and the other Sacred Writings of Moses perhaps also books of other men to which he alluded and yet there was no writing before the Law Concerning the book Numb 21.14 suppose the word runne in the present tense Dicitur It is said in the book of the Warres of the Lord yet it is expounded by the Chaldee as of a thing past What God did in the Red Sea and in the brooks of Arnon which latter clause necessarily implyeth that the book was written after the Law for The battle of Arnon was the fourtieth yeare after their Exodus saith a Jew by Vatablus his commendation very eminent Or say it be read as Robert Stephen in his Annotations on the Pentateuch gathered from the Kings Professours at Paris hath it Sicut fecitin Mari Rubro sic faciet in torrentibus Arnon which sense Cornelius à Lapide embraceth yet those words evince that the book was written since their going out of Egypt which was but fourty dayes before the giving of the Law saith Helvicus But indeed first the word Sepher doth not alwayes signifie a book but sometimes a Narrative of things past whereupon Tremellius readeth it Idcirco dici solet IN RECENSIONE BELLORUM JEHOVAE And so others have held saith Vatablus plainly denying that there was ever any such especiall book of warres Others read it in the future It shall be read and thereupon some of the Jews think it is the Book of Judges which handleth the Warre with Amalek or another book which recounted the miracles of God in the Red Sea and by the river Arnon which book perhaps is now perished as divers others of the holy Scriptures and amongst them a book made by Samuel 1 Samuel 10.25 Which I wondred that neither Drusius nor any who handled the controversies whom I could yet meet with ever observed before me And indeed Jeamar is the future tense It shall be said or it shall be written So Vatablus the Interlineary Eugubinus and the Genevians So the words are rather propheticall then historicall and so no particular book of the warres of the Lord was written before the two Tables Lastly that I may leave no objection unanswered adde this to the answer of S. Augustine That Christ speaking of a prophesie in Paradise concerning himself doth not say It was written before Moses but It is written by Moses of me John 5.46 Moreover if we can read the Hebrew now without vowels much easier and better could they whose daily speech it was The necessity of pronouncing the consonaÌ„ts by the vowels evinceth not the writing of consonaÌ„ts the necessity of writing the Hebrew tongue by consonants evinceth not the necessity of writingvowels they may be of a later invention Secondly saith he * Quum duae linguae Syriaca Arabica quae ab Hebraea ortae sunt vocales habeant ut ex libris manuscriptis impressis apparet Matrem uempe Hebraeam illis carere verisimile non est Seeing that the two tongues the Syriack and the Arabick which came from the Hebrew have vowels as it appeares out of manuscripts and printed books it is not likely that the Mother-tongue to wit the Hebrew wants them I answer it followeth not Because the Syriack Arabick have now points therefore they had ever so when they were written and if they had ever points it is likely they invented them and added them to their consonants the rather because the Hebrew wanted them Thirdly * Quâ Linguâ Deus Sacra sua oracula promulgavit banc certam miniméque ambiguant esse necessariò statuendum est We must needs hold that tongue to be certain and no way ambiguous or doubtfull in which God hath published his sacred Oracles I answer Then God should have writ in any other language for the Hebrew of all other is most dubious and ambiguous And whereas he addeth That the Hebrew without vowels hath no certain signification but from the antecedent and consequent and admitteth three foure or five significations according to the diversity of vowels I answer the antecedents and consequents are guides sufficient and God did it purposely to exercise our wits and to make us know that though in things necessary to salvation the Scripture is easy yet in some matters there are depths not to be sounded in others The lips of the Priest should keep knowledge and they should seek the law at his mouth Malach. 2.7 which the unlearned scorn now adayes to do though there be much ambiguitie but how bold-daring self-willed would they be if there were no difficulties I return from the words to the matter and say That as the strong births of the wombe are a blessing of God whether in women or in beasts Deuter. 30.9 So an abortion is a curse and abortives I mean that had life and reasonable souls by the ordinary rules of Genes 17.14 when Circumcision was in force and of John 3.3 whilest Baptisme is in force is a fearfull estate Howsoever God may dispense with his own Law and shew mercy extraordinarily yet David when he wished his enemies to be like abortives wished them no good but evill yea if he did not curse them but foretold what they should be like and that they were not the words of imprecation but prediction yet he did not fore-divine or fore-prophesie any good estate to them whom he likeneth to abortives Let this suffice concerning abortives incapable of sinne or punishment and abortives whose estate of soul is dangerous being measured by the rules of precepts Which I say against Anabaptists and the contemners or causelesse delayers of that gracious Sacrament 5 It is now supposed and shall if it please God hereafter be demonstrated That humane souls are not traducted nor causally brought out of the flesh yet are they occasionally that I may touch at the manner God having resolved and decreed after generation and fit organization of the Embryo to create and infuse a reasonable soul which soul because it is united to a masse corrupted in such a manner as a spiritlesse masse may be corrupted or rather to a masse inclining or inducing to corruption in the very unition it contracteth originall sinne Hugo Eterianus thus descanteth on this point * Cum anima languore afficitur non voluntate non necessitate sed solâ societate peroellitur si voluntate corrumperetur anima non originale sed actuale peccatum censeretur si necessitate câ—deret von ultrà esset imputandum illud vitium Hugo Eter de Animarum regressu ab Inferis cap. 4. When the soul languisheth it is neither cast down by the will nor by necessity but onely by fellowship if the soul were corrupted by the will it should not be counted originall sinne but actuall if it should fall by necessitie that vice were no further to be imputed Concerning the latter part I answer if in his necessity he imply coaction he saith true otherwise by this concurrence of our condescending will in Adam or by
good or God saw that it was good as he did at all and every of the other five dayes creation Was it therefore not good Yes verily for Gen. 1.31 God saw every thing that he had made and behold it was very good John 14.16 c. The Comforter shall abide with you for ever even the Spirit of truth whom the world cannot receive because it seeth him not neither knoweth him but ye know him for he dwelleth with you and shall be in you And verse 26. The Comforter shall teach you all things Therefore he shall teach them to write truely the Spirit of truth will not suffer them to write falsly whilest he dwelleth with them and in them as he did when they wrote Inspiration was ordained as a cause and as a means of right conceiving conceiving or apprehension was appointed as a cause and a means of right expression expression was either by word or writing Many words were prophetically and most divinely spoken which were not written not so many were written as were first spoken The vocall expression was more transient and transitorie perhaps concerning some few and those onely of those times the expression permanent and by writing was and is directorie to mankinde to the end of the world Inspiration apprehension and much expression by voice were all as means to this main end that there might be a Scripture Shall the means be certain unerring and inerrable and shall the end be dubious crooked and erring The perfect use of the right means leads on infallibly to an undeceiving and exact end If the Divine Pen-men could not erre or be misled in the former which someâ—imes vanished leaving no footsteps behinde them it is not possible that they should erre in writing which is the master-piece of that divine work lasting for ever the absolute square and judge and canon of all mens thoughts words and deeds unlesse you say God had lesse care to preserve from corruption divine records filed up on eviternitie and necessarie at all times for all persons in all places as the Scriptures now are then he had of inspirations which ended onely in the apprehension if they were not expressed or turned into aire and vanished almost with the breath if they were onely spoken Nor let any man say that writing is further removed from the divine operation then inspiration was and so more subject to errour for it shall appeare ere long that the same Spirit which began by inspiration sat still moving on the waters not leaving his own work till there was a perfect production till the end was accomplished and the will of God was written in words and letters of truth so that not one Iota or tittle had any errour Yea let me go one step further and say that when the Apostles did dictate to their scribes actuaries or secretaries not onely not themselves but not their notaries could erre And yet I have read of two mad stories crosse to my opinion the one in Sixtus Senensis Bibliothecae sanctae 2. pag. 120. on the name Tertius who recordeth out of Diodorus Bishop of Tarsus that this Tertius being no excellent speaker nor writer made the obscure Epistle of S. Paul to the Romanes to be more obscure whilest he laboured to expresse S. Pauls thoughts and sense by more confused and unabsolute sentences and transposed explications As if S. Paul could not write sufficiently himself though he said in humblenesse Rudis sermone sum I am rude in speech 2. Cor. 11.6 yet was he powerfull in writing 2. Cor. 10.10 As if he had not divers most sufficient scribes by him As if he would permit the writing of so divine super-divine an Epistle to an Ignaro a silly fellow As if Tertius himself wrote not this Epistle in the Lord that is by divine authoritie or as Cajetan thinketh these words In the Lord are added to shew that he did not write it as an hireling which sense is made good by some authorities according to the diversitie of punctation As if the Spirit who inspired Paul dictating ruled not the hand of Tertius writing As if S. Paul would make so block-headed a disciple as Tertius is feigned to be to be his scribe and that in his most majesticall and obscurest Epistle Or if Tertius were so that he should be thought worthy to be Iconii Episcopus and have that extraordinarie grace to be crowned with Martyrdome as Ecclesiasticall historie recordeth of him As if S. Peter whom Paul withstood for a smaller matter to the face Gal. 2.11 when he said that there were in all S. Pauls Epistles some things hard to be understood would have commended his fellow-Apostles wisdome as he did 2. Pet. 3.15 and not rather have found fault with his follie and the manner of his writing if not with the matter also if Tertius had been so absurd as Diodorus imagined especially seeing S. Peter saith that the unlearned and unstable wrest some of those writings unto their own destruction which in all likelihood should justly rather swallow up S. Paul for his carelesnesse of inditing and Tertius for his supinenesse or rather blasphemous forgerie of divine truths by mis-writing them if any fault could have been truely imputed to either of them But of this we shall speak by Gods help more at large in the next section save one The second mad storie followeth Because some were wont to forge Epistles in S. Pauls name as is apparent 2. Thess 2.2 where he beseecheth them Not to be shaken in minde or to be troubled neither by spirit nor by word nor by letter as from us therefore he alway subscribed his own name to all his Epistles f Vbicunque sciebat falsos adesse doctores Wheresoever he knew that there were false teachers saith Hierom on Gal. 6.11 On which place he also relateth that a very learned man of those times said S. Paul being an Hebrew knew not Greek letters and because necessitie required that he should subscribe with his own hand to the Epistle t Contra consuetudinem curvos tramites literarum vix magnis apicibus exprimebat He wrote though in ill-shaped unhandsome very great letters shewing this testimonie of a kinde affection that he would endeavour to do for the Galatians what indeed he could not do Whereby he concludeth that S. Paul could not write Greek at least not in a legible good hand S. Hierom wondered at the ridiculousnesse of his exposition as well he might because the Apostle used to subscribe to divers of his Epistles and here he wrote this whole Epistle with his own hand and yet S. Hieroms exposition is almost as forced as the former u Grandibus Paulus literis scripsit quia sensus erat grandis in literis Spiritu Dei vivi non atrameuto calamo fuerat exaratus S. Paul saith he wrote in large long characters or letters because the sense was great in the words and was written by the Spirit of
the Nether-lands where they say your book was printed cannot defend you Let the women rather go to their needle and their spindle Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection 1. Tim. 2.11 But I suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the man as she doth if she turn expositrix but to be in silence saith S. Paul Quis expedivit psittaco suum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Picásque docuit nostra verba conari Cornelius Cornelii à Lapide deserveth the severest censure of the Inquisition for expounding the word of God by an Hebrew anagram on Exod. 25.18 though he cite a piece of Scripture for a parallell Indeed S. Hierome on those words Sheshach shall drink after them Jeremie 25.26 interprets it to be Babel because if you mingle in the Hebrew Alphabet the first letter with the last the second with the last save one and so forth till you come to the middle and invert the order of reading which we do for the memory of children as for example 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when you are come to the middest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do meet then that which in the ordinary and forward reading is Babel in the inverted reading is Sheshach I apprehend him thus write in one line the Hebrew Alphabet beginning with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and ending with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in another line begin with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and end with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what in the right way is Babel in the froward way is Sheshach For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the second letter being doubled and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the twelfth letter in their proper places and rank make with their vowels Babel and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the second letter being also doubled with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the twelfth letter in the alphabet in the preposterous posture of them with the same vowels do make Sheshach therefore Babel is called Sheshach Magno conatu meras nugas Great ado about meer trifles Indeed the Rabbines have many mutuall oppositions of letters in the inverted alphabet and none so ancient as this as Bertram in his Comparatio Grammaticae Hebraicae Aramicae truly observeth and of the Cabalisticall interchangeing of letters he preferreth this Athbasch above all yet is it more nice and curious then sound or religious neither can S. Hieroms authority give authority or allowance to this minglemangle-kinde of interpretation his authority in this point being weakened by his slender conjecture I think saith he that the Prophet Jeremy did prudently conceal the name of Babel lest the besiegers of Jerusalem should be enraged against him but say I otherwhere he nameth Babel as Jeremy 50.18 and layeth a burden upon the kingdome and citie of Babylon upon her Princes and her wise men both in the 50 and 51 chapters Yea in the same 25 chapter ver 12 Jeremy saith from God I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation Which inconvenience Lyra foreseeing therefore perhaps the rather thinketh that Sheshach is the name of the Egyptian King and that Pharaoh was the common name as afterward Cesar was the common name of the Emperours and Julius a proper name This is evident there was a Sheshach king of Egypt in the dayes of Solomon 1. King 11.40 and there might also be a second Sheshach after But Lyra himself on Jer. 51.41 saith that Sheshach in that place is used for Babel and I am forced to say that no part of the 51 chap. toucheth on the woes of Egypt but purposely is bent against Babylon and it is not likely that the same Prophet would call two distinct kings or two distinct kingdomes by the same word Sheshach Therefore Lyra is out of tune in this strain But why then is Sheshach put for Babel If no reason could be assigned yet the word of God is not so to be dandled withall or rather to be tortured as to draw expositions out of anagrams and therefore the Jesuit was justly blameable to make this place a pattern of his anagrammatisticall interpretation Mr. Selden de DIs Syris Syntagm 2. Cap. 12. saith Sheshach may seem to be an idol of the Babylonians a she-idol or perhaps as it is in his Addenda a masculine Deity but he leaveth all to conjecture wherein though he hath done excellently yet I rather follow in this point Tremellius who on Jeremy 25.26 observeth that Sheshach in the Babylonish tongue doth signifie Diem festum celebrans and so may signifie either the King or the City keeping a festivall day Which was never without feasting Now that both the feast was kept and the festivall day designed to the worship of their idols may be judged by the event Daniel 5.4 where they praised the gods and for so doing was Belshazzar reprehended vers 23. Tremellius addeth that Jeremy by this one word did demonstrate with his finger the very day of the King of Babel and Babylons fall as if he had said At a feast he shall be slain or In her feasting the city shall be destroyed For as the Lord prophesied by Isaiah Prepare the table watch in the watch-tower eat drink Isa 21.5 where both the feast and the fall of the King of Babel and of the city also is divinely foretold so God gave a second warning Jeremy 51.39 In their heat I will make their feasts and I will make them drunken that they may rejoyce sleep a perpetuall sleep Where Babylons feasting-destruction is named then followeth I will bring them down like lambes to the slaughter ver 40. whereupon he crieth out in the 41. ver How is Sheshach taken that is Diem festum celebrans either the feasting Belshazzar or the feasting city overthrown Concerning the King the Scripture saith Daniel 5.1 He made a great feast to a thousand of his lords and drank wine and whiles he tasted the wine he commanded to bring the golden and silver vessels of the temple of Jerusalem and in the same houre the fingers of a mans hand wrote his destruction and that night was he the wine-bibbing Sheshach slain Concerning the city I proved before out of Jeremy that her destruction was to wait upon her intemperance and so Quomodo capta est Sheshach id est Civitas diem festum celebrans And indeed I rather incline to this latter exposition in this place because also of the words immediately following How is the praise of the whole earth surprised but neither Belshazzar nor Sheshach if it were an idol were the praise of the whole earth How is Babylon become an astonishment among the nations If you judge it to be a she-idol because it is said Quomodo capta est Sheshach I first answer that at that feast service was done to many idols of gold and silver brasse and iron wood and stone Daniel 5.23 but that Sheshach was the chief among them or that any one idol of them was so named is yet to
Leaving every man to his own libertie in this point saith Erasmus Secondly I wonder that that holy Father could think S. Paul would permit the least sinne when Rom. 3.8 he counteth them slanderous reporters that affirmed he said Let us do evil that good may come adding their damnation was just Again if it be read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our English well translateth it By permission and the Arabick expounds it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By my concession g Non dico ut in decreto decisivo Nor speak I it as a sinall sentence or binding decision as Beza hath it The Arabick of Junius hath it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 With mutuall consent and thus enlargeth it h Quod dico ex consensu posse alterum ab altero discedere ad tempus propter jejunium orationem non jubeo sed consulo Nam nè ' Deus quidem ipse hoc ordinarium aut perpetuum esse mandavit suis sed exemplum praebuit cum hoc consilio me◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Whereas I say One may depart from another by consent for a time that they may fast the more and pray the better I command not this but advise it For even God himself never gave charge unto any of his that this should be done commonly and kept perpetually but he hath given us an example agreeable to my counsel that it may be done sometimes for a while upon extraordinary occasion Exod. 19.15 Come not at your wives The translated words of the Arabick by Junius are these i Dico hoc juris ut dici solet consiliunt non ut mandatum This is the advice not the decree of the Law Beza makes the sense of the words to be as if S. Paul did not command expressely that all should be married as some might collect from his words vers 2. Junius applieth them to his leaving it indifferent for man and wife to forsake the companie of each other for a time i Nomen VENIAE perperam torquetur ab Augustino Augustines PARDON is farre fetcht and forced too much saith Beza for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a candid interpretation upon good reason and doth not alwaies imply such a pardon as connoteth a fault Aristotle saith k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eth. l. 6. c. 11 It is an upright sentence inclining not to rigour but to moderation Peter Martyr saith l Versatur circa aequii summum jus remittit quod alioqum est summa injuria It is exercised about that which is equall and qualifieth the rigour of the law which otherwise is extream injurie Even in the same sort could I deal with one whom I saw to fast or to studie too much that he might sometime refresh himself Which I would not say imperiously but by way of counsel grounded on equitie Neither doth it therefore follow that to studie hard or to fast holily is a sinne So farre Peter Martyr who might as well have insisted in S. Pauls advice to his scholar 1. Tim. 5.23 Drink no longer water but use a little wine for thy stomacks sake and thine often infirmities The Syriack in Junius hath it answerable to the Arabick m Hoc dico ego tanquā infirmis non ex mandato This I say as to the weak not by commandment n Ex concessione non ex imperio By grant not precept as Tremellius turneth it o Non praecipio sed permitto I charge not but permit saith Haymo for how could S. Paul command when Christ left it free When Christ said It is not given to all or He that is able to receive it let him receive it Matth. 19.12 if the words have reference to the second verse or when God himself left it indifferent if it hath dependance upon the temporarie abstemiousnesse upon just occasion touched at in the fifth verse Concerning the second objection vers 10. Vnto the married I command yet not I but the Lord. I answer First that those forms of speech are not simply exclusive much lesse contradictorie and denote not so much a simple negation as a kinde of comparison sometime I yet not I. And we have other places of Scripture to be ranked in the same parallell John 7.16 My doctrine is not mine but his that sent me As therefore it was most true that Christs doctrine even as he is God and Man is not his in one sense that is originally for as he had not the divine essence of himself or from himself but from God the Father so from the Father had he the divine doctrine and yet in another sense is truely Christs doctrine as conceived and preached by him who is God the Fountain of truth yea Truth it self And as the doctrine which he had as he was Man was partly not his for the infused doctrine into the soul of Christ comprehending all scientificall habits by which Christ naturally knew and that most perfectly whatsoever was to be known was not his as Man but was infused of God and partly his namely such as he like a Viator or another Man experimentally might gather And the true meaning of the words may be The doctrine which I preach is not the invention of mine own brain but his rather who sent me to teach you what he taught me and so is both mine and not mine To which effect Pererius So in the place of the Apostle where it is written I command yet not I but the Lord since S. Paul might be considered either as an ordinarie man or as an Apostle inspired from God he first saith I command and then by distinguishing explaineth his meaning Yet not I as a common man but rather the Lord by me his Apostle And all this proveth not that S. Paul could write any thing as he was an Apostle of his own head or yet put in any of his own conceits but was wholly guided by the Spirit For whatsoever is so properly mans work that it is not also Gods that is not good since the Authour of goodnesse is excluded Secondly I answer The place doth rather expressely say that whatsoever S. Paul wrote or spake as an Apostle they were not his words or writings but the words of God for his commands were not his but the Lords then any way imply that he could write any thing as an Apostle without the Spirit or by the dictate of his own naturall prudence onely Thirdly o Praecipio non ego ex mea sententia sed Dominus in Evangelio c. I command not according to mine opinion but the Lord in the Gospel doth That a man may not depart from his wife except for fornication saith Haymo Where our Saviour speaks not of a short departure with consent for the improvement of religious duties for then S. Paul might have had a command for it in the objection precedent but our Saviour speaketh of a totall or finall departure of man and wife by
