal and Iuridical word importing more surely than a Declaration which they desired to have corrected And thereupon it was propounded in the Conference at Hampton Court That to the word Absolution in the Rubrick following the general Confession these words Remission of sins might be added for Explanations sake And though Dr. Raynolds one of the Four Proctors for the said Petitioners in the foresaid Conference may be conceived to have been of the same opinion with these of the agrieved sort whom he did appear for yet he was so well satisfied in the power and nature of Sacerdotal Absolution that he did earnestly desire it at the time of his death humbly received it at the hands of Dr. Holland the Kings Professor in Divinity in the Vniversity of Oxon for the time then being and when he was not able to express his joy and thankfulness in the way of speech did most affectionately kiss the hand that gave it But what need more be said for manifesting this judicial power in the remitting of sins than what is exercised and determined by the Church in the other branch of this Authority in retaining sins By which impenitent sinners are solemnly and judicially cut off from the sacred Body of the Church and utterly excluded from the company and Communion of the rest of the faithful Of which the Church hath thus resolved in her publick Articles viz. That person which by open denunciation of the Church is rightly cut off from the unity of the Church and Excommunicate ought to be taken of the whole multitude of the faithful as an Heathen and Publican until be be openly reconciled by penance and received into the Church by a Iudge that hath authority thereunto Where clearly we have found a Iudicial power and a Iudge to exercise the same and that not onely in the point of retaining sins in case of excommunication but also in reconciling of the penitent in remitting sins in the way of ordinary absolution Which whether it be given in Foro poenitentiae or in Foro Conscientiae either in private on the confession of the party or publickly for satisfaction of the Congregation doth make no difference in this point which onely doth consist in the proof of this That the Priests or Ministers of the Gospel lawfully ordained have under Christ a power of forgiving sins Which comfortable doctrine of the remission of sins by Gods great mercy at all times and the Churches Ministery at some times as occasion is is the whole subject of this branch of the present Article Proceed we next to those great benefits which we reap thereby The Resurrection of the Body and the Life Everlasting ARTICLE XI
whole Text is expounded of Christs descent into Hell as hath been proved at large in the foresaid Article This finally is the very place to which the Devils who exclaimed against Christ our Saviour for coming to torment them before their time desired him that they might not go And they besought him saith St. Luke ne imperaret illis ut in Abyssum irent i. e. That he would not command them to go into the deep or rather into the Abysse or the bottomless pit as the word is rendred thrice in the Revelation Abyssus therefore must be Hell or the house of torments prepared for the Devil and his Angels against the judgment of that great and terrible day which they were so afraid to enter that they besought the Lord not to send them thither The third word used for Hell in the holy Scripture is Tartarus used onely by St. Peter and that but once God spared not saith he the Angels that sinned but having bound them with chains of darkness detrusos in Tartaro tradidit cruciandos cast them down into Hell to be kept there to the day of judgment Where Tartarus though Englished Hell is not that very place of torment to which they shall be doomed in the judgment day but the out-skirts or suburbs of it the prison in the which they lie bound in the chains of darkness But whether it be Hell it self or the dungeon to it the antient Gentiles who best knew the true meaning of it have made it a dark place in the deeps of the Earth and therefore called by Ovid Tenebrosa Tartara Thus Hesiod also telleth us of it that the dungeon of Tartarus is as much under the Earth as Heaven is above it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his words there are And so did Virgil understand it when he told us this Tartarus ipse bis patet in praeceps tantum That Tartarus is twice as deep as the Heaven is high And in a prophecy of one of the Sibyls which I finde often cited by the antient Fathers it is described to be a place in the lower parts of the Earth For speaking of the day of judgment it is there affirmed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That then the gaping Earth shall discover the Tartarean dungeon That they did also use the word for the place of torments is evident by that of Anacreon an old drunken Poet who giveth this reason why he was so loath to die and forsake this world 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because he feared to go to Tartarus And so St. Augustine understood it when he said of Christ That he descended unto Tartarus but felt there no torments The fourth and last word was Gehenna or Ge-Hinnom a word not known amongst the Gentiles and onely used by Christ when he spake to the Iews whose it was originally and by St. Iames in his Epistle to that scattered Nation who very well understood the true meaning of it For Ge-Hinnom or the Valley of Hinnom was a Dell or Valley near Ierusalem in which there was a fire continually burning partly to consume the dead Carkasses and filth of the City and partly for the sacrificing of those wretched Children which were offered to the Idol Moloch Which making it a place both of stink and terror it came to be a type of Hell-fire it self and for the fire of Hell or for Hell it self was used by Christ and his Apostle as before was said the Hebrew word being mollified and made Gehenna Hell is called many times Gehinnon saith Peter Martyr because a Vale being a low and deep place doth resemble Hell Quod infra terram esse creditur which generally is believed to be under the Earth A place of fiery torments saith Martin Bucer and therefore called Gehenna ignis or the Hell of fire in St. Matthews Gospel These are the several words used by the sacred Pen-men of the New Testament when they speak of Hell And all being laid together will amount to this That it is a dark and dismal place in the deeps of the Earth prepared by God originally for the devil and his angels and secondarily for impenitent sinners where they shall fry for ever in unquenchable flames and see no other light but the fire that burns them And this being properly the punishment reserved in Hell for those who are condemned to that bottomless pit I shall insist the more upon it Not looking here upon the separation of the wicked from the love of God or the despair which they grone under or the guilt of conscience which either are but poena damni the loss of that which Gods beloved do enjoy in the Heavenly glories or are in part inflicted on the wicked man in this present life For unto this relates those Parables in St. Matthews Gospel where it is said by Christ That the Angels shall gather out of his Kingdom all things that offend and them that do iniquity and shall cast them in caminum ignis into the furnace of fire And in the Parable of the Net we have it in the same words in caminum ignis Thus the rich glutton in St. Luke is said to be tormented in those fiery flames And in the twentieth of the Revelation it is called expresly Stagnum ignis sulphuris A lake of fire and brimstone as was said before A truth communicated to and by the Prophets of the former times who give us this description of Tophet or the Valley of Hinnom That the pile thereof is fire and much wood that the breath of the Lord is like a stream of brimstone to kindle it and that the stream thereof shall be turned into pitch and the dust into brimstone And Malachi speaking of the day of judgment telleth us That it shall burn like an Oven and that all which do wickedly shall be as the stubble Quos inflammabit dies veniens whom that day when it cometh shall burn up A truth so known among the Gentiles whether by tradition of their Ancestors or conversation with the Iews we dispute not here that by the verses of the Poets and the works of their most grave Philosophers as Minutius telleth us Illius ignei fluminis admonenâ—ur homines Men were admonished to beware of that burning lake To which it were impertinent to adde the testimonies of the Antient Fathers by one of which it is called Divinus ignis Poenale incendium by a second Ardor poenarum by a third Aeternus ignis by a fourth sic de coeteris And though a Question hath been made as all things have been questioned in these captious times whether this fire be true and real or onely metaphorically called so in the Book of God yet by all sound Interpreters it is thus agreed on as hath been very well observed by a learned Iesuite Metaphoram esse non posse quae sit tam perpetua That such a constancy of expression