bill of divorcement or separation for of this Christ spake expressely Mat. 19.9 Mark 10.11 Luk. 16.18 Therefore S. Paul commanded not but the Lord namely Christ in those places of the Gospel to which he aimed The third objection is out of the 1. Cor. 7.12 To the rest speak I not the Lord. These words compared with the former may seem to carrie it cleare against me For what can be of more force I command yet not I but the Lord and To the rest speak I not the Lord as if S. Paul spake and wrote something by humane wisdome which the Lord bid him not First I answer with Peter Martyr S. Paul saith thus because before he had reference to Christs speech in the Gospel of not easily dissolving matrimonie but now he sets down somewhat of which Christ in the Gospel is not found to have said any thing So now he speaks not the Lord namely not Christ in the Gospel not Christ by word of mouth as he was man and yet on the contrarie side we may as truely say even in this place and to S. Pauls proper sense with the words inverted The Lord speaks not I Not I of my self not I as a man but God from heaven or the holy Spirit speaketh The conclusion is S. Paul speaketh or writeth nothing as an Apostle from himself without the Lord without divine immediate revelation from the holy Ghost but he might relate something which Christ spake not whilest Christ lived on earth something that is not registred in the Gospel And thus S. Paul did speak and not the Lord And thus may an other speak or write and not the Lord. p Ego dico non Dominus Nunquid Dominus non loquebatur per eumâ—Vtique Sed ideo dixit se dicere non Dominum quia hoc praeceptum non continetur in Evangelio dictuÌ„ à ' Domino sicut illud superius I speak not the Lord Did not the Lord speak by him Yes But therefore he said that himself spake and not the Lord because this precept is not contained in any of the Gospels as the other was saith Haymo before Peter Martyr And indeed I remember not that Christ so much as toucheth at this point Whether a beleeving man should put away or dwell from an unbeleeving woman yea or no To the fourth objection 1. Cor. 7.25 I have no commandment from the Lord yet I give my judgement I answer It was matter of counsel not of precept it was left indifferent the doing or not doing had not been sinne q Noluit Deus de virginitate coelibatu praecipere quia visus fuisset damnare nuptias Christ would give no command concerning single life or virginitie lest he should seem to condemn marriage So Augustine in libello de sanct virginit So Hierom against Jovinian So Ambrose saith Peter Martyr Yet the Consilium do I counsel is the advice of such an one as had obtained mercie of the Lord to be faithfull and a faithfull steward will not distribute more or lesse then his Lord appointeth The unjust steward made them write lesse then was due the usurer makes them write more the good and faithfull man followeth his masters will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 foot by foot So this place proveth not that the Apostle as an Apostle wrote or spake by humane wisdome any thing but what was appointed of God The Rhemists on verse 12 say By this we learn that there were many matters over and above the things that Christ taught or prescribed left to the Apostles order and interpretation wherein they might as the case required either command or counsel and we bound to obey accordingly Doctour Estius goeth further r Satìs autem insinuat hic sermo Praecipio non ego sed Dominus Apostolos eorum successores posse quaedaÌ„ praecipere quae Christus ipse per se non praecepit This speech I COMMAND YET NOT I BUT THE LORD doth sufficiently evidence that the Apostles and their successours can command something which Christ himself by himself commanded not Both of them runne awry in one extream Doctour Fulk answereth to that place of the Rhemists The Apostles had not particular precepts for every case but they had generall rules in Christs doctrine which they were bound to follow in their precepts and counsels I think he approacheth too nigh unto them unlesse he mean that both their precepts and counsels had the divine dictate to guide them especially in things which they wrote And whereas he saith They had not particular precepts for every case I say they had for all cases necessarie especially concerning the whole Church And their generall rules might rather be for guiding matters of order and discipline then of doctrine For he that promised to lead them into all truth would not leave them in the framing of particulars as he doth us and other men who out of generals do deduce these and these specials For there is a great distance and traverse to be placed between those sacred Penmen and other succeeding Expositours of holy Writ And S. Paul doth imply that even his judgement or counsel was according to the Spirit of God as Bishop Andrews well observed and now cometh to be handled The fifth objection is verse 40 in the same verse where he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 According to my judgement he addeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I think also that I have the Spirit of God Minus dicit plus volens intelligi He speaketh sparingly but would be understood more largely say I. So verse 26 I suppose and 1. Cor. 4.9 I think that God hath set forth us the Apostles last f Puto autem Sobriè loquitur minúsque dicit majus significat ut sit sensus Certò scio I THINK He speaketh soberly signifying more then he spake and it is all one as if he had said I KNOW CERTAINLY saith Dionysius Carthus with whom accordeth Primasius Do not think that I speak what I do of my self the Spirit of God speaketh in me t Futo non dubietatem significat The word I THINK is not wrapped about with doubtfulnesse Peter Martyr thinks it is an Ironie against the false Apostles who traduced S. Paul as unworthy to be an Apostle And then the Ironie hath as full force as if he had peremptorily avouched The Spirit of the Lord is in me and by it I write what I write Other objections may be made as the 2. Cor. 11.17 I speak it not after the Lord but as it were foolishly in this confidence of boasting Therefore not onely humane wisdome but humane infirmitie may seem to challenge part both in his words and writings It is answered in a few words of Dionysius Carthusianus Non loquor id est Loqui non videor that is It seems not so to some though my self know the contrarie Others may object 1. Cor. 9.8 Say I these things as a man or saith not the Law
Hellenists Chaldee Paraphrase or any heathen Authours yet it doth not necessarily evince that the holy Actuaries or Notaries did oversee reade heare or transcribe those things out of their knowledge from the said Authours but both the names of those Authours and the things themselves were presented to them by that blessed Spirit which knew all things and this among the rest That these words phrases and sentences were fit to be inserted into the holy Writ which now are in it All Scripture is of divine inspiration But the very words are part of Scripture Therefore even they were inspired Revel 19.9 The Angel said Write Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage-supper of the Lambe Did not the Angel speak the words Did not he give the Apostle both matter and words When the Apostle was commanded Revel 14.13 by a voice from heaven to write Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord c. was he commanded to write his conceits and thoughts apprehended in Syriack and translate them into Hellenisticall Greek or did the heavenly voice suggest onely an holy inspiration into him and left him to coyn words as Heinsius would have it or rather did not the voice teach the very words which should be written viz. Blessed are the dead c. Now let us passe to the fifth and last Conclusion in which we must dissent from the worthy Heinsius and disarm him of his often-inculcated but not once proved Tenet The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Writers of holy Scripture conceived in one language and writ in an other Upon which ground he hath raised a strange structure but his very ground-work is sandie slipperie and false And this I hope to evince by Scripture Authoritie and Reason All which shall be squared to that Corner-stone which more then once before I hewed upon more roughly and now by Gods grace intend to polish namely That the very words and letters were dictated unto the holy Scribes and therefore they had no power to change or transchange to adde or diminish or to expresse by their own words their internall irradiation but in the language which they conceived they also wrote their heavenly dictates 2. Pet. 1.21 The Prophesie came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost Therefore their very speech being according to the motion of the holy Ghost their words were not of their own choice but from above and not onely divine thoughts but sacred words were also given them 1. Cor. 2.13 S. Paul spake in words which the holy Ghost taught Did the holy Ghost inspire thoughts into them in one language and teach them words to speak in an other language Cui bono To what end and purpose and why not all done in the language which they conceived 2. Tim. 3.16 Scriptura per Spiritum scripta est The Scripture was writ by the Spirit saith the Syriack not onely inspired as it is from the Greek but written and as it was inspired written Revel 19.9 The Angel saith concerning very words which he commanded to be wrote These are the true sayings of God Not inspirations onely of God and the words of Men but the sayings of God Exod. 34.27 Write thou these words for after the tenour of these words I have made a covenant God was not tied to the words Moses was to the writing of the very words Jerem. 30.2 Write thee all the words which I have spoken unto thee in a book He gave him no power to put in words of his own Twelve times in the Revelation was S. John commanded to write and knew he not the words Hos 8.12 I have written to Ephraim the great things of my Law Even all what my Prophets have done I challenge as mine own writing Authorities of men The Scriptures were written y Magisterio Spiritus in obedience to the Spirit saith Sasbout on Peter Therefore the Apostles had not the power left unto them of writing their own conceits but were fitted with words by the Spirit z Si Spiritu saucto inspirati ab eo impulsi locuti sunt Prophetae caeteri librorum sacrorum scriptores Consequens est Scripturam totam esse verbum Dei non aliter à nobis accipiendam quà m si Deus immediatè absque humano vel Angelico ministerio eam edidisset ut ità dicam digito suo scripsisset If the Prophets and other writers of holy Scripture spake by the moving and inspiration of the holy Ghost it followeth that all the Scripture is the word of God no otherwise to be esteemed of by us then if God immediately without the ministery of men or Angels had set it forth and as I may say had written it with his own finger saith the learned Estius Even Cornelius Cornelii à Lapide himself on Timothie thus a Prophetae alii scriptores 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocantur calami instrumenta Spiritus sancti quast scribae velociter scribentis inspirantis dictantis sacras literas The Prophets and other holy Penmen of Scripture are styled the pens and instruments of the holy Ghost as of that scribe who speedily writeth inspireth and dictateth the divine writ Where he confesseth the holy Spirit not to inspire onely but to dictate yea to write like a swift scribe the holy Scripture Gregorius Praefat. in Job cap. 2. b Scriptores sacri Eloquii quia repleti Spiritu sancto super se trahuntur quasi extra semetipsos fiunt sic Dei sententias quasi de labiis proferunt The writers of the heavenly word because they are filled with the holy Ghost are elevated above themselves in him and as it were out of themselves and so the sentences of God are uttered as it were by their lips Athanasius Epist ad Lib. saith c Christus vetus novum Testamentum composuit Christ made the Old and New Testament d Quid est illud o◠Domini nisi Scripturae per quas loquitur Dominu◠What is the mouth of the Lord but the Scriptures by which the Lord speaketh saith Rupert on Matth. lib. 4. Philo Judaeus in lib. Quis rerum divinarum haeres thus e Propheta nihil ex se proloquitur sed omnia submonente alio A Prophet prophesieth nothing out of his own brain but all things by the prompting of the holy Ghost as he wittily concludeth Therefore not so much as the words are his own Chrysostom de Lazaro Homil. 4. Though a dead man revive and an Angel come from heaven you must beleeve Scriptures above all for the Master of Angels the Lord of the living and the dead he himself framed them The same Chrysostom de expulsione ipsius sheweth the manner I reade his own handwriting c. They are done by his hand the very writing it self is his and therefore called Chyrographum Dei A writing under Gods own hand by Augustine
on Psal 144. Now follow the Reasons why they concelved and writ in the same tongue First there is little or no difference between the Apostles and other men if the Apostles did frame words to their heavenly inspirations For when it pleaseth the blessed Spirit who bloweth where he listeth to drop down into the soul of an ordinary man some thoughts divine and in the language of spirits saith unto the same soul Of these see that you make a prayer the righteous man accordingly obeyeth and of those inward apprehensions shapeth a verbal prayer and poureth it forth before God Almightie and setteth it down in writing Shall the prayer be held as Divine as Scriptures Then may Manasses his Apocryphall prayer immediately before the books of Maccabees as it is in our last translation be no longer Apocryphall but Divine as Divine as any prayer made by the selected holy Penmen To have a thing perfectly Divine is required that heavenly words may be mixed with heavenly illumination Secondly our faith will be questioned if thoughts were inspired and the Penmen should adde what words they pleased f Titutabit fides si Scripturarum vacillat authoritas Our faith will stumble if the authoritie of the Scripture be shaken never so little saith Augustine de doctr Christian 1.37 But the Scriptures authoritie shaketh if God give onely the matter and men the words Thirdly the Prophets and Apostles wrote not alwayes all their own things themselves but sometimes used the ministerie of divers others A Scribe and a Prophet were two distinct persons and offices Jer. 36.26 Jeremie had Baruch Jer. 36.4 Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the Lord so then the words of Jeremiah to Baruch were the words of the Lord to Jeremiah And when that roll was burnt Jeremiah by the word of the Lord was bid to take another roll and write in it vers 28 c. Which Jeremie did not by himself but by Baruch the scribe vers 32. The nine first chapters of the Proverbs of Solomon were written by Solomon himself The rest were writ by others who attended on Solomon and heard them and are like so many precious stones apart and severally though not made up into one jewell or chain nor hanging together in any setled method yet to be esteemed at as high a rate and value as the very writings of Solomon The same Spirit inspired all the same mouth spake all though they were penned by severall hands by the command of the same holy Spirit In the New Testament S. Paul wrote much with his own hand The whole Epistle to the Galatians Gal. 6.11 at least to these very words and to Philemon vers 19. Many saluations 2. Thessal 3.17 18. The saluation of Paul with mine own hand which is the token in every Epistle so I write The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all Amen So that we may soundly gather that whatsoever Epistle under his name hath not that in it it was not written by him There was an Epistle written in his name to the Thessalonians terrifying them as if the generall judgement had been present as may be gathered 2. Thess 2.2 But S. Paul disclaims it It had not belike the salutation with his own hand his friendly farewell and prayer which saith Anselm was in these or the like words Grace c. as all the rest of his Epistles have toward their end though with a little variation of words sometimes larger sometimes briefer even the Epistle to the Hebrews also Hebr. 13.25 Grace be with you all Amen That you may not question but also that is his Epistle whereas no other Apostles have it so fully though S. Peter cometh nearest him 1. Pet. 5.14 For all this he used the help of some others in writing All the second Epistle to the Thessalonians was written with another hand except the salutation at the end saith Estius Rom. 16.22 I Tertius who wrote this Epistle salute you in the Lord. The words will bear this sense I Tertius who wrote this Epistle in the Lord salute you or thus as the Vulgat hath it I Tertius salute you who wrote this Epistle in the Lord. He said IN THE LORD to shew that he wrote not for money saith Cajetan Questionlesse Paul dictated and Tertius wrote the Epistle saith Estius Even those words themselves are not Tertius his own inserted as a private mans or secretaries but are divine Scripture And either by the Spirit he was commanded to write so and that thought was from heaven put into his heart and those words into his mouth to be written by his hand or else which I take to be most likely S. Paul knowing the minde of Tertius perhaps in part by Tertius his own expression but rather and chiefest by Divine revelation that Tertius did salute them in the Lord he willed him so to write I hope Heinsius will not say that Tertius conceived in Syriack and wrote in Greek or when S. Paul made his narrative in the Hebrew tongue Act. 22.2 that Luke conceived in Syriack and wrote in Greek neither can he say the like of the holy secretaries to whom not first thoughts in language spirituall and then words but thoughts by words outward and expressed were revealed Yet Erasmus in his last Annotation on the Epistle to the Hebrews saith thus g Quod affâ—runt hîc quidam Paulum ipsuÌ„ scripsisse Hebraicè caeterùm Lucam argumentum Epistolae quam memoriâ tenebat suis explicuisse verbis quantum valeat viderint alii What some do affirm THAT S. PAUL HIMSELF VVROTE IN HEBREVV BUT S. LUKE DID EXPRESSE IN HIS OVVN VVORDS THE ARGUMENT OF THE EPISTLE VVHICH HE HAD GOTTEN BY HEART let others consider what force and power it hath What will you say nothing to this Not so great a Critick Sure this drop might have fallen from your pen That such manner of writing had savoured no more of the Spirit then any ordinary writing where a skilfull scribe doth amplifie the heads given unto him Again Erasmus on Hebr. 2. in his Answer to Fabers 57 objection relateth that Faber h Quicquid est incommodi offâ—ndiculi id in Interpretem rejicit sed meo judicio parùm prudenter Whatsoever seems incommodious or offensive layeth the fault thereof upon the Interpreters but not prudently enough as I think saith Erasmus and in the answer to the one and fourtieth objection i Faber flagellat Interpretem huius Epistolae qui in Psalmo non verterit ELOHIM A DEO cùm idem fecerint Septuaginta quibus magìs conveniebat hoc imputari Faber scourgeth the Interpreter of this Epistle who did not turn the word ELOHIM in the Psalm FROM GOD when the Septuagint did so to whom this might rather be imputed Again Erasmus saith ibid. of Faber k In â—us trahit Interpretem Epistolae He commenceth a suit against the Interpreter of this Epistle All this
MISCELLANIES OF DIVINITIE Divided into three books Wherein is explained at large the estate of the Soul in her origination separation particular judgement and conduct to eternall blisse or torment BY EDVVARD KELLET Doctour in Divinitie and one of the Canons of the Cathedrall Church of EXON S. AUGUST serm nov 24. de S. Paulo ¶ Omnibus hominibus natis constituit Deus mortem per quam de isto seculo emigrent Exceptus eris à morte si exceptus fueris à genere humano Iam homo es venisti Quomodo hinc exeas cogita HINC LVCEM ET POCLA SACRA ALMA MATER GANTA BRIGIA Printed by the Printers to the Vniversitie of CAMBRIDGE and are to be sold by Robert Allot at the Beare in Pauls-Churchyard 1635. TO THE MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD MY VERY GOOD LORD THE LORD Archbishop of CANTERBURIE his Grace Primate of all ENGLAND and Metropolitane Most Reverend THE manifold graces which God hath plentifully poured on you enabling you even from your youth to be a fit instrument divers wayes to advance his glorie and blessing your great good labours with the favourable acceptance of our dread Soveraigne State and all who have well-wishing unto this our Sion have caused me a crazie old retired man who never saw you but once and that long since to leave behinde me a testimoniall to the world both of my heartie thanks to God that you have been of my humblest prayers that you may long continue a prop of our Church a favoured Ezra the prompt Scribe in the Law a powerfull Aaron to make an atonement for the people an Elijah zealous in your calling a provident guide to the Prophets to the sonnes and schools of the Prophets a father chariot horsemen of Israel as Elisha called Elijah as king Joash called Elisha May heavenly influences and divine irradiations say Amen Amen Your Graces in all dutie Edward Kellet The Contents of the first book CHAPTER I. Sect. 1. THe subject of the whole work The reason why I chose the text of Hebr. 9.27 to discourse upon The Division of it Fol. 1. c. 2. Amphibologie prejudiciall to truth Death appointed by God yet for Adams fault The tree of life kept from Adam not by phantasticall Hob-goblins but by true Angels and a flaming sword brandishing it self Leviticall ceremonies dead buried deadly Things redeemed dispensed with yet still appointed 2 3. The Kingdome of Death reigning over all Bodily death here meant and onely once to be undergone 4 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implieth not necessarily the longinquitie of future times intercurrent but rather a demonstration that other things were precedent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 After doth often signifie an immediate succession Judgement here taken for an act of justice 5 5. The generall judgement here understood by OEcumenius and Bellarmine The second book of Esdras apocryphall and justly refused More then the generall judgement is meant Even the particular judgement also is avouched by many authorities Three questions arising from the former part of these words 6 CHAP. II. 1. HOw God is immortall how Angels and the souls of men how Adams bodie was mortall and yet immortall though compounded of contraries 10 2. Aristotles last words his death Holcot or the Philosophers pray for him Aristotle canonized by his followers Plato and Aristotle compared Vives taxed Adams bodie was not framed of the earth or dust of Paradise 12 3. Adam should not have been subject to any externall force he was lord of the creatures inward distemper he could not have Adams bodily temperature Christs who was fairer then the children of Adam the helps for Adams bodie meat drink and sleep 17 4. Divers opinions of the tree of life If Adam had eaten of the tree of life before or after his fall he had lived for ever If he had not sinned he had not died though he had not tasted of the tree of life To what use the tree of life should have served 20 5. The Councel of Millan Cardinall Cajetan Richeomus the Jesuit Julianus Pomerius and Saint Augustine think that Adam could not have died if he had not sinned The book of Wisedome Holcot Doctour Estius and two passages of Scripture Canonicall are authorities evincing that Adam had in the state of innocencie an immortall bodie 24 CHAP. III. 1. DEath is a bitter-sweet Enoch and Elias Raptures were not painfull to them Christs transfiguration and the manner of it That it was not painfull to him Adams translation to a life celestiall and a bodie spirituall should not have been painfull if he had not sinned They who shall be changed at Christs coming shall by it finde no pain Death is painfull 28 2. Man-kinde died the first minute of their sinne God draweth good out of evil Death in some regard is changed from a punishment to be a favour and blessing of God 31 3. Not many or more sinnes but one caused death One onely David begotten in lawfull wedlock That this one sinne is not lesse in the godly nor greater in the wicked Death was appointed for one sinne onely of one person onely 33 4. This one person onely was man this man that sinned that one sinne was Adam Strange and curious speculations that Eve sinned not that sinne for which mankinde was appointed to death 36 5. Two School speculations propounded The second handled at large as expounding the former and determined against the School-men themselves viz. That the children of innocent Adam had been born confirm'd in grace The censure of Vives upon these and the like points A part of his censure censured 43 CHAP. IIII. 1. ADams perfection in innocencie Our imperfection after his fall contrary to his both in understanding and will and in the parts concupiscible and irascible 55 2. Adam had other laws given him but one above all and one onely concerning posteritie 57 3. What this law was Adam knew the danger to himself and his off-spring The first sinne was against this law 58 4. Eve sinned before How she sinned the same and not the same sinne with Adam 60 5. Zeno the Stoicks and Jovinian confuted Sinnes are not equally sinfull 62 6. Adam sinned farre more and worse then Eve 65 7. This sinne of Adam was not uxoriousnesse as Scotus maintained but disobedience or pride The branches of Adams sinne 66 CHAP. V. 1. ORiginall sinne is an obscure point The errours of the Schoolmen concerning it The over-sight of Bellarmine 73 2. Originall sinne described by its causes Distinguished from Adams actuall sinne 77 3. In what sense Adam had and his posteritie hath Originall sinne We were in Adam He stood for us idealiter Every one of us would have done exactly as Adam did We did sinne in Adam and how 78 4. Whether Christ was in Adam and how 82 5. We sinned not that sinne in Adam by imitation onely 84 6. Adams sinne as personall was not imputed Adam is saved Adams actuall sinne as it was ideall and
of foure parts of foure hills 23 6. If Kiriath-Arba doth signifie the citie of foure men yet they might be other men besides the foure Patriachs 24 7. If it had its denomination from foure Patriarchs and from their buriall there yet Adam is none of them 25 8. Augustine peremptorie for Adams buriall in Calvarie and Paula and Eustochium or rather Hierom. 26 9. Another objection answered The Jews never shewed extraordinary honour to Adam or Noah but to Abraham and others after him Drusius preferreth the reading used by our late translation Hos 6.7 before the Genevean and Tremellian 27 CHAP. VII 1. THough Adam was buried on Calvarie as Pineda saith yet his proofs are weak that Adam was raised with Christ and went bodily into heaven with him The cited place of Athanasius proveth onely Adams buriall there Origen in the place cited is against Pineda Augustine is palpably falsified 29 2. Adams skull shewed lately at Jerusalem 30 3. Dionysius Carthusianus saith Eve then arose His opinion is without proof ibid. 4. Nor Abraham then arose ibid. 5. Nor Isaac then arose whatsoever Pineda affirmeth 31 CHAP. VIII 1. PIneda his phansie that Jacob then was raised 33 2. The reason why the Patriarchs desired the translation of their bones was not to rise with Christ as Pineda opineth but upon other grounds and to other ends ibid. 3. Where Joseph was first buried where secondly 34 4. The great difficultie of Act. 7.16 propounded Two answers disliked The originall is not corrupt 35 5. Beza taxed for imputing corruption to the originall on Mat. 13.35 and on Luk. 22.20 and on Matth. 27.9 All these places defended and the sacred Majestie of Scripture vindicated from criticisme Many good answers to Matth. 27.9 Erasmus faulty with Beza 36 6. S. Augustine and Cyrill against them 40 7. Masius and Junius prefer the Arabick and Syriack before the Greek Junius recanteth A little errour may perhaps be ascribed to the Transcribers A generall errour in Greek and Latine may not be admitted in all copies of Scriptures ibid. CHAP. IX 1. THe second answer disliked Melchior Canus censured for saying S. Steven his memorie failed him His like proof from Jephthah his mistaking answered 42 2. Another argument of his from Matth. 2.6 answered 44 3. Heinsius touched at Cusanus rejected for holding that Adam could have understood all languages now in use The manner of the confusion of tongues at Babel ibid. 4. The Orientall languages a goodly ornament and necessary in some places The Syriack enlightening the Greek 48 5. The Jewish excommunications Donations to Religious houses sealed up with curses to the infringers Mr Selden in part defended though his Historie of Tithes hath done hurt MARAN-ATHA The Amphibologie of Act. 3.21 cleared by the Syriack Vbiquitaries with Illyricus taxed Heavens and Heaven taken for God ibid. 6. Heinsius strictly examined and rejected 54 7. Things granted viz. The inspirations and conceptions of holy Pen-men were under one or other language in which conceptions they could not erre nor could they erre in writing 57 8. Questions handled at large Whether it were necessary that the Scripture should be written Whether the sacred writers wrote casually Whether they were commanded to write Whether they were compelled to write Whether they understood all that they wrote Whether they did reade profane Authours Whether they studied the things before hand 68 9. Conclusions against Heinsius There was no difference between the Pen-men of the Divine writ of the Old and New Testament in the point of conceiving and writing in different languages We are not to have recourse to the thoughts of S. John rather then his words They had no libertie left them to put in their own conceits or in writing to adde or blot out what they had done They had no libertie to cloath their inward apprehensions with words of their own They did not conceive in one language and write in another 95 CHAP. X. 1. REall truth in the Greek and Latine texts of Act. 7.16 The place expounded thus The Fathers were not Abraham Isaac and Jacob but the twelve sonnes of Jacob 112 2. These twelve Fathers were not buried in Abrahemio but in Sychem 114 3. Abraham in this place is not taken properly but patronymicé ibid. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used by S. Stephen amphibolous and expounded 116 5. Two opinions concerning the place of Acts 7.16 propounded 117 6. The last preferred 118 CHAP. XI 1. PIneda makes Moses to be one of the raised at Christs Passion if once he died Pineda censured for his assertion or rather his hypothesis 119 2. David then arose in Pineda his judgement 120 3. His argument answered Bishop Bilson wavering and rejected as he rejecteth S. Augustine ibid. 4. A demonstration upon S. Augustine his ground and Act. 2.24 that David was not raised nor ascended bodily into heaven 122 5. Davids sepulchre now kept by the Turk 123 CHAP. XII 1. PIneda doubteth whether Ananias Azarias and Misael were raised at Christs passion because there now are said to be some reliques of them some at Rome and some at Venice saith Lorinus 124 2. Other reliques The table at which Christ ate with his Apostles Some hairs said to be the hairs of our glorious Saviour others of his all-gracious mother A bone of Philips A sandall of S. Peters 125 3. S. Peters chain miraculous as they report ibid. 4. Mr. Mountague now the reverend Bishop of Chichester defended ibid. 5. S. Pauls chain also miraculous from Gregorie Bellarmine 126 6. False reliques taxt by Erasmus and Calvin John the Baptist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 supposed to have three heads at the least Three or foure prepuces of Christ ibid. 7. Reliques before Christs time The ark The holy oyl The rod of Moses and Aaron The throne of Eternitie phansied by the Jews The horns of Moses One finger of the holy Ghost The Papists faults in forging of false reliques 128 8. All Reliques are not false What respects are to be denied to true Reliques 130 9. What are to be given 131 10. No likelihood of the raising up of Ananias Azarias and Misael about Christs passion 132 CHAP. XIII 1. PIneda saith Jonas arose then and Noah His reasons very shallow 133 2. Daniel arose saith Pineda from Nicetas If Daniel arose he arose but with one leg the other leg is yet shewed at Vercellis ibid. 3. Job arose now saith Pineda His proof lame Jobs Epitaph poeticall His sepulchrall pyramis made of imagination 134 4. Job shall arise at the generall judgement Pineda wrincheth the Scripture ibid. 5. The end of Jobs book according to some Greek copies a double exposition of the words 135 6. Jobs bodie supposed to be translated to Constantinople ibid. 7. Bartholomaeus Sibylla saith S. Hierom is expresse that the holy mother of our Lord and John the Evangelist are bodily ascended The like cited from Aquinas And Holcot saith That the glorious virgins bodie was not to be incinerated Her supposed day of
after death excluding judgement in this life and placing death rather before judgement then any great distance betwixt death and judgement according to the native use of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which before The second exposition is of Gregory de Valentia * Tom. 4. Disp 1. quaest 22. punct 9. who applieth the words to the particular judgement immediately upon death So doth Ludovicus de ponte Vallis Oletani * Part. 1. Meditat. medit 9. who sets it down as a veritie of faith * De particulari judicio animae quod sit proximè post mortem judicium singulorum exerceri invisibiliter statim post eujusque mortem Concerning the particular judgement of the soul which is done immediately after death every one is judged invisibly presently after his death and evinceth it by this Text. So doth Joannes * Viguer Instit pag. 692. Viguerius * Bus initio Panarii Antidotorum spiritual Busaeus the Jesuite likewise accounteth * Secundum novissimum est judicium particulare mortem proximè consequens the second last thing to be the particular judgement following death immediately the severitie whereof saith he Job the holy patient feared Job 31.14 What shall I do when God riseth up and when he visiteth what shall I answer him S. Ambrose on this place hath it thus * Post mortem judicabitur unusquisque â—uxta userita sua Every one shall be judged after death according to their own deservings Which words do point at the particular judgement saith Suarez Lastly lest I may seem too eager against the second book of Esdras let me borrow a testimony or two from thence 2 Esdr 9.11 12. They that lothed my law while they had yet libertie and place of repentance open unto them must know it after death by pain And 2. Esdr 7.56 While we lived and committed sinne we considered not that we should BEGIN to suffer for it AFTER DEATH Whence we may probably collect That the beginning of punishment is immediately after death upon the particular judgement and the increase or additament at the generall judgement 2 That some are in torments before the generall day of retribution 3 That the beginning to suffer is not after a long time GOD onely knoweth how long but after death yea presently after it All these proofs on each side make way for the third and best interpretation That the Apostle meaneth not onely either of these judgements but both of them Benedictus Justinian on these words thus * Post eujusque obitum sequitur judicium privatum in quo quisque suarum actionum reddit urus estrationem post finem mundi erit judicium omnium tum hominum tum daemonum After every ones death private judgement follows in which every one is to give an account of his actions after the end of the world shall be the judgement of all both men and devils Of both the Apostle may be understood saith he So also Salmeron and Hugo Cardinalis and Carthusianus Oecolampadius thus * Sive speciale judicium intelligas sive generale uihil refert Whether you understand the speciall judgement or the gener all it matters not Thus have I brought you back to the point where I first began That this text is fitted to my intentions affording me just liberty to write whatsoever may be conceived or expressed concerning the estate of humane souls in their animation or in death or after it in the life future because the words must be expounded of both judgements And now the text being cleared from ambiguities the termes explained the state being made firm and sure not rolling and changeable and being fixed upon its basis and foundation three questions do seem to arise from the first words of the text and each of them to crave its answer before I come to my main intendment First How and when Death came to be appointed for us Secondly Whether Adam and his children all and every one without priviledge or exception must and shall die It is appointed for men to die Thirdly Whether they that were raised up from the dead at any time did die the second time It is appointed to men once to die O Gracious LORD who orderest all things sweetly and who dost dispose whatsoever man doth purpose I humbly implore thy powerfull guidance and enlightning assistance in all this work for his sake who is Alpha and Omega the Way the Truth and the Life thy onely SONNE my blessed SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST Amen CHAP. II. 1 How GOD is immortall how angels and the souls of men how Adams body was mortall and yet immortall though compounded of contraries 2 Aristotles last words his death Holcot or the Philosophers pray for him Aristotle canonized by his followers Plato and Aristotle compared Vives taxed Adams body was not framed of â—he earth or dust of Paradise 3. Adam should not have been subject to any externall force he was Lord of the creatures inward distemper he could not have Adams bodily temperature Christs who was fairer then the children of Adam the helps for Adams body meat drink and sleep 4. Divers opinions of the tree of life If Adam had eaten of the tree of life before or after his fall he had lived for ever If he had not sinned he had not died though he had not tasted of the tree of life To what use the tree of life should have served 5. The Councel of Millan Cardinall Cajetan Richeomus the Jesuite Julianus Pomerius and S. Augustine think that Adam could not have died if he had not sinned The book of Wisedome Holcot Doctor Estius and two passages of Scripture Canonical are authorities evincing that Adam had in the state of innocency an immortall body 1. TO the full answering of the first question how or why Death was appointed for us I shall need to cleare but these two points That Adam for sinne was appointed to die That Adams sinne and punishment was propagated to us Thus sinne was the mother of death thus we were appointed to die because of sinne As a preparative to the first of these two points I hold it fit to demonstrate that Adam at first was made an immortall creature Concerning Adams soul and the spirits of all men descended from him that they are immortall I hope to prove it so soundly in an other part of this tractate that I will fear no other reproof but this that I bring too much proof for it Therefore supposing or rather borrowing that truth which by GODS grace shall be repayed with interest I now come to shew that Adams bodie was created immortall Immortall I say not as GOD is immortall who neither had beginning nor shall have end with whom is no shadow of change much lesse any reall substantiall change who hath as all other good things else so immortalitie eminently and so eminently that our Apostle in some sort excludeth all others and appropriateth it to him saying 1.
troup may I put in somewhat unthought of by others Some have said truly that the divine providence and preserving power which extendeth to the least things in our declined estate as to the lives of birds and beasts and the fall of every hair God not being * Contra eorum dogmata qui primos homines si non peccâssent immortales futuros fuisse non credunt De Civit. 13.19 lesse in the least things then he was in the greatest and governing all things in number weight and measure would have much more watcht over Adam and his ofspring continuing perfect But this is that which I propose Whether the good Angels did immediatly minister unto Adam in his integritie and should have done unto us to keep mankinde from harm To which I answer That since the Prophet Psal 91.11 describing the blessed estate of the godly maketh this one especiall branch He shall give his Angels charge over thee to keep thee in all thy wayes and verse 12. They shall bear thee up in their hands lest thou dash thy foot against a stone I can not but think that the same Angels should have watcht over us and friendly conversed with us in our innocencie For God reduceth * Deus non minor est in minimis quâ—m in maximis the lowest things to the highest by the middle working by subordination of causes Yea * Infima ad suprema per media grant that this is spoken of the Sonne of God onely which by the Evangelists Matt. 4.6 and Luke 4.9 seemeth to be the Devils argute inference yet it excludes not their watching over us and their ministerie if we had not fallen whose very office and name consist in being ministring Spirits All being sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation Heb. 1.14 which out of doubt both Adam and his issue continuing in perfection should have been But leaving these things Christs answer to Satan proves that unto whom these words were said He shall give his Angels charge over thee c. unto the same was also said Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God Matt. 4.7 which was not spoken to Christ alone or principally but in the plurall number to the Israëlites and others succeeding them as appeareth Deuter. 6.16 Ye shall not tempt the Lord your God as ye tempted him in Massah They are deceived whosoever imagine the ministerie of Angels should not have been any way necessarie if Adam had not sinned since Christ the immaculate Lambe of God who sinned not nor could sinne refused not their ministerie Matth. 4.11 and comfort or strength Luke 22.43 and since one Angel strengthneth himself with an other Dan. 10.21 and Revel 12.7 and since they might have ministred more matter of joy unto us by their most familiar conversation in assumed bodies Unto these authorities let me adde two memorable places out of the Apocrypha The first is Wisd 1.13 God made not death Satan begot it sinne brought it forth Adam and Eve nurst it The other passage is in Wisd 2.23 God created man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be immortall made him an image of his own eternity On which words Holcot thus Corporeall creatures have onely a footstep of God Man is the image of God Again * Quantum fuit ex parte Dei creavit hominem inexâ—crminabile msecundum corpus On Gods part he created him unperishable according to the body And there he hath a large discourse proving howsoever Aristotle Metaph. 8. defineth Man to be a reasonable creature mortall that the opposite is true and he resteth in it For Aristotle knew not Adams innocencie but spake of us as we are in the state of sin Whosoever desireth to read more curiosities strange and learned concerning the bodily immortalitie of Adam at the Creation let him read Estius on the second of the Sent. Distinct 19. But to confirm the truth delivered in the book of Wisdome the last and the best kinde of authoritie shall be produced out of the unquestionable Canon death is stiled our Enemy 1. Corinth 15.26 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inimicus as Hierome on the 27. of Esai readeth it hostis saith Valla therefore death is not naturall or kindly to us but rather a consort and fellow-souldier of Satan and sinne who fight against us But the sharp-pointed places are in Genes 2.17 In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die or dying thou shalt die Mortalis eris as Symmachus well translates it or morti obnoxius as Augustine well expounds it and Genes 3.3 Ye shall not touch it lest ye die therefore they should not have died if they had not touched the forbidden fruit And so they both were and ever might have been immortall When the woman of Sarepta said to Eliah * 1. Kings 17.18 Art thou come unto me to call my sinne to remembrance and to slay my sonne doth she not secretly intimate that sinne is a murtherer And if there had been no sinne there had also been no death * In 2. Sent. dist 19. quaest 1. in and by her evident confession that her sinne was the cause of his death Scotus shall determine the point Punishment can not be without fault but death is the punishment of sinne and during the state of innocency there could be no sinne therefore no death I have dwelt the longer on this part because every reason authoritie by which I have proved that Adams bodilie estate in the time of innocency was immortall affordeth also by way of preparative a binding argument to evince that Adam for sin was appointed to die which is the first of the two Propositions which I propounded In which words we intend to handle these things First somewhat concerning death Secondlie that Adam was appointed to die for one sinne onely Thirdly that it was for Adams own sinne onely and not for Eves Fourthly we will enquire what that sinne was O Onely-wise God who createdst Man in thine own likenes and madâ—st him the Image of thine own eternitie I beseech thee to renew in me that decaied Image make me like unto thee give me the favour to taste of the Tree of Life which is in the midst of the Paradise of God and to drink of the pure River of the Water of Life clear as Crystall proceeding out of the Throne of God and of the LAMBE Heare me O blessed SAVIOUR for thine infinite Merit and mercies sake Amen CHAP. III. 1. Death is a bitter-sweet Enoch and Elias Raptures were not painfull to them Christs Transfiguration and the manner of it That it was not painfull to him Adams translation to a life celestiall and a body spirituall should not have been painfull if he had not sinned They who shall be changed at Christs coming shall by it finde no pain Death is painfull 2. Man-kinde died the first minute of their sinne God draweth good out of evill Death in some regard is changed from a
of all As the King represents the Kingdome and the chief Magistrate the Citie and the Master of the house the houshold so did Adam represent us and in him and with him we sinned 4. I can not part with this second point till I answer the objection Whether Christ were in Adam The doubt will be cleared by these two Positions First Christ may be said to be in Adam some kinde of way Therefore the Evangelist derives Christs Genealogie from him and he is said to be The Sonne of Adam Luke 3.38 And if he be called The Sonne of David as often he is Matth. 21.9 Mark 10.47 Rom. 1.3 He was made of the seed of David according to the flesh if he took on him the seed of Abraham as he did Hebr. 2.16 and is flesh of our flesh and bone of our bones and we of his Ephes 5.30 it must needs be confessed He was in Adam Paracelsus talketh of Non-Adami such as descended not from Adams loyns these if such are monsters in nature and as great a monster in Divinitie is it to say that Christ was no way in Adam I will enlarge this by a distinction Christ was not in Adam no nor we neither so that our substances or any part thereof were really or materially in him Yet both Christ and we were in him First because mediatly we were born of him and because he was the efficient cause of generation not the immediate propinque and proximous cause thereof which necessarily communicateth some matter to that which is begotten but he was the remote mediate yea the furthest and most distant efficient naturall cause of all from which it is not necessary that its matter reach to the hindermost effects Secondly be cause if he had not begotten children neither Christ in his humane nature nor we now long after him had ever been born Thirdly Christ took flesh of the thrice-blessed Virgin Mary and she was in Adam as all others are except Christ she was begotten by the concurrence and cooperation both of man and woman and so inasmuch as his holy Mother was in Adam Christ in a sort may be said to be in Adam * Christus fuit de genere Adae Holâ—â—t De Imputabintate peccati Christ was of Adams kindred saith Holcot The second Position is this Christ was not in Adam every manner of way as we were For we differed in this peculiar sort and manner because we were in Adam secundum seminalem rationem quâ per communionem vtriusque sexûs fit generatio For Adam could beget no childe without a femal sex which was one main reason of Eves creation neither did ever daughter of Eve conceive without a different sex except onely that stupendious miracle of our Saviours Incarnation And after this manner Christ was not in Adam He had true flesh from Adam but it was onely the listenes or similitude of sinfull flesh that he had Rom. 8.3 All other flesh except his is the flesh of sinne Had he come from Adam every way exactly as wee do he had had not onely true flesh as he had but true sinne also but because he had not Patrem naturalem as Scotus phraseth it therefore neither did he sinne in Adam nor was in Adam as we were Lombard * Lomb. lib. 3. dist 3. enquireth Why Levi was tithed in Abraham and not Christ when each of them was in the loyns of Abraham in regard of the matter He answereth * Leviticus ordo qui in Abraham secundum rationem seminalem erat ex eo per concupiscentiam caruis descendiâ— Sed Christ us non descendit secundum lâ—gem communem aut carâ—is libidinem The Leviticall order which was in Abraham according to the seed descends from him by the concupiscence of the flesh But Christ came not according to the common law or lust of the flesh And he resolveth thus When Levi and Christ according to the flesh were in the loyns of Abraham when he was tithed therefore was Levi tithed and not Christ because Christ was not in the loyns of Abraham after some manner or other that Levi was Moreover how could Christ be tithed to Christ how could the same in the same regard both pay and take Melchisedec was a figure of Christ and tithes by an everlasting law were due to the priesthood of Melchisedec as is unanswerably proved by my reverend friend now a blessed Saint Doctor Sclater against all sacrilegious Church-robbers Therefore Christ was not to be tithed in Abraham though Levi was Yea if Aaron or Melchisedec himself had lived till Christ had come in the flesh and lived with him perhaps they would have resigned up as it were their Office and no more have taken tithes or continuing in Office Sacerdotall under him they would have taken tithes in his name and for him Aquine out of Augustine thus * Quomodocunque Christus fuit in Adam Abraham in aliis Patribus alii homines etiam ibi fuerunt Aquin part 3. quaest 31. art 6. ex Aug. De Gen. ad lit 10.19 After what manner soever Christ was in Adam and Abraham and in other Fathers other men were there also but not contrariwise And Aquine himself setteth his conclusion When the body of Christ windeth up to the Fathers and so to Adam mediante Matris suae corpore Christ was not in them secundum aliquid signatum determinatum sed secundum originem Which I imagine he establisheth against such as Lombard saith did hold That from Adam descended by way of generation some such part or parcell as of it Christ was made Against which Aquine argueth thus whether modestly enough and truly let others judge The matter of Christs body was not the flesh and bone or any other actuall part of the Ever-blessed Virgin but onely her bloud which was potentiâ caro * Corpus Christi non seminaliter conceptum est sed ex castissimis purissimis sanguinibus Aquinas ex Damasceno But what she received from her parents was actually part of her but not part of Christs body Nor was Christs body in Adam and the other Fathers secundum aliquid signatum so that any part of Adams body or of the other Fathers could determinatly be pointed out and be said to be the very exact individuall matter out of which Christs body was framed but Christ was in Adam secundum originem as others were Whil'st Christ was in the wombe of the most happy Virgin Mary even many moneths before her delivery she was called Luke 1.43 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The mother of my Lord which words in part Elisabeth took from Davids speculation Psal 110.1 The Lord said unto my Lord. Never woman was truly called or to be called a Mother before she were delivered except onely the Al-gracious Virgin Mary who could not possibly suffer abortion nor lose that Blessed Fruit of her wombe by the sinne of man or the punishment of mankinde for sinne which was conceived
there followeth with the hideous secret most feared and affrighting torments of the Inquisition confiscation of goods and sometimes shamefull commonly a painfull and violent death If he rely on the advice of the Pastours he sinneth against his own conscience and against truth Who can or will direct this wavering Christian in such uncertainty of wayes that he step not aside nor be out of the right path O gracious God send out thy light and thy truth let them lead me Psal 43.3 Let them direct my discourse and illuminate it that it may be to the anxious and scrupulous conscience as a guide to direct the way and as a lanthorn to give it light in the way S. Hierome and Ockam and Doctour Field of the Church 4.13 three most eminent in three ages a Father a Schoolman and a pillar of our Church do counsel good men in such a case to silence and mourning in secret as the Prophet Jeremy did Men saith he have nothing left unto them but with sorrowfull hearts to referre all unto God I should rather under correction say That a Christian thus perplexed is to take these courses which those Divines perhaps did presuppose as necessary preparatives but did not expresse First I advise that man whose conscience runneth a singular way to wash his heart from wickednesse Jerem. 4.14 to lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godlinesse and honesty which is pointed at as a means whereby men may come to the knowledge of the truth 1. Tim. 2.2 c. For unto the wicked God saith What hast thou to do to declare my statutes or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth Psal 50.16 Ezek. 20.3 Yes but thou art confident that thou thy self art a guide of the blinde a light of them which are in darknesse an instructer of the foolish a teacher of babes having the form of knowledge and of the truth in the Law Rom. 2.10 I answer Thou must also take the qualifications and necessary appendants to a reformer following in that place immediately Thou therefore that teachest an other teachest thou not thy self c. Thy self must not be ignorant thy self must not steal not commit adultery not commit sacriledge not break the Law not dishonour God For as it is Wisd 1.5 6. The holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit and remove from thoughts that are without understanding and will not abide where unrighteousnesse cometh in For wisdome is a loving spirit Never were the uncharitable ignorant or sinnefull men fit undertakers to contradict established doctrines disciplines or commonwealths But Thou hypocrite first cast out the beam out of thine own eye and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brothers eye Matth. 7.5 Reasons more then ordinary will be expected by God and good men from him who leapeth out of the Church in which he was born and bred kicking at the breasts of his mother running with the bit in his teeth his own wayes I conclude this first point thus He who will needs runne such singular courses had need be a man of rare sanctity and of singular good endowments of knowledge Secondly I would have him earnestly to pray for humility and to practise it By pride Satan cast himself out of heaven Adam him and his out of Paradise David said Psal 131.1 Lord my heart is not haughty neither do I exercise my self in great matters or in things too high for me And vers 2. Surely I have quieted my soul as a childe that is weaned of his mother my soul is even as a weaned childe On which words suffer me to make a little excursion by way of explanation Concerning the first passage If David had appealed to men some scruple might have remained but saying to God the searcher of hearts and reins Lord my heart is not haughty he maketh his humility unquestionable In the second passage observe that though he was a King and a Prophet yet some things were too high for him by his own confession Nazianzen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 153. Him I count humble not that speaks humbly and modestly of himself or that speaks courteously and humbly to his inferiour but that speaks modestly concerning God and knows what to speak and what to conceal and in some things can confesse his ignorance and yeeld to them to whom the office of teaching is committed On the contrary a Objectum superbi est ipsemet câ—lsior quà m eâ— convenit The object of a proud man is himself and he is higher in his own conceit then is fit saith Cajetan Pride exalteth a man humilitie casts him down and as all pride shall be at the last thrown down so all true humilitie shall be exalted I would not go to heaven by pride no man ever went to hell by humilitie In the third passage this is the sense May my hopes or God himself fail me may evil betide me for this or some such like imprecation antecedent is to be understood si non posui silere feci animam meam as it runneth in the Hebrew The oath it self or imprecation is not expressed that people may learn to be abstemious in swearing In which regard also it is said Ecclus 23.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jurans nominans He that sweareth and nameth God Where the Vulgat and Septuagint omit the name of God though it be necessarily understood and is expressed in our best translation In the last passage remember that we ought all in this point of humilitie to be as little children if we will enter into the kingdome of heaven Matth. 18.3 David addeth My soul is as a weaned childe not in this respect that newly weaned children are commonly more froward similitudes hold not in every particular but as the mother applieth mustard wormwood and other bitter things to her breasts that she may keep her childe from the milk which he desireth though she know it inconvenient or hurtfull for him so God did wean David by the bitter remembrances of death fear of Gods judgement and the pains of hell and by crosses also of this life sicknesse banishment envy in court insurrection of his own sonnes and the like from those pleasurable things which David affected but God knew to be naught for him There was never any arch-heretick or grand impostour but made private ends his cynosure self-conceit and self-love his card and compasse Even after God had wondrously appeared unto Moses and gave him his mission Moses replied Exod. 3.11 Who am I that I should go unto Pharaoh c. and Exod. 4.1 2. his backwardnesse further appeareth yea after though God by his two miracles confirmed the calling yet twice more did he declare that he was afraid to begin so great an alteration Exod. 4.10 and especially at the 13. vers insomuch that the Lord was angry Humblenesse which is alwayes accompanied with modesty bashfulnesse measuring ones own strength and subjection of spirit is to be
The easie things any man may judge of in the more abstruse the voice of the Pastours is to be followed c Quam clavem habebant Legis Dectores nisi interpretationem legis What key had the Doctours of the law saith Tertullian in the same place but the interpretation of the law So the key of interpretation rests in the ministery for things which need interpretation as hard places do though the key of agnition in things unto which their knowledge can aspire is permitted yea commended unto all men and they who withhold this key of knowledge from the people are accursed by Christ Luke 11.52 To the further explaining of my opinion let us consider in a Church corrupted these two sorts of people First the Magistrates either Civil or Ecclesiasticall And we will subdivide them into the Wilfully blinde and the Purblinde Of the first were some Bishops and Nobles and Gentry in Queen Maries dayes who hunted after bloud even the bloud of innocents and strained their authority to the highest Such is now the Inquisition falsly called the holy house with all the chief officers thereof such in the dayes of Christ were divers Scribes Pharisees Sadduces and some Rulers of the people who knowing the truth to be on Christs side by his doing such miracles as no man ever did before did choke and strangle their belief made shipwrack of their consciences resisted the holy Spirit who would neither go into the kingdome of heaven nor suffer others that were entering to go in against whom Christ pronounced wo upon wo Matth. 23.13 c. For they took away the key of knowledge Luke 11.52 and purposely kept the people ignorant and blinde According to their demerits there are reserved for them intima inferni the depths of hell blacknesse of darknesse and the greatest torments thereof without repentance The next tribe or sort are the purblinde Magistracy either Secular or Clergy Such were divers in the dayes of Queen Mary who had learning enough to know that all went not right yet did not vehemently oppose the truth but did swimme with the stream made the time their stern the whole Church turning and returning three or foure times in one age These were seduced as well as seducers Such also at this day are divers in the Papacy more moderate lesse rigid and rigorous concealing some truths they know because they have given up their hearts and beliefs to trust in their Church for such things as they do not know though they have means to learn and capacitie to understand if they would and therefore are faulty Such also were divers in the Jewish Church and State Ye killed the Prince of life saith S. Peter to the people Acts 3.15 And now brethren I wot that through ignorance ye did it as did also your rulers Such were those Pharisees Matth. 15.12 who were offended with Christ of whom Christ saith vers 14. They be blinde leaders of the blinde And if the blinde lead the blinde both shall fall into the ditch d In foveam peecati inferni Into the ditch of sinne and hell saith Hugo Cardinalis on the place e Cùm pastor per abrupta graditur necesse est ut grex in praecipitium ducatur When the shepherd goes by craggie clifts the flock must needs fall headlong and break their necks saith Gregory f Duces praeceptores fovea infernus The guides are the teachers and the ditch is hell saith Faber Stapulensis on the place So much of the purblinde Magistracy Clericall or Laicall in a corrupted Church From the Magistrates in the first place we descend to the people in the second place whom we also divide into their severall ranks and files In the generall they are either learned or unlearned The learned are first such as go against their conscience and practise contrary to their knowledge and belief sailing with winde and tide and because they will be found fault withall by the fewest they will do as the most do Timorous hypocrites they are fearing persecution losse of goods liberty and life more then they fear God who is able to destroy both body and soul for whom is kept the allotment of hypocrites brimstone and fire storm and tempest ignis vermis this shall be their portion to drink without repentance An other sort of learned men professing truth there are in a corrupted Church and each of them forsooth will be a reformer of the publick these despise government are presumptuous self-willed they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities 2. Pet. 2.10 speaking evil of the things that they understand not vers 12. as out of question they understand not all things which in their carping humour they censure people-pleasers ambitious of esteem full of words running as much after their own will as after their consciences hearty enough to draw on danger obstinate enough to provoke death Of these men though they die for some truths yet because they have a mixture of many errours in their intellect perversenesse in their will and ill grounded ill bounded affections wanting those godly endowments of charity before spoken of we may pronounce as the Apostle did They shall utterly perish in their own corruption 2. Pet. 2.12 Such a fellow was he and his like of whom g Anno 1543. Mr. Fox reporteth that when Christ said This is my body interpreted the words to this effect The word of God is to be broken distributed and eaten So when Christ said This is my bloud the blessed words are missensed as if Christ had then said The Scripture must be given to the people and received by them By which forced exposition the seal of our redemption is troden under foot the thrice-blessed sacrament of the bodie and bloud of our Lord is utterly annihilated whereas indeed in the words of consecration there are included verba concionatoria praedicanda words predicatorie and serving for doctrine I will not esteem him as an holy perfect martyr who dieth with such crotchets in his brain such pride in his heart Such an one was Ravaillac who for conscience sake forsooth stabbed the Anointed of the Lord the Heros of our time his naturall Soveraigne Henry the fourth of France He followed his conscience but his conscience had ill guides When he had outfaced tortures and death it self though he thought that he died a martyr if he died unrepentant the powers of hell gat hold upon him Such manner of people were those Jews who in most desperate fashion said His bloud be on us and on our children Matt. 27.25 Do you think they all were wholly ignorant do you think they all swerved against their consciences or rather medled they not in things above their callings were they not too presumptuous Thus though they had the knowledge of some truths and perhaps would have died for them yet their zeal wanted more and better knowledge to have rectified their consciences and they should have called
by the Evangelist Matth. 27.52 and 53 verses The graves were opened and many bodies of Saints which slept arose and came out of the graves after his resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared unto many So farre the text Of the various pointing of which words see more hereafter opening two windows for two expositions On which words divers worthy men both modern and ancient conclude That those Saints died not again k Sed apparuerunt multis etiam cum Christo nunquam ultrà morituri abierunt in coelum But appeared to many and with Christ never after were to die but went into heaven saith Jacobus Faber Stapulensis And Mr. Beza on this place opineth that they did not rise that again they might live among men and die as Lazarus and others did but that they might accompany Christ by whose power they rose into eternall life The late Writers saith Maldonate think that they went into heaven with Christ and with them doth himself agree So Pineda on Job 19.25 So Suarez a third Jesuit So Anselm So Aquinas on the place and on the Sentences So if Suarez cite them truely Origen in the first book to the Romanes about those words of the first chapter By the resurrection of Jesus our Lord and Clemens Alexandrinus Strom. 6. and Justinus Quaest 85. Ambrose in his Enarration on the first Psalme and Eusebius Demonst 4.12 and of modern Authours and of our Church Bishop Bilson in the effect of his Sermons touching the full redemption of mankinde by the death and bloud of Jesus Christ pag. 217. So Baronius ad annum Christi 48. num 24. concerning those Saints whom Christ piercing the heavens carried with himself on high leading captivitie captive Ephes 4.8 More reserved and moderate is Mr. Montague that indefatigable Student sometime my chamber-fellow and President in the Kings Colledge in Cambridge now the Reverend Lord Bishop of Chichester who in his answer to the Gag of the Protestants pag. 209. saith of these Saints They were Saints indeed deceased but restored to life and peradventure unto eternall life in bodies as well as souls MOst cleare Fountain of Wisdome inexhaustible wash I beseech thee the spots of my soul and in the midst of many puddles of errour cleanse my understanding that I may know and embrace the truth through Jesus Christ Amen CHAP. V. 1. Who were supposed to be the Saints which were raised by such as maintain that they accompanied Christ into heaven 2. A strange storie out of the Gospel of the Nazarens 3. Adams soul was saved Adams bodie was raised about Christs Passion saith Pineda out of diverse Fathers Thus farre Pineda hath truth by him That the sepulchre of Adam was on mount Calvarie so say Athanasius Origen Cyprian Ambrose Basil Epiphanius Chrysostom Augustine Euthymius Anastasius Sinaita Germanus Patriarch of Constantinople 4. It was applauded in the Church in Hieromes time 5. Theophylact thought Adam buried in Calvarie Drusius unadvisedly taxeth the Fathers Tertullian consenteth with other Fathers and Nonnus who is defended against Heinsius 6. At Jerusalem they now shew the place where Adam his head was found Moses Barcepha saith that Sem after the floud buried the head of Adam 7. The Romane storie of Tolus and Capitolium much resembling the storie of Adam 1. TO the clearing of this cloud and that we may carry the truth visibly before us I think it fit to enquire First Who these Saints were which thus miraculously arose and then secondly to determine Whether their bodies were again deposited in the earth till the resurrection or Whether in their bodies with Christ they ascended into heaven 2. For the first Hugo Cardinalis on Matth. 27.53 hath an old storie It is said saith he in the Evangelisme of the Nazarens that two good and holy men who were dead before about fourty yeares came into the Temple and saying nothing made signes to have pen ink and parchment and wrote That those who were in Limbus rejoyced upon Christs descent and that the devils sorrowed Though the rest be fabulous yet herein the Gospel of the Nazarens agreeth with our Gospel That the names of the raised are not mentioned Others have been bold to set down both the names and the order of them who arose 3. Augustine Epist 99. ad Euodium thus a De illo quidem primo homine patre generis humani quòd eum ibidem Christus ad inserna descendens solverit Ecclesia ferè tota conseutit Almost the whole Church agreeth That Christ descending into hell freed the first Adam thence That the Church beleeved this non inaniter not vainly but upon some good ground we are to beleeve from whence soever the tradition came though there be no expresse Scripture If this be true of Adams soul yet is it nothing to our question of his bodily resuscitation Proceed we therefore to those that think his very bodie was raised Adam then arose saith Athanasius in his Sermon of the Passion and the Crosse saith Origen in his 35 Tractate on Matthew saith Augustine 161 quest on Genesis and others also if Pineda on the fore-cited place wrong them not And he giveth this congruentiall reason That Adam who heard the sentence of death should presently also be partaker of the resurrection by Christ and with him who had expiated his sinne by death To which may be added That as S. Hierom reports the Jews have a tradition that the ramme was slain on mount Calvarie in stead of Isaac as also Augustine Serm. 71. de Tempore ratifieth And to this day they say they have there the altar of Melchisedech So Athanasius reports from the Jewish Doctours that in Golgotha was the sepulchre of Adam This is true but it is not certain that Adam was raised and not true that he ascended bodily into heaven Mr. Broughton in his observations of the first ten Fathers saith thus Rambam recordeth that which no reason can deny how the Jews ever held by Tradition that Adam Abel and Cain offered where Abraham offered Isaac where both Temples were built on which mountain Christ taught and died And as the place was called Calvaria because the head or skull of a man was there found and found bare without hair and depilated saith Basil so divers Fathers have concluded that Adam was there buried and that it was his head See Origen tractat 35. on Matth. Cyprian in his sermon on the resurrection Ambrose in his tenth book of his commentaries on Luk. 23. Basil on the fifth of Esay Epiphanius contra Haeres lib. 1. Chrysostome Homil. 84. in Joannem Augustine Serm. 71. de Tempore and de Civitat 16.32 Euthymius on Matth. So Athanasius Sinaita lib. 6. in Hexam in Tom. 1. Bibliothecae Patrum and Sanctus Germanus Patriarch of Constantinople in Theoria rerum Ecclesiast as you may see in Tom. 6. Biblioth Patrum besides abundance of new writers with whose names I delight not to load my page 4 Hierom on
these words Ephes 5.14 Wherefore he saith Awake thou that sleepest c. telleth how he heard one disputing in the Church of this place thus This testimonie is spoken to Adam buried in Calvarie where Christ was crucified Which place was called Calvarie because there was placed Caput antiqui hominis Adams skull Therefore at that time when Christ being crucified did hang over his sepulchre this prophesie was accomplished saying Arise Adam that sleepest and stand up from the dead and not as we reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ shall give thee light but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ shall touch thee because by the touch of his bloud and of his bodie hanging over him he might be enlivened and rise Now though Hierom himself saith that this sense agreeth not with the context yet he leaves it to the Reader to judge whether the thing be true or no and confesseth that the words were pleasingly entertained by the people and b Quodam plausu tripudio sunt accepta approved with applause extraordinary both of hand and foot And c Haeres 46. contra Tatian in fine Epiphanius expresly affirmeth that Adam was buried in Calvarie and that the mountain was so called from Adams head there found adding d In quo crucifixus Dominus noster Jesus Christus per aquam sanguinem qui fluxit ab ipso per compunctum ipsius latus in aenigmate ostendit salutem nostram ab initio massae primi bominis reliquias respergere auspicatus Where our crucified Lord Jesus Christ by water and bloud which flowed from his pierced side figuratively shewed our salvation from the primitive lump whilest auspiciously he sprinkled the reliques of the first man Therefore Now was fulfilled saith he Surge qui dormis Arise thou that sleepest c. Ambrose and Paulinus seem to have read it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Augustine on these words Psal 3.5 The Lord sustained me citeth this place thus e Surge qui dormis exurge à mortui◠continget te Christus Arise who sleepest and stand up from the dead and Christ shall touch thee which reading was used also by others in Hieromes time 5. Theophylact on Matth. thus They that hold Traditions say Adam was buried in Calvarie It is a Tradition saith he on Mark from the ancient Fathers adding this Therefore Christ who healed the fault and death of Adam was there buried that where was the beginning there should be the end and destruction of death On Luke he alledgeth this reason f Vbi per lignum casus illic per lignum resurrectio Where the fall was by the tree there by the tree also should be the rising again Now as this reason is but weak so his words on John are worthie remembrance That the Tradition is Ecclesiasticall not Judaicall that it was published by Noah after the floud Whence we may justly tax Drusius in his first commentarie ad voces novi Testamenti on the word Golgotha who ascribeth the finding of Adams skull and his buriall on Golgotha to the too much credulitie of the Fathers in beleeving the Jews It rather makes against the Jews and the Jews gain nothing in my opinion by that report Certain old verses fathered on Tertullian prove directly that in the same place that Adam died Christ died also and of Golgotha and Calvaria in particular thus runne the verses Hîc hominem primum suscepimus esse sepultum Hîc patitur Christus sic sanguine terra madescit Pulvis Adae ut veteris possit cum sanguine Christi Commistus stillantis aquae virtute lavari The first man here they say was buried The earth was here with Christs bloud watered That Adams dust commixt with Christ his bloud Might so be bath'd as in a soveraigne floud Tertullians Latine verses may be seconded with Nonnus his Greek verses on John 19.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which are thus translated Donec in locum venit nominati cranii Adam prisci nomen ferentem ambitu capitis Vntill he came toth ' place as goes the fame Which from old Adams skull did take its name Where Nonnus concludeth as many other more ancient did before him that it was called the place of a skull from the first Adams head The learned Heinsius Exercit. sacr pag. 196. contradicting saith The Evangelist did not think the place was so called from Adams skull nor that the word SKULL inclines to that sense nor is it called ADAMS SKULL but THE PLACE OF A SKULL And whereas Epiphanius saith that Adams skull was found in that place which gave occasion to the words of Nonnus I marvell that they who were conversant in books of the Hellenists found not the beginning of that fable For in them the word ADAM is taken Collective after the Hebrew manner So in the Latine 1. Sam. 7.9 g The words are in 2. Sam 7.19 This is the law of men saith Heinsius not of Adam Our translation hath it This is the manner of man without restraining it to the first Adam Ista est lex Adam hoc est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moreover Symmachus interpreteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Humane nature So where Josiah 2. King 23.20 is said combussisse ossa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have burnt the bones of Adam the Seventie have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He burnt the bones of men on it Because therefore in this place were the skuls of Adam that is of men the place is called so And whereas ADAM should be taken for MEN Nonnus by signing out the first Adam hath increased the absurditie of this errour To this effect Heinsius on that place In this my defence of Nonnus I give but a touch at the slip 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Septuagint have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answerable to the Hebrew at the other slip of citing 1. Sam. 7.9 in stead of 2. Sam. 7.19 and granting that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken sometimes Collectivè both in Scriptures and some Hellenists do desire to know how it is applied to this place For though there be mention of Adam in Nonnus yet there is none in the Text which might give the hint to the errour of Nonnus as Heinsius mistermeth it And when Heinsius produceth one Hellenist expounding Golgotha and there using 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Collectivé he shall say something But saith the worthy Heinsius it is not called Cranium Adami The skull of Adam but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The place of a skull I answer Neither are the words Crania Adam The skulls of men as Heinsius understandeth it For Luke 23.33 it is said expresly The place is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other three Evangelists have it also all and every of them in the singular number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the place Golgotha which is being interpreted the place of a skull Mark 15.22 Called Golgotha that is to say a
to the first place of Matth. 13.35 and say Who ever denyed but that some Copies have been corrupted and in some of them some words foisted in but all Greek all Latine Copies with the Arabick and Syriack translations reade Abraham and not Jacob Whereas some Copies were alwayes perfect in that place of Matthew Now if you grant corruption in any point or title in all the Greek and all the Latine Copies how will you prove any part or word of the New Testament to be uncorrupt Which razeth up the very Corner-stone of our Faith Mr Beza again objecteth that the name of Jeremie is written for Zacharie Matth. 27.9 I answer that the Authour of the book of Maccabees giveth us to understand that Jeremie wrote other things which now we have not 2. Maccab. 2.1 and so did divers of the Prophets and why may not this be then taken from some of those works which are perished Secondly S. Hierome saith a Jew brought him an Apocryphall book of Jeremie in which he found this testimonie word for word and this book was called APOCRYPHA or OCCULTA JEREMIAE The Apocryphals or hid writings of Jeremie saith Erasmus on Matth. 27. As what S. Paul saith of Jannes and Jambres 2. Tim. 3.8 and what S. Jude saith of Michael the Archangel striving with the Devil is thought to be taken out of the books Apocryphall so might this testimonie be cited also out of Jeremies Apocryphals Thirdly Erasmus supposeth that Zacharie had two names and was called both Zacharie and Jeremie and so no inconvenience followeth Fourthly not onely the Syriack leaves out the name of Jeremie but even in Augustines time the name of Jeremie was not in many Latine Copies as Augustine himself testifieth de Consensu Evangelistarum lib. 3. cap. 7. The ordinarie glosse also saith that in some editions it is onely thus By the Prophet and the name of Jeremie is left unmentioned Fifthly Augustine in the last recited place of his resolveth that the Divine providence purposely set down Jeremie for Zacharie and what the holy Spirit did dictate S. Matthew did truely write And one reason why the Spirit of God confounded the names of Jeremie and Zacharie was this saith Augustine To insinuate that all the Prophets wrote by one Spirit and wonderfully consented in one and therefore we must beleeve that e Quacunque per eos Spâ—itus Sanctus dixit singula esse omnium omnia singulorum What the holy Ghost spake by them is not to be appropriated unto any one but to all and every of them What was said by Jeremie was as well Zacharies as Jeremies and what was said by Zacharie was as well Jeremies as Zacharies God spake not by the MOUTHS but by the MOUTH of all his holy Prophets since the world began Act. 3.21 and they had but one Spirit to guide them into all truth The Prophesie of Amos is called The book of the Prophets Acts 7.42 and the Word of God which in divers places is called in the plurall number Scriptures as John 5.39 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Search the Scriptures is also oftentimes called in the singular number The Scripture as John 2.22 they beleeved the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said Beleef was to rest as well on his Word onely without Scripture as on Scripture though he had said nothing and the word Scripture is not to be restrained onely to that place of Scripture before pointed at but to the whole Word of God written which they beleeved The Scripture hath concluded all under sinne Gal. 3.22 where not one single place onely but either common places of that point or the whole bodie of the Scripture is to be understood A few words of a Psalme of David is called by Christ himself The law of the Jews It is written in their law They hated me without a cause John 15.25 which is onely so written Psal 35.19 Again he saith to the Jews John 10.34 Is it not written in your Law I have said ye are Gods but it is written so onely Psal 83.6 Yea though one and the same thing in effect be written both Isa 28.16 and Psal 118.22 as also Matth 21.42 and Acts 4.12 yet S. Peter reckoneth all but as one All but one Scripture though severally written by these foure It is contained in the Scripture saith he 1. Pet. 2.6 in the singular number he mentioneth Scripture as if what one wrote the rest wrote S. Peter saith not It is contained in the Word with reference to one Spirit inditing or inspiring though that might have also been truely spoken but contained in the Scripture with relation to the unity and consent of the Pen-men Lastly the words of the Evangelist are these Matth. 27.9 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the Prophet Jeremie saying And they took the thirty pieces of silver 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 effatum Jeremiae dicentis That which was spoken by Jeremie saying c. Now Jeremiae might say it speak it dictate it which is most true and is all that S. Matthew saith who by the Spirit might also know that Jeremie did teach preach prophesie and utter these words and yet for all this and after all this Zacharie by the same Spirit might write transcribe and insert those words of Jeremie into his own Prophesie which S. Matthew denieth not as Baruch wrote divers things which he had heard from Jeremie as Agur collected some Proverbs of Solomon Again there was no necessitie that all things whatsoever Jeremie as a Prophet did speak g Jerem. 36.2 he himself or Baruch should write much lesse presently since there were many yeares between Jeremie his speaking and his writing for Enoch prophesied as it is in the 14. verse of the Epist of S. Jude but he prophesied Saying c. as it is there written for writing was none till God set the Copie unto Moses by writing the Law in the Tables on the mount Again S. Paul Act. 24.35 remembreth the words of our Lord Jesus how he said It is more blessed to give then to receive yet none of the Evangelists record such words but this might the Apostles relate unto S. Paul or by divine inspiration he might know that Christ spake them or they might be part of the words which Christ himself spake unto S. Paul for there is no certaintie that they were written S. John the Evangelist was commanded to conceal and not to write the words of the seven thunders Revel 10.4 If he had wholly concealed such a thing we could not know it he spake it but wrote it not Jeremie might speak this and not write it or write it and not speak it Any of these answers is better then to incline to Beza that the Text is erroneous or patched up with a false addition or to Erasmus on Matth. 27. intimating there was lapsus memoriae in Evangelistis howsoever he qualifieth it That if there were memoriae lapsus in Nomine duntaxat he
did think no man should be so morose nosy and stern as thence to question the authoritie of the whole Scriptures But his opinion is justly exploded as hypercritically nice and Julius Scaligers whip here fetcheth bloud of Erasmus Maximus esse potuisset si minor esse voluisset He diminisheth himself by taking upon him to be a censor of the Scripture Nihil parturiens continuò parit omnia saith a Papist of Erasmus 6. Wiser S. Augustine in Epist 19. ad Hieronymum thus h Ego solis cis Scripturarum libris qui jam Canonici appellantur timorem hunc honorē didici deferre ut nullum corum autorem scribendo aliquid errâsse firmissimè credam I have learned to give that reverence and honour onely to those books of Scripture which are called Canonicall that I most fully beleeve no writer thereof erred any Iota But if there were a fail of their memory they did somewhat erre whatsoever Erasmus should seem to suggest who would have taken it in fume if the Friers his opposites had said there had been in his books lapsus memoriae A fail of memorie S. Augustine is constant to himself and to the truth for again he saith concerning the Evangelists i Omnem falsitatem abesse ab iis decet non solum eam quae mentiendo promitur sed eam etiam quae obliviscendo The Evangelists must be so farre from lying that they must not fall into an untruth of forgetfulnesse S. Cyril lib. 6. in Levitic toward the end of his book ascending from one particular saith of the whole Scripture divinely inspired k Quid dicemus Oblivionem dabimus in verbis Spiritus Sancti What shall we say shall we grant forgetfulnesse in the words of the holy Ghost And he answereth his own question in generall l Non audeo hoc de sacri◠sentire sermonibus I dare not think so of the sacred Text. 7. Yea but saith Masius The Syriack translation proves that this place is faulty for the Syriack Copies have it thus Jacob was translated into Sychem and laid in the grave that Abraham bought for money of the sonnes of Hemor Junius his Syriack accordeth with Masius and on that place Junius thus The Syriack Interpreter either used a diverse Copie or his own judgement and authoritie Lastly the Arabick translation as it is set out by Junius readeth it correspondently to the Syriack and Junius on the Text in the Arabick translation preferreth the Arabick and Syriack reading before the Greek and the meaning of the Arabick and Syriack is this That Jacob being dead was carried into the field of the Sychemites the Egyptians accompanying Joseph and the Israelites wher 's septemdialis luctus Seven dayes mourning was made and after the mourning he was carried again from Sychem to Hebron to be buried with Abraham This is wittily invented saith Beza yet not to be admitted And indeed Junius himself in his Parallels retracts it and Chorographie sheweth it is no wittie invention For Hebron lieth between Goshen and Sychem now that they should carry him from Goshen even almost through Hebron it is not likely Wherefore to conclude neither be the Arabick or Syriack Copies of authoritie enough to confront the Greek for the Greek was not translated out of them but they out of the Greek neither may we yeeld that either the Evangelists did labi memoriâ fail in their memories or that generally in any place all the Greek and Latine Copies are corrupted If it had been a literall errour as Genes 3.15 the Vulgat readeth ipsa for ipse or ipsum or Dei for diëi in Epist Jude vers 6. or lapides seculi for lapides sacculi Proverb 16.11 or viduam ejus for victum ejus Psal 132.15 or fontem for fortem Psal 42.2 we would yeeld it was the fault of the transcriber but to admit such a corruption wherein is no similitude of letters and in all Copies both Greek and Latine I cannot like though more Authours then Masius Beza Drusius or Erasmus did joyn hand in hand to justifie it O Infinite Spirit unsearchable yet searching all things Omnipotent yet unable to lie or be untrue who never didst lead into errour thy holy Instruments nor sufferedst the Pen-men of thy sacred Scripture to take thy Dictates amisse I humbly beseech thee to inspire me with knowledge and zeal to vindicate thy heavenly Word and the most blessed Writers thereof from imputed corruption mistaking or obliviousnesse Grant this at the Mediation of my onely Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ Amen CHAP. IX 1. The second answer disliked Melchior Canus censured for saying S. Steven his memorie failed him His like proof from Jephthah his mistaking answered 2. An other argument of his from Matth. 2.6 answered 3. Heinsius touched at Cusanus rejected for holding that Adam could have understood all languages now in use The manner of the confusion of tongues at Babel 4. The Oriental languages a goodly ornament and necessary in some places The Syriack enlightening the Greek 5. The Jewish excommunications Donations to Religious houses sealed up with curses to the infringers Mr. Selden in part defended though his Historie of Tithes hath done hurt Maran-atha The Amphibologie of Act. 3.21 cleared by the Syriack Vbiquitaries with Illyricus taxed Heavens and Heaven taken for God 6. Heinsius strictly examined and rejected 7. Things granted viz. The inspirations and conceptions of holy Pen-men were under one or other language in which conceptions they could not erre nor could they erre in writing 8. Questions handled at large Whether it were necessary that the Scripture should be written Whether the sacred writers wrote casually Whether they were commanded to write Whether they were compelled to write Whether they understood all that they wrote Whether they did reade profane Authours Whether they studied the things beforehand 9. Conclusions against Heinsius There was no difference between the Pen-men of the Divine writ of the Old and New Testament in the point of conceiving and writing in different languages We are not to have recourse to the thoughts of S. John rather then his words They had no libertie left them to put in their own conceits or in writing to adde or blot out what they had done They had no libertie to cloath their inward apprehensions with words of their own They did not conceive in one language and write in another 1 THus then the constant and uniform accordance of the Greek and Latine Copies being held for Authenticall and Canonicall and all manner of corruption and generall aberration in any one letter being wholly removed there is invented a second way of answer grosse and absurd which I dislike as ill if not worse then the former A defender of it is Melchior Canus de Locis Theologicis lib. 2. cap. 18. toward the end of that book and chapter For he would seem to gather from Beda and Rabanus That it happened to Steven as to other common people namely that
in expectancie of Christ the Lord and on every occasion with reference to him MARAN Our Lord He will come he cometh MARAN MARAN But after Christ was born indeed and God took on him our nature and many Jews beleeved whensoever the unbeleeving brethren still cried their old MARAN as if the Messiah were not come the beleevers answered ATHA to their MARAN MARAN-ATHA Our Lord is come which because the other would not beleeve they were called Marani and Maranitae from their iterated Maran and rejecting of Maran-atha Baronius in fine Anni 775. reporteth from Mariana in his Spanish storie 7.6 That a gift was given to a Monasterie and the violatour of that donation jubetur esse Anathema Marrano Excommunicatus Where the word is not taken as some suspect à Mauris from the Moors because most of them in Italie renounced their Christianitie in the dayes of Frederick Enobarbus for he reigned 360 yeares and more after that gift but rather it is to be borrowed from the Syriack MARAN-ATHA saith Mariana commended by Baronius The consideration of which curse and excommunication strikes horrour to my soul in compassion of those who have raised their houses out of the ruines of things sacred with such dreadfull imprecations and feed themselves fat with revenews properly belonging to the Altar If man had not cursed such sacrilegious infringers God would but Founders have blasted them with lightning and thunder from heaven What saith King Stephen in confirmation of his gift to the Priorie of Eye in Suffolk cited by M. Selden in his Historie of Tithes cap. 11. pag. 350 l Quicunque aliquid de his quae in hac charta continentur auferre aut minuere aut disturbare scienter voluerit autoritate Domini Omnipetentis Patris Filii Spiritûs Sancti sanctorum Apostolorum omnium Sanctorum sit excommunicatus anathematizatus à consortio Domini liminibus Sanctae Ecclesiae sequestratus donec resipiscat Whosoever shall willingly and wittingly take away diminish or disturb any one of all these things which are contained in this Charter By the authoritie of God Omnipotent the Father Sonne and holy Ghost and of all the Apostles and Saints let him be excommunicated and anathematized and sequestred from the companie of the Lord and not be admitted into the Church till he repent By which words he intended to terrifie succession and to keep them from sacriledge Let the world know that there are many and as it falleth out now too many such direfull execrations annexed by holy Benefactours to eternize their gifts And as that good King said of himself That he was m Volens partem habere cum iis qui felici commercio coelestia pro terrenis commutant Willing to partake with them who by an happie commerce exchange earth for heaven So I fear that the sacrilegious Usurpers have indeed exchanged Heaven for Mammon and I pray to God that such devout and deliberate maledictions hang not over their posteritie to this day nor may extend beyond the first Atheisticall cormorants The same M. Selden in his book called Marmora Arundelliana pag. 65. mentioneth a Christian inscription which as he conjectureth both prayed to the most holy Mother of God for such as were Benefactours to a Monasterie and cursed them who did it any damage with the imprecations of divers holy men wishing that whosoever did so might in the day of judgement have against him for an adversarie the same most holy Mother of God These things I have related out of that most learned Antiquarie my worthy friend M. Selden rather then the like out of other Authours because I would not have either Clergie or Laitie conceit of him as full many do that he intended as great a devastation to our tithes consecrated by God and to God by a double Jus divinum as ever the Black-smiths sonne brought upon Religious houses or that he was the instrument of ungracious Politicians or his book the trumpet to animate the armies of the destroyers against the pitifull poore remnants of our Church not enough forsooth as yet reformed that is not enough beggarly though some poison in that book hath already wrought so piercingly upon us that our hair is fallen from our heads and our nails from our fingers as needing no more paring and in the cases of our tithes we are shaved and cut worse then the messengers of peace 2. Sam. 10.4 Yet saith M. Selden himself in his Review pag. 471. The many execrations annexed to the deeds of conveyance of them and poured forth against such as should divert them to profane uses should be also thought on Not onely thought on say I but trembled at till the houre of restitution And let them remember also who saith That it is a destruction for a man to devoure what is consecrated Prov. 20.25 which destruction is damnation not cared for by our devouring Esaus if they may fill their bellies with our hallowed morsels as appeared in those whirl-winde-dayes of Henrie the eighth and would have appeared since if God had not ruled the heart of religious King James of most happie memorie and of our sacred Soveraigne to whom we of the Clergie do more especially pray God to send all happinesse equall to his desires on earth and a more glorious estate among blessed Saints then he hath now among men to keep the commandments of their and our God above any worldly benefit I must return back to Maran-atha whose composition is thus as Martyr opineth The first part of it is the Noun MARA the second is an affix of the possessive Pronoun of the first person with the number of multitude making MARA to be MARAN the third particle and the close is the Verb ATHA venit Moreover concerning the tense of the Verb there is question Chrysostom Theodoret Theophylact reade it in tempore praeterito 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our Lord is come with whom agree Hierom and Estius others will have it to be the present tense speaking as if he did come presently because he shall come certainly and because none can say he shall not come at this present This tense Cornelius à Lapide approveth on this consideration because the Jews condemning any were wont to do so under the commination and contestation of the instant divine judgement as Psal 9.19 Arise O Lord let the heathen be judged in thy sight or rather saith Lapide it may be in the Optative MARAN-ATHA Veniat Dominus howsoever he is peremptorie that it is a cold exposition which applieth the words to the Preterperfect tense and the meaning to the first coming of Christ Let me adde that whether the word be read in the Present tense in the Indicative or in the Optative mood Venit or veniat He cometh or let him come it pointeth not at the past but at the future coming of Christ Yea Jude 14. where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used our Translation hath it
The Lord cometh and the words immediately following make it to have apparent and undeniable reference to the last judgement Nor were the words Maran-atha taken from Moses Deut. 33.2 though he saith The Lord came with 11000 of Saints where is a great similitude of some particulars for there is related what passed at the deliverie of the Law and neither Mara nor Maran is mentioned but rather by the semblance of words we may think Moses alluded to the prophesie of Enoch which long after this S. Jude citeth expresly as prophesying of future punishment to be inflicted for the breach of the Law And indeed Ambrose well expounds our Maran-atha of the second coming of Christ so Clemens Romanus Epist 2. in fine Augustine Epist 178 thus Anathema condemnatus Maran-atha definiunt Donec Dominus redeat Condemned till the Lord return to judgement Most true it is Maran-atha is added to exaggerate the power of the Execration and that it is a form of Execration so was it in the intent of the Donor in Mariana The Talmudists say it signifieth one delivered into the hand of the Tormentour by the judgement of the Lord himself Answerable it is in sense to the words in the 17. Chapter of the 6. Councel of Toledo l Perpetuò Anathemate damnetur May he be perpetually anathematized and Chapter 18. m Anathemate divino perculsus absque uilo remedii loco habeatur damnatus aeterno judicio Being stricken thorough with the divine curse without all hope of remedy let him be esteemed damned by the eternall judgement Therefore indeed foolish were they who thought Anathema Maran-atha to be a kinde of oath as if S. Paul adjured them by the coming of Christ yet so some held saith Peter Martyr More foolish was Cornelius a Lapide the Jesuit who on the place confessing the words to be n Verba execrantis denuntiantis aeternam damnationem imò verba condemnantis Words of imprecation of commination of the eternall damnation yea words of condemnation acknowledging also that Maran-atha is Anathema like to Hasschammata being usually contracted to Schammata which was generally known to be an excommunication of an high form adding also that o Maranus est idem quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 excommunicatus ob apostasiam Maranus and a man excommunicate for apostasie are Synonymaes yet for all these things by himself avouched saith expresly * Non sunt verba excommunicantis They are not words of one that excommunicateth But indeed they are words of an excommunication taken from the minatorie prophesie of Enoch recited by S. Jude verse 14. The Lord cometh p Indè ergò nemo non videt deductam illam Anathematis rationem ex primis illius Anathematis verbis minùs aliàs ad alia aliarum sententiarum initia usitatis Anathema ipsum de more Hebraeorum appellatum fuisse From thence therefore every man seeeth that Anathema is deduced and that according to the Hebrew guise it is called Anathema from the beginning or first words of that curse which words are otherwise lesse used to the beginnings of other sentences saith the learned Bertram Maran-atha is q Extremum genus excommunicationis apud Hebraees The highest and greatest degree of excommunication among the Jews saith Drusius in his Henoch pag. 29. who addeth concerning the Apocryphall books of Henoch that the Jews say they have them yet to this day From whence it is likely both that the Jews took their form of excommunication and from the first words of the curse Maran-atha might denominate the intire Anathema Maran-atha as from the beginnings of writs or from the principall words many of our Common-law-writs are so called aswell as the decrees of Popes Nor let any object the unlikelihood that this Anathema is taken from Enochs prophesie because S. Jude hath it not like Maran-atha 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I answer that neither Hebrew nor Syriack nor our English so well endure the placing of the Verb before the Noun as the Greek doth but followeth naturally the naturall sequele of the words and not onely when Enoch spake it but when S. Jude first wrote in the Syriack if in it he wrote that was Maran-atha what after by the Spirit was changed into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the meaning is all one whether it be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Noun must be construed before the Verb The Lord cometh Maran-atha This excommunication S. Paul briefly and in two words reciteth as an usance of the Jewish Synagogue and fit to be introduced into the Christian Temples and exercised in Ecclesiasticall discipline So much of that An other instance is in Act. 3.21 What is in the Latine and Greek full of Amphibologie diversely at divers editions rendered by Beza and others is plain radiant in the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quem oportet quidē coelum recipere saith the vulgat The sentence is altogether doubtfull both in Greek and Latine saith Bellarmine Tom. 1. pag. 409. whether Jesus suscipiat coelum or coelum Jesum as Cajetan openeth the case Now the Syriack translated by Tremellius hath it Quem oportet coeli capiant Quem necesse est coelis ut capiant as it is varied by the skilfull Linguist Bertram Quem oportet coelum ut capiat saith the Arabick all running to the second exposition that the heavens must contain Christ Which words being firm against the Ubiquitaries they interpret Coelum not properly but figuratively for the glorie reigne and majestie of God r Alioqui enim si sermo esset de loco dictum esset Quem oportet coelo recipi For otherwise if he had meant the place of Heaven it would have been said Who must be received into Heaven So Illyricus in lib. de Ascensione Christi But Illyricus must not teach the holy Ghost how to speak nor be offended if the All-wise Divine Spirit use an Amphibolous phrase in the Greek which is cleared by the more Eastern tongues In my opinion he might rather have said that perhaps by Heaven GOD is meant both because our blessed Saviours last words were Luke 23.46 Father into thy hands I commend my Spirit which most certainly was received into the hands of his Father in heaven as also for that not onely the word Coeli in the plurall number is taken for God according to the use of the Aramaeans and also of the Jews as appeareth in the record containing the jointure and dowrie which Rabbi Moses made to Clarora the daughter of Rabbi David explained by Bertram at the end of his Aramaean and Hebrew Grammar where the Bridegroom saith among other things f Esio mihi in uxorem juxta legem Mosit Israel ego ex verbo Coelorum colam honorabo alam regam te Be thou a wife to me according to the law of Moses and Israel and I according to
illumination as Gerson styleth it Columna ignis A pillar of fire Exod. 13.21 Stella Magos in Oriente antecedens The starre conducting the wise men of the East Matth. 2.9 An holy undeceiving unambiguous influent coruscation The Spirit of God moving upon the face of the waters Gen. 1.2 This made Abraham not unwillingly to sacrifice his sonne The quenching of this Spirit against the cleare light of his own convicted conscience made the old Prophet more inexcusable then the other officious lying Prophet who deceived him 1. Kings 13.16 c. Nor did an Angel speak unto the seducer by the word of the Lord vers 18. Samuel being but a childe might not indeed as a novice or some others for a while might not know the voice of the Lord as Peter at the present knew not the operation of God by the Angel in his miraculous deliverie But now I know saith he that God hath sent his Angel yea I know of a surety Act. 12.11 Profane ones I will not priviledge from mistaking of God as perhaps lest Satan might out-stretch his Commission from God when he gave Job into his hands God said restrainingly Onely save his life Job 2.6 And S. Augustine de cura pro mortuis gerenda cap. 12. telleth an admirable storie of two men each called Curma to wit How Curma the Countrey-man lay almost dead many dayes onely a little steam of breath coming from him they kept him from buriall though he was without motion or any feeling whatsoever they did unto him in which time he saw many visions So soon as he opened his eyes he said Let one go to the house of Curma the smith Who was found dead that moment in which Curma the Husbandman came to his senses And the surviving Curma related that he heard in the place from whence he was returned that the smith and not himself was to be brought to that place A mistaking there was by the messengers of death though it were after righted Caiaphas might not know the inspiration or instinct propheticall which he had because he was a wicked man Dispensativè illi contigit sermo He did distribute the speech to others which he knew not himself saith Basil in Prooem Isaiae He was a Prophet perchance Casu saith Origen on John Balaam his asse and Caiaphas spake they knew not what The prophesie was transitorie saith S. Augustine Wherefore I conclude as before That wicked men may be punished with mistakings in things divine But that ever any holy man was ignorant to the end that God moved when he moved him or that the righteous were ever deceived by Oraculous anfractuous perplexities or that the Notaries of heaven the writers of any part authentick of either Testament could be deceived in their conceptions is not agreeable to likelihood reason or truth The last Lemma is this The holy Penmen could not erre in writing If they could what difference is there between their Writings and other profane Authours And to what end had they infallibilitie of understanding if what they understood they could expresse erroneously A readie perfect and quick scribe writeth not falsly but My tongue is the pen of a readie writer saith the Psalmograph Psal 45.1 Holy Ezra who was the divine amanuensis of the book of Ezra is called by the same words SOPHIR MAHIR a readie swift exact scribe Ezra 7.6 no question with allusion to the words of the Psalmist John 16.13 When the Spirit of truth is come he will guide you into all truth How into all truth if there be an errour in writing Or had God care that the Apostles should not misse of the truth in their Speeches and yet misse in their Writings If the Prophets could not erre no more could the Evangelists or Apostles for if there were any superioritie in priviledge we are rather to ascribe it to these latter then to those former in regard that the Law of Christ and of Grace is farre above the Law of Moses as the Apostle doth demonstrate to the Hebrews themselves But that the Prophets could not erre is apparent because Christ himself who is Truth would not have appealed from the present more visible pretending Synagogue to them as all-sufficient Judges as he often did if they could erre A perfect rule is not to be tried by an imperfect one Prophets writ their Prophesies and fastened them to the gates of the Temple and other publick places to be read and were rather judged by their Prophesies written then by them as inspired or uttered by mouth The Gnomon of the Sunne-diall which our late Hieroglyphical Poetaster doth make to signifie the Scriptures is better to be judged by a moving clock the curious handie-work of the same great Artist I mean by the Church and Church-men with whom Christ hath promised his Spirit shall be to the end of the world then by the rude masons or rather the senselesse stones and mortar of the walls I mean the ignorant people who have plucked down not onely the Weather-cock by his interpretation the Pope but usurp to themselves a power to judge the Gnomon and to reform and amend the well wrought well ordered clock The shallow phantastick stateth not the question aright when he is so magisterially peremptorie saying That the Clergie may not so judge of the Scriptures as to conclude or teach any thing against them or to vouch unwritten verities if they be certain verities it mattereth not much whether they be written or unwritten Veritie will vouch it self in spight of lying Poets as some call them or Traditions contradictorie to the written Word Which contradictorie Traditions do much differ from unwritten Verities howsoever the Poet confusedly joyneth them For who of us ever taught that the Clergie may teach any thing against the Scriptures when we professe with him that the Church ought to subject it self to be directed by the Scriptures But that fabling rymer may say any thing who in his Sarcasmos and Frontispice is suffered thus to rave No wonder that the Clergie would be Kings whereas we the now unpriviledged Clergie do humbly pray to God to uphold our declining estates from the hands of those Atheists and turbulent Anti-episcopall Anti-monarchicall Reformists perhaps Pensioners of the forcin enemies of our State who under the pretence of Religion labour to pluck down our Church and Ecclesiastick Hierarchie and upon the ruines thereof to arise to the depluming of the Eagle to the bearding of the Lion not onely to the paring of the royall prerogative but also the removing the very scepter and crown from the Anointed of the Lord whom God alwaies mightily defend and to the bringing in of popular government for No Bishop no King said the learned wise and pious King James most truely I return to retort the Church-reforming Poets words upon himself In his Solarie he saith That the diall is the Written Word which is of it self dead and unprofitable without further illumination since none of the Philosophers nor
the living God and not with penne and ink For though the sense and words of this Epistle to the Galatians be from God and most divine yet there is no reason to imagine that S. Paul intended to include that sense under these words Videte or Videtis qualibus literis scripsi vobis manu meâ You see how large a letter I have written to you with mine own hand But if the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie quantitie though S. Paul wrote in great letters and characters yet it might be a verie good and fair hand as there are few fairer writings then some where the letters are large and full drawn and I doubt not but he who gave them the extraordinary gift of tongues and languages did also as a necessarie appendant give them the power to write well those languages especially since their writings were to benefit more then their voices could reach unto We never reade that the holy Apostles Peter James or John were learned or could reade or write before their calling or learned it by degrees after their Apostleship yet they could and did write and as the Spirit guided their thoughts and words so did he their hands and they wrote both divinely for matter and as I think exquisitely for the manner yea more exquisitely then other men as being governed and actuated by the hand of God which is perfect in all his works And indeed the true sense of the place in my opinion toucheth not at the deformednesse of the characters or at the grand-greatnesse of them but at the length or prolixitie of the Epistle which is excellently rendered by our English You see how large a letter I have written as if S. Paul had spoke thus more at large I who before told you that we must not be weary of well-doing but must do good unto all men whilest we have time especially to the houshold of faith I say I my self have not been wearie in writing this Epistle though it be long and whilest I had time I have spent that time in doing you good by writing this letter by writing this long and large letter to you For though I have written longer Epistles yet I did rather subscribe to them and wrote not all of any one of them with mine own hand but you may take it as a token of my heartie love that I wrote all this Epistle my self You see how large a letter I have writ to you with mine own hand And this sense better answereth to the coherence then that of S. Hierom or of the other learned man whom S. Hierom wondered at So much for the third Lemma 8. I come now to the first Question viz. Whether it was necessarie that Scripture should be written for mens instruction That it was not absolutely necessarie must be confest for God might have used other means He is liberrimum agens the freest agent or rather ipsa libertas libertie it self not chained to fate nor bound in with nature or second causes Necessitie freedome of our will or indifferencie to either side and contingencie are the issues of his will Yea God did use other means in the law of nature for above 2450 yeares the Patriarchs were nourished with agraphall Tradition onely No word was ever written till God wrote the Law the two first Tables the work of the onely-wise Almightie The writing was the writing of God graven upon the Tables Exod. 32.16 Written with the finger of God Exod 31.18 The Jews say The book of Genesis was written by Moses before God wrote the Law For though God spake all the words of the Decalogue Exod. 20.1 c. yet he delivered not the Tables to Moses till Exod. 31.18 but Exod. 24.4 it is related that Moses wrote all the words of the Lord and vers 7. that he took the book of the Law and read it in the audience of the people Kemnitius answereth That the things are recorded per Anticipationem seu per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The last is recorded in the first place for the writing and dedication here mentioned were accomplished afterward Exod. 34.32 The pillar of stone and that other of brick which Josephus Antiq. 1.4 saith the children of Seth did write in before the floud were either fictions or antidated The prophesie of Enoch was not written by him as S. Augustine de Civit. 15.22 and Origen Hom. 28. in Num. think but Enoch prophesied Saying Jude 14. As the prophesie of Adam Genes 2.24 and of God himself Genes 3.15 both of them concerning Christ were spoken in Paradise not written and as the Apostles wrote not the Creed but delivered it onely vivâ voce by word of mouth saith Irenaeus 3.4 and Augustine de Fide Oper. cap. 9. and Ruffinus on the Creed and divers others so is it likely that Enochs prophesie was not written or rather was written long after it was spoken for writing was not so necessarie for the Patriarchs First because they were purer in minde saith Chrysostom Hom. 1. in Matth. And it is the fault of our corrupt nature and we may be rightly impleaded that ever there was any writing as may be gathered from Isidorus Peleusiota lib. 3. epist 106. Secondly the long lives of the Patriarchs supplied the room of writing for Methusalah who lived 240 yeares with Adam with the first Adam who was AETATIS ILLIUS EPISCOPUS Bishop of those times saith Kemnitius in Examine part 1. pag. 13. lived also 90 and odde yeares with Sem and Sem lived 50 yeares in Jacobs time by the calculation of Helvicus and there were not 200 yeares from Jacobs death to the writing of the Law Thirdly besides such aged venerable Prophets as were Adam Enoch Noah and Abraham who was an eminent instructer with authoritie and as it were with a Pretorian power Gen. 18.19 I know that Abraham will command his sonnes and his houshold after him that they keep the way of the Lord other Patriarchs knew the will of God by immediate revelation by dreams and visions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 At sundrie times and in divers manners Heb. 1.1 Gods speech was in stead of writing But when men grew more impure and upon the increase of sinne mans dayes were shortened God did withdraw himself and his familiar conversation was not so common but because their hearts of flesh were hardened in which was printed the law of nature by them even obliterated and they received new evil impressions in stonie hearts God himself wrote the Morall Law in two Tables of stone and Gods own handie-work being broken by the occasion of their sinne to shew that the Morall Law should continue for ever the broken Tables were removed and none knoweth what ever became of them and Moses was commanded to frame two new whole Tables of stone like the former Two extreams about the written word are here to be avoided The first is of the Papists who too much disgrace the Scripture at least comparatively
x Putáne piures baeresâ—â— sectas exerituras fuisse fi nuila pâ—nitus Sâ—riptura extitisset quà m nunc cùm Scritura mortalibus à coelo data est Ego certè propior sum existimanti paucioreâ— fuisse futuras Do you think that more sects and heresies would have bubbled up if there had been no Scripture at all then now are when God hath sent us the holy Writ I rather incline to that side who think there would have been fewer divisions saith Gretser in his defence of Bellarm. de Verb. Dei 4.4 Pighius de Eccles Hierarch 1.2 saith y Apostolos quaedam scripsisse non ut scripta illa praeossent Fidei Religionâ— nostrae sâ—d ut suâ—essent potiús That the Apostles wrote some things not that they might rule over our Faith and Religion but be subject rather and concludeth that the Church is not onely not inferiour nor onely equall but in a sort superiour to the Scriptures The Carmelite Antonius Marinarus in the second book of the Historie of the Councel of Tâ—ent pag. 118. is confident z Ecclesiam fuisse perfâ—ctissimam prius â—uam Sanctorum Apostolorii ullas sâ—ripsisset neq Ecclesiam Christi perfectiâ—â—e ullá carituram etiamsi nihil unquam scripto fuisset mandatum That the Church was most perfect before any Apostle wrote and that the Church of Christ had never wanted perfection though never any thing had been written Majoranus Clyp 2.28 thus a Vnus Ecclesiae consensus qui nunquam caruit Spiritu Dei pluris apud nos esse debet quà m omnes eâ—ingues muti codices quoiquâ—t sunt crunt unquam sâ—ripta volumina quae hominum ingemis semper materiam contentionis praebuerunt The uniform consent of the Church which never was destitute of Gods Spirit ought more to be esteemed by us then all the dumbe writings and volumes which are or shall be written which have ministred matter of debate to the wits of men These are accursed errours and easily confuted because traditions are inconstant and their number was never yet determined by themselves but the Scripture is certain and our Saviour both rebuketh the Pharisees for holding of traditions Mark 7.8 c. Luk. 11.39 Matth. 23.18 and commandeth them to search the Scriptures John 5.39 and referreth himself and the whole course of his life and death to be examined by Scripture Luke 24.25 c. The other extream is of such who neglect or deride the Church and the very name thereof because they have the written word and these do as much glory in it as the Jews did in the materiall Temple of Solomon when in truth their contempt of the Church and its power turns to their damnation without repentance and if the frequent divine immediate revelation had been imparted by God to us as it was to the Patriarchs it had been better for us for in that illumination there was no errour no mistaking no doubtfulnesse but an impossibilitie of being deceived So that my discourse endeth in the point in which it began The Scripture was not absolutely necessarie to be written but ex hypothesi conditionally and supposing the divine decree it was necessarie yea upon corruption of manners and doctrine it was not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 convenient but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 necessarie not onely the most convenient way but the most necessarie means Otherwise God would never have written it It is necessarie if not as a cause yet as a concause The word as a cause the writing as a concause saith Trelcatius The Scriptures are not simply necessarie ad esse Eclesiae to the being of a Church whatsoever Scharpius saith but ad bene esse to the wel-being for nothing was written of the New Testament in Christs life-time nor in some yeares after Away with the Popish vilifying of Scripture c Materia litis non vox judicis Matter of strife say they and not the voice of the judge Away with the Puritanicall cut disdaining the Church and the interpreters thereof to wit their thrice-reverend Bishops and Priests and priding themselves in their own senselesse private Spirit The second question followeth viz. Whether the holy Penmen or Actuaries wrote the Scripture casually I answer If we take casually for fortè fortunâ for sole chance or onely bare contingencie they wrote not casually Te facimus Fortuna deam coelóque locamus Men think they make Fortune a goddesse a giddie one like the people themselves but indeed God worketh that which we call Fortune amongst men Augustine lib. 80. quaest quaest 24. divinely reasoneth in this sort What is done by chance is done suddenly or rashly what is so done is not done providently but whilest providence administreth all things nothing falls by chance in this world if through it we look up to God as to the universall cause by his providence For nothing falls under our senses but was commanded or permitted from the invisible and intelligible Hall of the highest Emperour saith Augustine de Trin. 3.4 1. Kings 22.34 A certain man drew a bow at a venture or in his simplicitie and smote the King of Israel between the joynts of the harnesse What the 32 Captains of the King of Aram could not accomplish though this were their Commission Fight neither with small nor great save onely with the King of Israel vers 13. that this roving arrow did by chance accomplish and slew the bloudie Ahab yet so by chance as the hand of the Lord did guide it Nec erranti Deus abfuit and it might have been written on the shaft before it was drawn out of the quiver Deus Achabo more certainly then what was written on the arrow that stroke out the eye of Philip of Macedon Astur Philippo A wealthy merchant sendeth two of his Factours one to the East Indies the other to the West each of them not knowing the others employments after certain yeares he appointeth each of them to be at such a port on such a moneth and day if they so can They both meet both wonder both at the first hold it a strange chance when the deep wisdome of their master providently determined all this There is no chance where providence reigneth If we take casually as importing counsel meerly humane led by opportunitie onely and excluding inspiration as men consilium capiunt ex tempore pro re nata Advise according to the fresh occurrences or as bonae leges ex malis moribus oriuntur Good laws are made upon former mis-behaviour thus the holy Prophetâ— Evangelists and Apostles wrote not casually for as the Prophesie came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost 2. Pet. 1.21 so both for the Old and New Testament S. Paul saith All Scripture is given by inspiration of God 2. Tim. 3.16 Is that casuall If we conceive the matter thus The holy penmen wrote casually that is
suggestion and inspiration then a proper command I reply Of precepts properly so called some are hid and secret others more manifest the internall command bindes as much as the externall divine suggestions oft times have the force of an expresse inward precept and commands are sometimes manifested by inspirations Praeceptum propriè dictum which is by word or writing and Imperium internum may be equivalent and so long as it is Imperium internum what need we care though it be not Praeceptum propriè dictum And the command was to write which is an outward act The second Objection brought by Bellarmine against himself is from the Revelation where S. John is commanded divers times to write To this he answereth most unclerk-like That S. John was commanded to write certain hidden visions not the doctrine of the Gospel and precepts of manners But this is easily confuted for Revel 19.9 it is said Write Blessed are they which are called to the marriage-supper of the Lambe Is not this the doctrine of the Gospel what is more Evangelicall He might have considered the marriage-feasts in the Gospels Matth. 22.2 c. and Luk. 14.16 And a voice from heaven said Revel 14.13 Write Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth yea saith the Spirit that they may rest from their labours and their works do follow them Are these hidden visions Is not this the doctrine of the Gospel The like might be amplified out of the first second and third chapters of the Revelation where matters of moralitie and precepts of manners are commanded to be written and are written and not hidden visions but rather the doctrine of repentance and of the Gospel Christ saith to his Apostles Act. 1.8 Ye shall be witnesses unto me He forbeareth the word of preaching and useth more generall words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ye shall be witnesses and they bare witnesse by writing Joh. 21.24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things and wrote these things and we know that his testimonie is true not onely he himself but Peter and the rest WE know that his testimonie is true what testimonie but his writings d Toti operi suo fidem vult conciliare He would have all his works or writings beleeved saith Luc. Brugensis and Maldonate When the seven thunders had uttered their voices I was about to write saith S. John and a voice from heaven saith Write them not Revel 10.4 The Apostles forwardnesse or pronenesse to write argueth not necessarily that he was not commanded first to write but rather presupposeth it and this present inhibition Write not may serve as an exception to a former generall command that he might have to write Indeed there is no expresse record that all and every of the Apostles were enjoyned to write nor is it likely they were for then they would have obeyed whereas not the one half of the Apostles committed any thing to pen ink and paper for ought we know But we are sure that some writers of the Old Testament were commanded to write Exod. 17.14 And the Lord said unto Moses Write this for a memoriall in a book Jerem. 36.2 Take thee a roll of a book and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee c. and S. John was commanded eleven or twelve times to write and thence it is more then probable that the rest of the Apostles which wrote were commanded to write they might be expressely appointed to write though in their writings so much be not expressed To say as Bellarmine doth It is false that God commanded the Apostles to write because so much is not written is rash and ill-advised inferring that they were commanded nothing except those things which are written Is every thing false that cannot be proved is nothing true but what can be proved To evince a thing to be false is required a reall proof of truth positive which Bellarmine wanteth and the falsitie may justly be retorted home to the Cardinall himself from the authoritie of a prime man of his own part Wiser Aquinas 3. part quaest 42. artic 4. 2. thus When the disciples of Christ had written what he shewed and spake unto them we must in no wise say that Christ himself did not write since his members wrote that which they knew by the dictate of him their Head For whatsoever he would have us reade of his deeds and words he commanded them as his own hands to write Now let Bellarmine say It is false that the Apostles were commanded by God to write And thus much shall serve for the third question The fourth question Whether the Prophets Evangelists and Apostles were compelled to write As when it is said Luke 1.70 GOD SPAKE BY THE MOUTH OF HIS HOLY PROPHETS per LOQUENDI verbum SCRIPTIONEM quoque comprehendit so what I propound of Propheticall Evangelicall and Apostolicall writing must also be understood of their speaking or dictating Whether they were compelled to it Compulsion is of two sorts Proper and absolute Improper or mixt Proper when a man is forced as we say in spight of his teeth against his will as some who have been drawn to punishment Thus were they not compelled Mixt when a man doth that which he would not do unlesse he feared a greater losse as when a Merchant or Mariner cast their goods into the sea to save their lives which hath in it part of the voluntarie and part of the involuntarie And of this there may be some question for Jonah fled from the presence of the Lord Jon. 1.3 that is was unwilling to do the message Moses again and again refused to be Gods embassadour to Pharaoh Exod. 3.11 and to the Israelites Exod. 4.1 10 13. Isaiah was also backward Isa 6.5 One answer serves for all They were at first fearfull rather then unwilling but when they were confirmed they readily and boldly did their duties So farre were they from shadow of compulsion that they offered their service When the voice of the Lord said Whom shall I send and Who will go for Vs Isa 6.8 the Prophet said Here am I send me Yea but they were impulsi rapti agitati acti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Pet. 1.21 I answer The word rather excludeth voluntarie and arbitrarie will-worship or self-will-service then includeth compulsion for all this was performed Libero motu voluntatis With the free motion of their will or as others take it Salvo pleno usu liberi arbitrii Without any impeachment of the freedome of their will e Acti à Spiritu sancto loqunti sunt à Deo afflati compositos tamen intellige bos motus non quales fuere profauorum vatum They who were led by the holy Ghost spake being inspired by God yet know that their motions and inspirations were setled and composed unlike to the profane heathen priests or prophets for they were wilde senslesse not knowing what they did or said saith Tremellius
twelve times to write that he was compelled I reade not The second of Johns Epistle vers 12. the Apostle had many things to write yet would not write with paper and ink or with ink and pen as he phraseth it Epist 3. vers 13. If he would not how was he constrained S. Jude gave all diligence to write vers 3. so farre was he from coaction And it was needfull for me to write saith he in the same place It was not absolutely necessarie he saith not that he was compelled Divers followers of Solomon wrote his Proverbs who coacted them S. Paul wrote according to the wisdome given unto him 2. Pet. 3.15 Was this a power compulsive In the Epistle to Philemon vers 21. Having confidence in thy obedience I wrote unto thee knowing that thou wilt also do more then I say which words imply he would not have writ if he had thought Philemon would have been obstinate or refractarie and would have done nothing at his request howsoever he was free from coaction 2. Tim. 1.5 The remembrance of the unfeigned faith in Timothie in Lois and Eunice was the reason of S. Pauls writing unto him Doth reason use violence By Silvanus I wrote briefly exhorting you saith the Apostle 1. Pet. 5.12 Was he compelled himself who exhorted others m Simpliciter voluntatem cogi ad actum volendi contradictio est It implieth a contradiction to say simply The will was inforced to the act of willing saith Scotus The will may be compelled by God or by the creature quantum ad actus imperatos so farre as belongeth to the commanded acts in which the body is passive Joh. 21.18 Another shall gird thee and carrie thee whither thou wouldest not saith Christ to Peter Many are compelled to go to the Gaol and to be hanged but the will is induced quantum ad actus elicitos by the emanant and distilled acts What the holy Penmen spake or wrote they did freely and willingly void of compulsion The fifth question followeth viz. Whether the holy Pen-men understood all that they wrote Christopher Castrus on the smaller Prophets lib. 3. de vera futurorum cognitione cap. 12. handleth this point at large and to him I ow a great part of these authorities Montanus held that the Patriarchs and Prophets spake in an ecstasie not knowing what they said as Epiphanius Haeres 48. contra Montanistas relateth But he was an heretick for it The devil so moveth the tongues of the rapted or ecstaticall heathen that they neither understand what they speak nor have power not to speak and their speech is low out of the dust and their voice out of the ground Isa 29.4 as with the Montanists their Prophetisses Prisca and Maximilla and among the heathen the Pythonists and divers orders of religious irreligion this day among the Turks especially the Dervises But our Prophets saith the worthy Estius did speak and write propheticall light being infused into them and the knowledge of the mysteries inspired and with the free motion of their will The Father 's run in full streams to this depth Origen Homil. 6. in cap. 16. Ezekielis n Non excidebant mente Prophetae The Prophets were in their right mindes And Tom. 6. in Joan. o Fatendum est quae proprio ore protulerunt Prophetae eos intellexisse inque labiis gestâsse animi candorem We must confesse that the Prophets understood what they spake and carried in their lips the courteous grace of their minde And Periarch 3.3 p Omnes Prophetae vel Apostoli divinis responsis sine ulla mentis obturbatione ministrabant All the Prophets and Apostles were obedient to the words divine without any disturbance or distraction of minde Basil in Prooemio Isaiae q Sunt qui dicunt eos extra se raptos prophetare humanâ mente à Spiritis absorptâ Verùm id abhorret à professione divinae praesentiae â—t amentem reddat qui à numine corripitur cúmque plenus divinorum decretorum esse coeperit tum à Propria mente excidat Quomodo consentaneum est ut quis ex sapientiae Spiritu reddatur simillimus insano Quin potiùs neque lumen caecitatem parit verùm videndi vim à natura insitam expergefacit nec Spiritus tenebras inducit animis Some say that the divinely illuminated do prophesie their humane soul being swallowed up of the Spirit But it abhorreth from the professed truth and goodnesse of the divine presence to make him a mad man who is inspired by God and when he shall begin to be filled with divine Oracles that then hâ— should be out of his own wits Is it likely or convenient that one by the Spirit of wisdome should be made most like to a mad man Rather light stirreth up the visive facultie naturally nor doth light breed blindenesse nor the Spirit infuse darknesse into the mindes of men See the same Basil on Isaiah 13 at the beginning Chrysostom Homil. 29. in primam Epist ad Corinth 12. Hierom in prooem Isaiae Nahum Abacuc in 3. cap. ad Ephes Augustine de Genes ad literam 12.9 and Epist 112. and contra Adamantium Manichaeum cap. 28. Gregorie Moral 11.12 All aim at this mark That they were rapti or in an ecstasie none denieth but there is a double ecstasie The first either from outward and inward senses the minde remaining more enlightened and free and perfect Thus were they sometimes in an ecstasie Secondly there is an ecstasie from the minde it self when it understandeth not Thus they were never in an ecstasie So Philo Judaeus in his book Quis rerum divinarum haeres Cyril lib. 8. in Joannem cap. 3. r Non ad Prophetae rationem id semper exigitâ—r necessarium est ut quae sutura denuntiat intelligat habuit Dauiel complures visiones quas primum non intellexit sed ab Angelo postea est edoctus nomen Prophetae non perdidit It is not alwayes necessarie that a Prophet should understand whatsoever he foretelleth Daniel had many visions which at the first he understood not but was after taught by an Angel and yet he forfeited not the name of a Prophet I answer with Hierom on Daniel 10. They did know what the things signified though they were not presently inlightened Å¿ Vt per moram occasio daretur anepliùs Deum deprecandi lacrymis je junio invocandi Deum ut mitteret Augelum suum qui docereâ— Danielem that upon the delay occasion might be ministred unto them to pray oftner and more unto God and with tears and fasting call upon him that God would send his Angel to instruct Daniel So that every Prophet knew what words he spake and knew the literall meaning of every word but the spirituall meaning they understood not at the first or presently but afterwards So Zacharie saw many things and knew them not but asked the Angel Zach. 6.4 What are these my Lord
conceived more by the boundlesse power of the divine inspiration then we can possibly reach unto and there was never place of Scripture so since the Apostles dayes expounded if before that I dare say The Spirit aimed at nothing else and all is known All known good expositions may be said to be of the Spirit but the Spirit hath many depths which never yet were searched Therefore our anchor-hold must be on the words or else we shall flote in the wide vast sea of imagination and phansie without sail oar or rudder without card or compasse by having recourse to the Non entes or Non extantes allusiones Vnextant allusions which were in the thoughts of our blessed Apostle It is no rule or canon which is not extant Non Ens is an ill guide to Ens. Besides the Syriack now much differeth from that in the Apostles dayes how then can we finde out what the Apostle conceived For the Syriack and Arabick now in use except perhaps the Gospel of S. Matthew and the Epistle to the Hebrews were translated out of the Greek and not the Greek out of these Had we exactly the identicall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first originall manuscripts in which S. Matthew wrote his Gospel and S. Paul his Epistle to the Hebrews in the Hebrew or Syriack had we the true self-same paper or parchment in which the Evangelists and Apostles or their amanuenses wrote the divine dictates we might better guesse at their thoughts and the allusions to which they bended themselves But now Heinsius would have us to shoot at rovers or rather to no steadie mark at all at the then thoughts of our Apostle Lastly the worthy Heinsius doth a little interfere when he counselleth us to go to the allusions which were in the thoughts of the Apostles and not to the allusions which are extant For suppose I grant that he hath found whatsoever the Apostle alluded to in his minde is not this now extant Or can a thing be found which is not extant The third conclusion trenching upon Heinsius is this They had no libertie left unto them to put in their own conceits or in writing to adde or blot out what they had done This point concerneth the matter which is written Peter Moulin in his third Epistle to Bishop Andrews as it is in the 182 page of the said Bishops Opuscula wrote thus a Quae ad salutem fidem pertinent ab Apostolis statuta sunt afflatu divino in caeteris saepe usi sunt suâ prudentiâ ut innuit Pauius What things soever concern faith or salvation they were determined by the Apostles under the guidance of divine inspirations In other things they often used their own discretion and prudence as S. Paul intimateth 1. Cor. 7.25 The grave and profound Oracle thus answereth him pag. 193. b Parciùs ista de Apostolis prudentiâ suâ ufis periculose enim vel dicitur vel scribitur Apostolos in Quibusdam asslatu divino in reliquis suâ prudentiâ saepe usos idque in iis quae scripta reperiuntur Atqui vel illium ipsum locum ubi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cis ità concludi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ità ut vel illius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à Spiritu Dei dictamen suum habuerit I pray you speak more sparingly of this point viz. That the Apostles used their own wisdome or prudence for it is dangerous to say or write that the Apostles were in some things inspired from heaven in the rest often used their own counsel and prudence and that in matters which are found written in the Scripture But you know it is concluded immediately after these words ACCORDING TO MY OPINION or judgement AND I THINK ALSO THAT I HAVE THE SPIRIT OF GOD 1. Cor. 7.40 So that his very opinion or judgement had its dictate from the Spirit of God Again If the place cited were not inspired but written in humane prudence we must note it as Apocryphal Then let us make an expurgatorie index of the New Testament For we must separate that which is precious from that which is vile Things of humane wisdome will never stand mixed with things divinely inspired So farre he Enough indeed for an Epistle but I could have wished that the most learned walking-librarie had more fully answered all the objections which do most forcibly arietate the truth especially such as are couched in the same chapter which is cited by Peter Moulin If I come upon the stage after Roscius I look not for praise but pardon Let us muster up all their forces together and since that famous Bishop hath withstood the utmost of their strength in the first brunt the rest will like the French furie in warre be the easier answered The first objection is 1. Cor. 7.6 I speak this by permission and not of commandment The second objection is vers 10. Vnto the married I command yet not I but the Lord as if he had said A common man may speak and both deceive and be deceived but I say these things being taught of God The third objection is vers 12. To the rest speak I not the Lord. The fourth objection vers 25. Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord yet I give my judgement as one that hath obtained mercie of the Lord to be faithfull The fifth objection vers 40. She is happier if she so abide after my judgement and I think also that I have the Spirit of God To the first I thus answer The Apostle meaneth not that he was permitted onely to write or speak some things and commanded to write other things nor touched it any part of his thought to permit a little sinne that a greater might be avoided as some hence maintain c Dum tribuit veniam denotat culpam Whilest he forgiveth them he granteth they were faultie saith Augustine concerning these words in lib. de peccat Orig. cap. 38. Again de bono Conjugali cap. 10. d Quis ambigat absurdissimè dici non eos peccâsse quibus venia datur It is most absurd to say They sinned not whom pardon absolveth Again in Enchâ—r cap. 78. c Quis esse peccatum neget cùm dari veniam facientibus Apostoliea authoritas fateatur Who can denie there is a fault where the Apostle confesseth that the doers thereof were forgiven I answer Erasmus saith some Copies have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secundum indulgentiam as Augustine and others reade and then the sense is I tell you my opinion or This is my advice I leave you to your selves I do not command it God maketh not it a matter of precept but thus I advise or counsel and then it soundeth all one with that in the 25. verse where the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sontentiam do and verse 40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 f Liberum interim faciens hac in re suum cuique judicium
glorie of the Creatour If I be bold with Bishop Bilson he is as bold with S. Augustine and sleighteth his reasons and crosseth the very argument which Aquinas magnifieth and which we have now in hand concerning David All the Reverend Bishops words are too large to be transcribed you may reade them pag. 217. and 218. I will onely single out such passages as shew him to be singular or dubious in that point That David is not ascended into heaven doth not hinder saith he but David might be translated into Paradise with the rest of the Saints that rose from the dead when Christ did but it is a just probation that Davids bodie was not then ascended when Christ sat in his humane nature at the right hand of God Again he saith Augustine hath some hold to prove that David did not ascend in body when Christ did or at least not into heaven whither Christ ascended because in plain words Peter saith * Acts 2.34 DAVID IS NOT ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN But saith he either the bodies of the Saints slept again when they had given testimonie to Christs resurrection or they were placed in Paradise and there expect the number of their brethren which shall be raised out of the dust or lastly David was none of these that were raised to bear witnesse of Christs resurrection but onely such were chosen as were known to the persons then living in Jerusalem So farre Bishop Bilson Before I come to presse the argument let me desire the Reader to observe these things in the forecited words and to censure accordingly That the Saints may be in Paradise with their bodies but not in Heaven Is there any paradise but in heaven and when S. Paul was in paradise was he not in the third heaven Shall the Saints that rose upon Christs resurrection and if they ascended at all ascended upon his ascension Shall they I say be taken up from the earth and not be glorified or being glorified not be with Christ Shall they be kept at distance from the blessed spirits of Angels and men that attend upon the Lambe and hang between the earth and that heaven where their Redeemer reigneth Secondly against his former determination and against the reasons which he brought to confirm it he saith Either the bodies of the Saints slept again But doth it not impeach the power of Christs resurrection or will it not seem an apparition rather then a true resurrection as you before reasoned or they were placed in Paradise or David was none of those who were raised to bear witnesse of Christs resurrection You see now his resolution is come down but S. Augustines argument is sound that David was not excluded from that priviledge which other ancient Fathers and Patriarchs enjoyed if they enjoyed them Bishop Bilson himself confesseth that David ascended not when Christ ascended but Christ sat in his humane nature at the right hand of God when Davids bodie was not ascended If not then when did he or they ascend or how were they witnesses of his ascension Lastly that the Fathers before Christ were in blisse is out of doubt that they were in some mansion of heaven is probable that they were comforted and made happier by Christs exaltation may be beleeved But that either the souls of the Patriarchs and David are not with the other blessed Angels and spirits of men now where Christ is or that the Apostles and Evangelists and other most holy disciples of Christ do not follow the Lambe wheresoever he now is but are in a paradise out of heaven seems strange divinitie somewhat touching on the errour of the Chiliasts But I leave Bishop Bilson in this point unlike himself he being a chief of our worthies famous above thousands for a most learned Prelate 4. And if from the ground of S. Augustine and the words of S. Peter I do not demonstrate that David rose not to an eternall resurrection I am much deceived The confessed ground of S. Augustine is That it is hard and harsh to exclude David from being one that arose if any arose to eternall life so that if David arose not none may be thought of them so to arise as to ascend in their immortall bodies to heaven since he had greater gifts or priviledges then some of them and as great as almost any of them But say I David was none of those that arose or if he did he ascended not into heaven And this I will undertake to prove by S. Peter For first S. Augustine in the same Epistle saith The intent of S. Peter was to prove that these words Psal 16.10 Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption were spoken of Christ onely and not of David and the Apostle evinceth it by this reason Because David did die and was buried and his sepulchre is with us that is his bones and his bodie and his ashes are yet with us whereas if David had bodily ascended they would have fitted David as well as Christ who died and was buried and his sepulchre remained but his bodie was not incinerated neither was his flesh corrupted as Davids was but ascended And so the Apostles argument had been impertinent Secondly it is said most remarkably Act. 2.34 David is not ascended into the heavens But Christ is by Davids confession Note first the force of the Antithesis Secondly observe that S. Peter spake this after Christs ascension into heaven whereas if any arose to incorruptible glorie they arose or ascended with Christ and so by just consequent before this time when S. Peter spake these words yet the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He is not yet ascended or He hath not ascended into the heavens Again though David were in heaven in his soul long before that time as we say or if he went up out of Limbus Patrum as some Papists say yet certainly someway he was not ascended when S. Peter thus preached If any way he ascended not it must needs be in bodie or soul They dare not say He ascended not in soul and therefore we may boldly say He ascended not in bodie unlesse they will shew us some third nature in David that might ascend which thwarteth both Philosophie and Divinitie 5. Moreover the Turks now inhabiting Jerusalem keep the sepulchre of David forbidding entrance to all Christians into it as every traveller into those parts knoweth and they questionlesse respect the sepulchre as containing the bodie bones or ashes of David there present and unremoved Lastly if David ascended not when Christ did or a little after which is evidenced from the words of S. Peter our enemies themselves will not say that he ascended long after or of late Therefore David is not ascended bodily as yet howsoever Pineda fancieth O Most mercifull Saviour the sonne of David the Lord of David who hast supereminently the Key of David and openest and no man shutteth and shuttest and no man openeth
me qui fecit coelum terram fluctuans converto me ad Christum quia ipsum quaero hîc invenio quomodo sine impietate adoretur terra I am in a doubt I am afraid to adore earth lest he damn me who made both heaven and earth In this hesitancie or pendulousnesse I turn my self to Christ and here I seek and finde how without impietie earth may be worshipped As if no earthly thing should be adored but his bodie onely I would not say or think that any relique or reliques have in themselves or from themselves power to expell devils or to work wonders for a spirituall power as Thyraeus well observeth though it wound himself is not within a thing corporeall and a bodily power cannot drive away devils or work miracles say I. The great works of healing c. which have been done at the tombes of Martyrs reade S. Augustine de civitat Dei 22.8 might in those dayes extraordinarily be done by the Martyrs or by the Angels l Suscipientes personam Martyrum in assumed bodies like to the Martyrs as Augustine phraseth it in lib. de cura pro mortuis gerenda cap. 16. The reliques have no vertue in themselves to effectuate or actuate such miracles yea the very Angels or Martyrs themselves were but the agents instruments and the right hand of the Almighty who onely worketh great wonders by his power independent I would put no trust no confidence in the relique of any Saint or Martyr whosoever or whatsoever for help either of soul or bodie For this also is a wrong offered unto him in whose name our help standeth Our help cometh from the Lord which made heaven and earth Psal 121.2 And my God shall supply all our need according to his riches in glorie by Christ Jesus Philip. 4.19 9. What would I then do or how would I behave my self toward a true unquestioned choice relique I would which is the positive part by me promised with Chrysostom Hom. 5. in Job tom 1. honourably esteem of it kisse it and reverently both touch it and behold it and think of it and charily lay it up I would shew it to others not mercenarily but with joyfull and comfortable remembrance of him whose relique it was I would esteem of it above silver gold or precious stones I would make it my remembrancer of things past as a motive stirring me up to the imitation of that Saints vertues and actions which is their best relique I would use it as a bridle to curb evil in me and as a spur to goodnesse If any instrument of Satan should debase it and say that it is vilissimus pulvis I would scorn his scorn and esteem it as a most especiall instrument of the most High and would say to the caviller or rather to his master Lucifer the Father of lies and detraction m Saepe hoc vilissimo tortus es pulvere Even this which thou callest most vile dust hath often tormented thee as S. Hierom said of old Lastly till of it self it decayed and by its imperfection or rottennesse called for interment I would not bury it but commend it to be kept even in Churches and other holy places except idolatrie were committed with it or people in their profane religion adored it And then would I also burie it 10. Much more might be said but I must take manum de tabula or make a quick end and returning to Pineda say That if Ananias Azarias and Misael have no relique now remaining which Lorinus reports from report if they did arise or intend to arise with Christ they having a farre longer journey from the place of their captivitie to the sepulchre of Christ then Jacob had to the land of Goshen would or should have had as great a care as Jacob of translating their bones if Jacob translated his in hope to arise with Christ as Pineda intimateth O Gracious God who art to be loved by me for thine own self onely Grant I beseech thee that no worldly thought may nestle and breed in me nor that I may fasten any respect on any creature which may be derogatorie to the devotion due to thee my Creatour for Jesus Christ his sake in whom onely thou art well pleased Amen CHAP. XIII 1. Pineda saith Jonas arose then and Noah His reasons very shallow 2. Daniel arose saith Pineda from Nicetas If Daniel arose he arose but with one leg the other leg is yet shewed at Vercellis 3. Job arose now saith Pineda His proof lame Jobs Epitaph poeticall His sepulchrall pyramis made of imagination 4. Job shall arise at the generall judgement Pineda wrincheth the Scripture 5. The end of Jobs book according to some Greek copies a double exposition of the words 6. Jobs bodie supposed to be translated to Constantinople 7. Bartholomaeus Sibylla saith S. Hierom is expresse that the holy mother of our Lord and John the Evangelist are bodily ascended The like cited from Aquinas And Holcot saith That the glorious virgins bodie was not to be incinerated Her supposed day of Assumption most honoured among the Papists and yet there is monstrous disagreeing among them who favour her Assumption The last instances concern not our question 8. Pineda presumed too farre upon uncertainties Lorinus dareth not name any particularly that were raised It cannot be known certainly NOw also arose Jonah saith Pineda That Jonas was a lively type of Christs resurrection appeareth Matth. 27.40 But if every lively type of Christ arose then Samson Samuel Joshuah Gedeon Melchizedech Aaron Solomon then hundreds of others arose whom Pineda mentioneth not a Tandem resurrexit Noah At last Noah arose saith Pineda Why AT LAST since he was living before other and great in Gods favour who was saved and delivered from the common destruction of all mortall men This last reason as well holdeth That every one that was in the Ark arose also For they were delivered as well as Noah from the inundation of waters and especially Sem who was an holy man and was great in Gods favour 2. And Daniel arose who was brought out of the lions den saith Pineda and he proves it by Nicetas But neither he nor Nicetas proves it by any reason He might as well argue that Jeremie arose with Christ Because he being cast into the dungeon where he sunk in the mire was afterwards drawn out of the dungeon Jerem. 38.6 and 13. And if Daniel arose he arose but with one leg for b Crus Danielis asservatur Vercellis c. A leg of Daniel is kept at Vercellis a citie of Liguria saith Lorinus on Act. 2.29 Daniel died in Babylon saith Sixtus Senensis concerning him Of reliques he makes no mention nor of his rising again with Christ but alledgeth the last of Daniel the last verse Which words may prove that he arose not with Christ or if he did that he died again For the Spirit saith to him Go thou thy way till the end be for thou
wicked in that 2. By the words of the Creed is proved that some shall never die The same is confirmed by other places of Scripture with the consent of S. Augustine and Cajetan The definitions Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum of the sentences and tenents of the Church leave the words doubtfully Rabanus his exposition rejected 3. The place of S. Paul 2. Corinth 5.4 evinceth That some shall not die Cajetan with us and against Aquinas Doctour Estius and Cornelius à Lapide the Jesuit approve Cajetan S. Augustine is on our side and evinceth it by Adams estate before the fall which state Bellarmine denieth not Salmerons objections answered 4. Some shall be exempted from death as is manifested 1. Corinth 15.51 The place fully explicated The common Greek copies preferred The Greek reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We shall not all sleep standeth with all truth conveniencie probabilitie and sense The other Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We shall therefore all of us sleep and the more different Vulgat Omnes quidem resurgemus sed non omnes immutabimur Indeed we shall arise but we shall not all be changed justly exploded as adverse to sense 5. The Pelagians though accursed hereticks yet held truely That some shall not die S. Augustine dubious Others stick in his hesitancie Yet other Fathers and late Writers are constant That some shall be priviledged from death yet that change may be called a kinde of death 1. THe third main question being Whether Adam and his children all and every one of them without priviledge or exception must and shall die I have first answered and proved that there may be an exception of some who shall not die Secondly I have instanced in Enoch and Elias That they have been excepted and that they shall not die I am now come to the third branch of my answer That others also hereafter shall be excepted In the avouchment of this truth consisteth the labour till the end of this Chapter And first of all it must needs be acknowledged That all and every one of those who might have been or have been or shall be excepted may yet be said in a sort to die a Loco mortis erit momentanea commutatio The change which shall be in the twinkling of an eye shall be in the room and stead of death saith Aretius b In illis qui repentè immutantur immutatio illa erit species mortis The immutation of them who shall be suddenly changed shall be a kinde of death saith Beza Bosquier in his Terror Orbis maketh rapture to be a kinde of death we may more safely and properly call that sudden change by the name of death For in this it shall be like death That it shall take away from our bodies all corruptibilitie and mortalitie together with the defects now annexed to them and because it altereth if not abolisheth the former state or nature it shall go for a kinde of death But because this change doth not separate the soul from the bodie doth not dissolve the compositum we are bold to say It is not a true proper reall death The Papists will not be content with this immutation but urge a perfect naturall death a very disjunct separation of the soul from the bodie Aquinas goeth further and will have an incineration of the bodies from which dust and ashes incorruptible bodies shall arise But this is confuted by the Apostle 1. Thess 4.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c Nos viventes relicti simul cum illis rapiemur in nubibus in occursum Domini in aera We who remain alive shall be hurried together in the clouds to meet the Lord in the aire as Montanus hath it The Vulgat differeth but in word not in sense d Qui vivimus qui relinquimur c. We which are alive and remain shall be caught up That the Apostle speaketh not this of himself and of his own person is confessed Occumenius citeth Methodius his opinion thus and addeth his reason For S. Paul was not alive corporally to that time But it cometh more home if we say as well we may that the blessed Apostle S. Paul knew that himself was none of them who were to endure alive on earth till the day of the generall judgement because he saith 2. Tim. 4.6 I am now readie to be offered and the time of my departure is at hand Yea 2. Thess 2.2 he exhorteth the same Thessalonians That though seducers should pretend his message or his letter yet they should not beleeve that Christs day was at hand His own time was at hand but Christs day was not The English translation jumpeth verbally in the contradiction At hand and Not at hand The Originall varieth but a little and that not in sense nor in the Verb it self but the Preposition and Montanus hath the word Instat by way of exposition in both places e Sed suam personam verbi gratiâ profert But he instanceth in his own person saith Methodius That he speaketh it onely of the godly is also apparent by the context for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we the remainder sheweth that a few shall be left at that time and if he had spoken of the wicked perhaps he would not have put in himself and other holy ones he would not have said Rapiemur We shall be taken up but Rapientur They shall be taken up Again when he saith Rapiemur cum illis We shall be taken up with them who are meant in those words save they onely who sleep in Jesus and whom God will bring with him 1. Thess 4.14 which are not the wicked but the godly onely They are the Saints with whom the Lord cometh Jude ver 14. The Rhemists themselves confesse that the Apostle speaketh of all the faithfull then living when Christ cometh to the last judgement Diodorus as it is in Hierom saith The Apostle f Apostolus Nos dixit pro eo quod justos de quorum ego sum numero said WE that is they who are just out of whose number I am not excluded A powerfull reason may confirm this because the wicked will wish mountains to cover them will quake and tremble at that houre and would not be willing to come to judgement if they could avoid it Therefore it is not likely that they would spring forth and put themselves forward to meet the Lord. The summe is The godly which shall be then left and be alive shall be taken up into the aire The Papists say this is not to be done g Sine media morte without intercurrent or intercedent death whereas the words are expresse We living and remaining shall be snatched up The argument of Gregorie de Valentia hath pith in it For he saith If the live men do die h Sequitur justos aliquantò pòst resurrecturos quà m alios fiquidem morientur atque adeò resurgent it followeth that the just shall arise somewhat after
others for they shall both die and rise again Which opinion because it is against all Divinitie he minceth and mollifieth thus i Omnes possunt dici resurgere simul prout simul fieri dici potest quod fit sub idem tempus brevissimum All may be said to arise together as that may be said to be done at once which is done in a very short time But this shift cannot serve his turn for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Corinth 15.52 in puncto or in tempore indivisibili in one instant is neither first nor last But so shall all arise and Bonaventure Sentent 4. distinct 43. quaest 3. proveth by six reasons that k Resurrectio omnium fit simul non successivê There shall be a joynt resurrection of all together and not successive as Valentia would have it The frame may be this from his confession The righteous shall not arise after others But by Valentia his acknowledgement if the righteous who shall be alive when Christ cometh shall die they must arise after others Therefore they shall not die at all Though it be said 1. Thess 4.16 The dead in Christ shall arise first yet he saith not he meaneth not that they shall arise sooner then other men much lesse later as the Jesuit would featly excuse it for all shall be raised together good and bad at the blowing of the trump All that are in the graves shall heare Christs voice one voice one single voice shall be heard of all and shall come forth they that have done good unto the resurrection of life and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation John 5.28 29. They must not come forth one by one or one after another but all together And not onely they who are dead shall all arise together but at the same time shall both the dead be raised and the living changed * 1. Thess 4.15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord perhaps some of the words which he heard in the third heaven that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep And there is no likelihood that the dead shall prevent the living Therefore all shall arise or be changed together The Lord shall descend from heaven with a shout with the voice of the Archangel and with the trump 1. Thess 4.16 With a great sound of a trumpet Matth. 24.31 The trumpet shall sound and the dead shall be raised incorruptible and we shall be changed 1. Cor. 15.52 All this shall be done at one time the change of some and the resurrection of others No preeminence is in that point Though the Apostle saith The dead in Christ shall arise first it is meant before others shall meet Christ in the aire l Non enim ponit ordinem resurrectionis ad resurrectionem sed ordinem ad raptum vel occurrentiam For he setteth not down the order of their severall resurrections but the order of their severall raptures and meetings with Christ saith the deep Aquinas The raised and changed holy ones shall go together the changed shall not meet Christ till first the holy dead be raised Again it is not Resurgent primi Shall be the first who arise which is the bad translation of the Vulgat but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Resurgent primùm Shall arise first of all adverbially first that is before others meet Christ S. Augustine was sometimes doubtfull of the main point but what saith he Tomo 4. de octo Dulcitii quaestionibus quaest 3. upon these words WE WHO LIVE AND ARE LEFT I would saith he heare more learned men concerning these words and correct what I have sometimes thought otherwise from hence if they can be so expounded to me as by them I may understand that all who live now or shall live shall die But if in these words there can no other sense be found and if it be cleare that the Apostle would be understood according to the evidence of the words That there shall be some living in the end of the world l Qui non expolientur corpore sed superinduantur immortalitate ut absorbeatur mortale à vita who shall not die corporally but be clothed over with immortalitie that mortalitie may be swallowed up of life then to this opinion without doubt is agreeable that which in our Belief we confesse That Christ shall come to judge both quick and dead So farre proceedeth that holy Father S. Augustine 2. And because he hath named a second place and instanceth in the Creed it shall be my second argument and thus do I shape it The Creed Apostolicall saith Christ shall judge both the quick and the dead He was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead saith S. Peter Act. 10.42 S. Paul hath the same 2. Timoth. 4.1 Testificor coram Jesu Christo qui judicaturus est vivos mortuos I testifie before Jesus Christ who shall judge the quick and the dead And when the Scriptures say so they understand it a De novissimo generali judicio of the last generall judgement saith Bellarm. de Purgat 2.4 Yea the Apostle expresseth so much in the last cited verse of Timothie Christ shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his Kingdome But his Kingdome was not of this world and his first appearing was past Therefore it must be at his second coming The ground-work of the words being laid thus the structure ariseth By the word dead you cannot understand the parties as they are dead for so Christ judgeth them not alive people are the object of his judgement But you must needs expound dead for those that sometimes did die and now are raised to be judged and are alive The word quick or living you cannot interpret as the Papists do such as are alive then and shall die and then be raised and then be judged for it needed not to have been said He shall judge the quick and the dead but it had been sufficient to have said onely one of them He shall judge the quick or the living for indeed they shall all be alive or He shall judge the dead for even the living and the quick shall die as the Papists feigne But indeed the Holy Writ divides all mankinde into two sorts the one part shall be living and not die but be changed the other are such as sometimes died Viventes mortuos And thus there are no clouds in that article He shall judge the quick and the dead In the Creed there is neither redundancie nor defect in the Popish exposition there is redundancie for if all and every one shall die it might as well have been expressed He shall judge the dead Or if the dead as dead be not properly judged it might onely have been said He shall judge the quick for according to the Papists all the living shall die and be again
Saints is called the resurrection unto life The resurrection of the dead wickâ— ones is called the resurrection unto damnation John 5.28 Likewise say I The change of the wicked if changed they be as I hold it most likely may be called the change unto shame and pain eternall as the change of the godly may be called a change unto glorie For the wicked shall reap no benefit by that change nor shall they meet Christ in the aire by any extraordinarie rapture as I conceive And since they die the second death it mattereth not if they avoid either the first death by immutation or the fire of conflagration Lastly if they shall meet Christ in the aire it is to their greater terrour They shall be hurried to their judge and haled toward their punishment they meet him not as he is a milde Saviour but as an angrie and just God And this is a sufficient answer both to the second and third objection of Salmeron as the learned who reade him can testifie 4. Another argument and that of moment and validitie to prove that some shall hereafter be excepted from death is taken from that memorable diversly read diversly expounded place of the Apostle 1. Corinth 15.51 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 e Omnes autem non dormiemus omnes autem immutabimur We shall not all die but we shall all be changed as the Interlinearie hath it And this is the first and best reading Let us examine first the words and the severall translations and so approach to the exposition The Greek cited by me at large is in all the Greek copies so saith Peter Martyr and Doctour Estius confirmeth the same so likewise doth Chrysostom and Theophylact reade it and Theodoret and Justinus ad Orthodoxos quaest 61. quaest 109. and Origen in tertio volumine enarrationis Epistolae primae ad Thessalonicenses as also in his book against Marcion Which is a manuscript in the Vatican saith Estius So Oecumenius Prognost 3.48 So Theodorus Heracleotes reades it saith S. Hierom in Tom. 3. Epistolarum pag. 198. and in the end of the same Epistle to Minerius and Alexander S. Hierom acknowledgeth that even in his dayes the Greeks did not reade it as the Latines Salmeron on the place findes fault with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Omnes quidem non dormiemus All of us shall not die f Quod juxta verborum proprietatem perinde est ac dicere Nullos dormituros non enim dicitur Non omnes dormiemus quà declararet aliquos non morituros Est grande discrimen apud Logicos inter Non omnes dormiemus Omnes non dormiemus which according to the proprietie of the words is as if he had said NONE SHALL DIE. For it is not said NOT ALL OF VS SHALL DIE by which words is meant and declared that some shall not die And there is a great difference among Logicians between these two propositions NOT ALL OF VS SHALL DIE and ALL OF VS SHALL NOT DIE. So farre he First I say Estius a learned Doctour and Popish Divine doth sleight this subtiltie g Sâ—ito sensum non mutari sive legas Omnes quidem non dormiemus qui ordo verborum est in Graeco sive Non omnes quidem dormiemus quomodo legit Hieronymus plerique Lat ni vertunt Know saith he that the sense is no whit changed or altered whether you reade it thus ALL OF VS SHALL NOT DIE as the order of the words is in the Greek text or thus NOT ALL OF VS SHALL DIE as Hierom reades it and most of the Latines interpret it Secondly I say if we should maintain that none shall die of them that are residui then remaining alive but that both good and bad shall all be changed without death I see no inconvenience to arise from that opinion Catharinus in his Commentaries findes fault with those who follow the first reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Estius findes fault with him for his fault finding condemning him of inconsideration and rashnes The Arabick accordeth with the Greek Nos omnes non moriemur sed nos omnes mutabimur We all shall not die but we all shall be changed The Syriack also is in harmonie with both Greek and Arabick though Salmerons nicetie may think it a jarre Non omnes nos obdormiemus omnes autem nos immutabimur Not all we shall sleep but all we shall be changed yea an old vulgat translation which is in Basil in the librarie of the Predicants saith Erasmus agreeth with our Greek Aquinas himself in the end of his 8. Lect. confesseth that our Greek reading is in sense consonant to that which the Apostle wrote to the Thessalonians the first Epist 4 chap. and 17 verse Scriptures sweetly expound Scripture We shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed saith the Apostle here and to the Thessalonians We which are alive and remain shall be caught up together The very Prefaces have a correspondence in substance and are more then ordinarie This we say unto you by the word of the Lord 1. Thessal 4.15 and here 1. Corinth 15.51 Behold I shew you a mysterie And then doth he in both places evince an immutation without death Therefore there can be no danger in our opinion as may be evinced from Aquinas his free acknowledgement Yea there is not onely no danger but great reason for it for How excellently doth this agree with that which presently followeth verse 52. The dead shall be raised incorruptible and we shall be changed Doth he not plainly discriminate and diversifie those which shall be raised from those which shall be changed He doth not say We shall be raised incorruptible and We shall be changed as he must have done if all are to die and then to be changed And to shew that the change is not by laying down of the bodie he addeth immediately This corruptible must put on incorruption and this mortall must put on immortalitie vers 53. phrases implying no losse no decay no separation but a superinduction and superaddition to what before was enjoyed And when this is done he saith most pertinently vers 54. Then shall be brought to passe the saying that is written Death is swallowed up in victorie as if he had said When both these things are accomplished the raising of the dead and the change of the living so that they shall be no more mortall then shall death be overcome O DEATH WHERE IS THY STING vers 55. So much for the first and best reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I come to the second which is varied by the addition of one letter but it makes a contrarietie in the sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Omnes non dormiemus All of us shall not sleep saith the former Omnes dormiemus All of us shall sleep saith the latter And this latter way it seemeth to have been read in some few copies even in S. Hieroms time But this Greek lection is
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Tremellius and the Preacher ex ratione carnis saith the same that is as I interpret him out of carnall reasoning he might rather have said ratione carnis because the flesh of the abortive was buried and the churls carcase unburied Nor let any man thwart me by saying that in the Septuagint is no such matter but the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Vulgat accordeth Supercecidit ignis and the whole troups both of Greek and Latine Fathers so read it and so expound it I answer ingenuously that ascribing so much as I do to the Septuagint and Vulgat I wondred how there should be so great difference from the uncorrupt originall The Vulgat thought I trusted to the 70. and the 70. to some Hebrew Copy varying from others more perfect The 70 rendred Gen. 4.8 not according to the Hebrew which is certainly defective saith Vatablus and somewhat is to be understood for indeed there is an extraordinary pause but according to the Samaritan Pentateuch Cain said unto his brother Let us go into the field as Mr. Selden evinceth by the authority of Hierom and Cyrill of old and by a Samaritan Copy now in the hands of Bishop Usher which the Hierusalem Targum amplifieth relating That Cain told Abel there was no future world nor reward for goodnesse nor punishment for sinne all which Abel contradicted and thereupon Cain slew him So might the 70. or the Vulgat or both translate the passage of the Psalmist not accordant to those Copies which are now in price but answerable to some other Hebrew one At length I rested assured that the Copies which they used differed onely in one letter and in the points For instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with five points as it is most commonly read and with six points saith Kimchi which signifieth abortivus and is in the Psalmist their Copies had it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth cecidit there being the same Radicals and no letter changed Secondly for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mulieris which is in David they read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth fire the omission onely of one letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath caused abortivus mulieris to be translated cecidit ignis For as for the variety of punctations that is of small moment by reason of their often interchangings and easie mistakings and points were not used in the dayes of the Septuagint as some say scarce when the Vulgat first was as others say not from the beginning say I if the names of the points and accents be Syriacall Drusius in his Henoch chap. 1. saith Hieronymus ante Masoritarum tempora à quibus apices habemus ut communis opinio est qui nunc in vsu vixit Mercer in the great Dictionary of Pagnine on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relates that when the Chaldee translates Deuter. 26.5 Laban Syrus quaerebat perdere patrem meum and when the Vulgat rendred it Syrus persequebatur patrem meum whereas indeed it ought to be read as it is in our last Translation A Syrian ready to perish was my father non est dubium saith he quin sine punctis quibus tunc carebant Biblia legerint in Pihel non in Kal. Yea Sine dubio novas literas habemus if we may beleeve Bellarmine De Verbo Dei 1.1 And indeed the three fundamenta laid by Balthasar Bambach That the points were coëtaneall to the Hebrew letters are founded on the sands First saith he Sine vocalibus consonantes proferri non possunt omnis lingua quae illis destituta est manca imperfecta mutila efficitur What of all this how followeth this Because the consonants cannot be pronounced without vowells therefore the vowells were underwritten Let him know the Hebrew Tongue was most perfect when it was least written and till Moses his time there were not so much as consonants written howsoever they fable of a pillar written upon long before for God invented the letters first when he made his Two Tables and writ the Law in them See this proved by our learned Whitaker saying * Deus ipse scribendi exemplum modúmque ost endit quando Legem suis digitis conscriptam Mosi tradidit Sic Chrysost Theophylact in 1 Matth. Papistae in confess Petrocoviensi cap. 15 Screckins Jesuita Thes 13 De Verbo Dei Whitak De Script Controvers 1. quaest cap 2. God himself hath shewed an example and manner of writing when he delivered to Moses the Law written with his own fingers So Chrysostom and Theophylact write on the first of Matthew and the Papists in their Confession c. But though Eusebius Praeparat Evangel lib. 18. saith Moses first taught the use of letters to the Jews yet Saint Augustine De Civitate 15.23 saith Enoch wrote * Nonuulla divina some divine things since Saint Jude testifieth so much But that ever honoured Father considered not that Jude said onely Enoch prophesied which he might do by saying onely and not writing as Adam Genes 2.24 yea God himself prophesied of Christ in Paradise Genes 3.15 which Moses first wrote for ought that we know and S. Judes words are Enoch prophesied saying in which writing is rather excluded then included Drusius in his Enoch cap. 27 saith There was a book called LIBER BELLORUM DOMINI out of which Moses bringeth a testimony Cornelius à Lapide saith It was written before the Pentateuch Aben Ezra saith The book was in the dayes of Abraham In the book of Job who lived before Moses is mention of writing and of books as of things common and of graving in stone with a pen of iron Cusanus prinketh higher in his Compend chap. 3. pag. 241. he saith Our first parents had the art of writing since by it man hath many helps for things past and absent are by it made present By the same reason he may say Adam knew the art of Printing of Brachygraphy of Characters Let us passe-by the unauthorized vast fancy of Cusanus and answer the objection drawn from Jobs book which if it were written by his three friends or their Scribes at their dictate as saith Bolducus the Carthusian since they could make Job no better satisfaction then to historifie his innocency and their own petulancy or if by Elihu the Buzite as is very probable for he was young when they were old Job 32.6 and might well live till after the writing of the Pentateuch and publishing of books or by Job himself for Job himself might have conferred in Midian with Moses saith Bolducus who also died but thirteen yeares before Moses died saith that Carthusian yea Job lived after Moses if he lived 248 yeares as the Septuagint and Olympiodorus do account And certainly after all Jobs misery he lived in prosperity 20 yeares longer then the whole yeares of Moses compare Job 42.16 with Deuter. 33.7 and so Job might know the writing of the Law in Tables of stone
which by reason of the long tract of time and the insensible degrees of their growing could know one another if they could meet Object 3. As there is no language but some man understandeth so there is no language but Adam who signifieth a man could understand if he heard I answer The word Adam is homonymous and the similitude unlike and disjoynted Object 4. But Adam imposed names on all things therefore no man else originally invented any other name I answer He saith true if he confine his meaning to the Hebrew to that Origo originans But that Adam called Cheese Coise or Cattell Catalla or a Chappel Capella a learned man should not think Object 5. Oh but some by Gods gift had the knowledge of all tongues then wonder not if Adam had I answer They had the gift of all tongues then necessarie to be spoken or understood perchance of all tongues then in being that as when people inclined to idolatrie the diversitie of tongues was introduced so when they were to be reconciled to Christ the cloven tongues sitting on the Apostles might finde a remedie for that diversitie by the gift of languages Yet saith Aquinas 2a. 2 ae quaest 176. art 1. ad 1. f Instructi fuerunt divinitus in linguit omnium gentium quantum requirebatur ad fidei doctrinam c. The Apostles were taught from heaven the languages of all nations so farre forth as was requisite for the doctrine of faith but for points of elegancie the Apostles were onely skilfull in their own tongue As in wisdome and knowledge they were sufficiently instructed so farre as the doctrine of faith required but they were not furnished saith he with acquisite knowledge or conclusions Arithmeticall or Geometricall Thus farre Aquinas But that they understood or spake tongues which since have sprung up is not likely no more did Adam That Adam could have done it by Gods miraculous power I confesse that he could out-weather any meer man by his naturall gifts I beleeve what he could have done by labour or studie in a little time if he had heard or read any language I will not question since man hath found out the language of Hieroglyphicks and the tongue of characters hath been read and if you place constantly severall things in the room of severall letters a dog for A a tooth for B a lion for C and the like a little practise will discover the true meaning But my controversie with Cusanus is What Adam could do suddenly naturally and ordinarily if he heard our mongrell Neoterick languages He is for the affirmative That Adam understood them or could understand them I am for the negative 4. But I must return to Heinsius with whom I will acknowledge that the Orientall languages are of infinite worth most necessarie to be studied exacting as much labour and pains before they be gained as they afford delight and profit spirituall when they are obtained yea I heartily wish that even the learned would not presume to interpret the harder places of Scripture unlesse they be furnished with knowledge in the Eastern tongues much lesse should the ignorant Laicks expound it Those beasts ought not to touch this mountain That I may omit many memorable passages concerning the Old Testament I say that an unusuall splendour from the Syriack hath fully inlightned many places of the New Testament which lay in darknesse View two instances 5. What was the meaning of Anathema Maranatha 1. Cor. 16.22 was long unknown long sought after in vain as being impossible to be found in the Greek or Latine languages how copious soever in the end it was traced to be an Idiotisme of the Syriack and a phrase borrowed from the usance and practise of the Jews for their politie had three sorts of Excommunication The first called Niddui which regularly was a separation for thirty dayes during which time the excommunicated person must keep himself foure cubits aloof from all men and women in all places The Evangelist seemeth to touch at this when he recordeth the Constitution of the Jews that if any confessed Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 extra Synagogam fieret He should be put out of the Synagogue as the last Translation well expounds it Joh. 9.22 The second and heavier degree was called Cherem in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Latine by the Livian phrase Devotorius by the Cesarean Devotus It were easie to mention some who have vowed-away themselves as that resolute young Romane Knight Marcus Curtius see it in Livie lib. 6. and the soldurii from whence in likelihood cometh the name of souldiers in Cesars commentaries conditionally devoted Deciique caput fatale voventes And the Decii vowing their own destruction Also at severall times and places divers others both captives and natives have been dedicated to the infernall deities To which in the spirituall censure of Christian Excommunication there is some allusion where S. Paul delivered Hymeneus and Alexander unto Satan 1. Tim. 1.20 and 1. Cor. 5.5 where he likewise decreed the like sentence against the incestuous Corinthian The third and highest step in this Excommunication is called Anathema Maranatha 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for so some reade it in the Greek also most of the Latine Bibles make it all one word Maranatha others Maranata saith Cornelius à Lapide What it did signifie g Diu doctos Theolegos torsit the learned Divines long and much endeavoured to know and all much laboured to finde the fountain and origination of that Anathema saith Bertram in the Preface on his comparison of the Hebrew and Aramean Grammar Elias in Thisb saith MARA signifieth DOMINUS and so the letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is paragogicall And it may be read DOMINUS VENIT The Lord cometh saith Peter Martyr Likewise for the language Some saith he think it is h Vna dictio Syriaca one Syriack word i Vox Hebraeo-Syriaca Half Hebrew half Syriack as Cornelius à Lapide hath it k Magis Syrum est quà m Hebraeum It is more Syriack then Hebrew saith Hierom Epist 137. ad Marcel l Tametsi ex confinio utrarumque linguarum aliquid Hebraeum sonet Though as he addeth it somewhat sounds like Hebrew by the nearenesse and proximitie of those languages In the perfect Hebrew Marenuatha is Dominus noster venit Our Lord cometh ATHA is used Deut. 33.2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et venit That MAR MARA or MARAN is used for Dominus till after the Babylonish captivitie I reade not What in the Hebrew is MORE in the Chaldee is MAR MAR Dominus MARA or MARIA Domina Some Christians of the East at this day call their Prelates MAR-ABRAHAM MAR-JOSEPH saith Cornelius à Lapide Yea the whole sentence is Chaldaick if ye beleeve the learned Estius at large MARANA-ATHA contracted MARAN-ATHA He also hath a wittie relation That the Jews before Christs coming were wont ordinarily to have this word in their mouths Maran