to run into Extremes There are some that say that Unbelief is the only Sin for which Men shall be condemn'd they shall be condemn'd not for their other Sins but solely for this Mr. Lock on the other hand would persuade us that Men shall not be condemned at all for Unbelief The Sentence says he follows not doing without any mention of not believing He alledges for this St. John 5. 28 29. St. Matth. 7. 22 23. 13. 14 49. 16. 24. 25. 24 c. St. Luke 13. 26. But 1. In many of these Places as St. John 5. 28 29. St. Matth. 13. 41. not 14 as it is in Mr. Lock and 49. St. Matth. 16. 27. not 24. as Mr. Lock there is not the least mention of any Sentence therefore it is manifest that they do not tell us for what Men shall be sentenced 2. Those who are mention'd St. Matth. 7. 22 23. and St. Luke 13. 26 27. were Believers and so could not be sentenc'd for Unbelief I do not say that they believ'd to the saving of their Souls or with a saving Faith a Faith working by Love and bringing forth the Fruits of good Works for the contrary is most manifest they were Workers of Iniquity or Unrighteousness But I say that they were Believers they should say unto Christ Lord Lord yea they were such Believers as not only own'd him for their Lord but also prophesied cast out Devils and did many mighty Works in his Name and therefore if they were not sentenced for Unbelief but only for their Misdeeds it cannot be thought strange 3. Let it be suppos'd that they were Unbelievers all that these Texts say is that Workers of Iniquity shall hear that Sentence I tell you I know you not depart from me And if it may be hence inferr'd that they are to be condemn'd only for working Iniquity then from St. Mark 16. 16. where it is said He that believes not shall be damn'd it may be concluded that he shall be condemn'd only for Unbelief that the Sentence shall follow not believing without any mention of not doing But this Inference Mr. Lock will not allow They are Workers of Iniquity on whom the Sentence is pronounced says Mr. Lock out of St. Matth. 7. 23. They are Unbelievers who shall be condemned say I out of St. Mark 16. 16. And if from St. Mark 16. Mr. Lock will not conclude that Men shall be condemn'd only for Unbelief and not for working Iniquity why does he conclude from St. Matth. 7. that they shall be condemn'd only for working Iniquity and not for Unbelief 4. As to St. Matth. 25. 24 c. which may seem to be more to Mr. Lock 's Purpose than the former for this tells us expresly for what Men shall be sentenced to Punishment which the other do not the Judge shall say to those on his Left Hand Depart from me ye cursed for I was hungry and ye gave me not to eat c. it is enough to say That if because the Sentence of extreme Malediction shall be pronounced upon Men because they did not feed the hungry give drink to the thirsty take in the Strangers cloath the naked visit the sick and imprison'd he can inferr that Men shall be condemn'd only for their not having done these things and not for their Unbelief then certainly because St. John 3. 18. it is said He that believeth not is now condemned because he hath not believ'd in the Name of the only begotten Son of God we may inferr that Men are and shall be condemn'd only for their not believing and not for their not doing If Men shall be condemn'd only for the Sins mention'd St. Matth. 25. then they must be condemn'd only for Sins of Uncharitableness Impenitence is not expresly mention'd in these Places of Scripture produced by Mr. Lock any more than Unbelief Will he say that Men shall not be condemn'd for their Impenitence The Truth is that he may with as much Reason say That as say that the Sentence shall not be pronounced on them for their Infidelity Why should Mr. Lock think it strange that Men should be condemn'd for not paying Obedience to the Command of Christ who hath commanded all Men every where to believe and repent Unbelief is a Sin which is the Cause of all our other Sins which would be prevented if we did unfeignedly and with a lively Faith believe the Gospel It is also that which as it were binds and fastens the Guilt of our other Sins upon us they will not be forgiven unless we believe and repent And yet according to Mr. Lock Men shall be condemn'd for their other Sins and not for this I have perhaps dwelt too long upon this yet I think it not amiss to give a brief Account why I render St. John 3. 18. He that believeth not is now condemn'd whereas in our Translation it is He that believeth not is condemn'd already The Words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is now condemned or is now judged as most worthy of Condemnation Now that God hath express'd such wonderful Love to the World by sending his only begotten Son into it not to condemn it but that by him the World might be saved see v. 16 17. and now that he is come into the World and hath wrought such Miracles he that believes not must be most justly worthy of Condemnation because he believes not in the Name of the only begotten Son of God being given that every one that believes in him should not perish but have everlasting Life Now that Light is come into the World if Men will not believe in the Light every one will judge that they are justly worthy of Condemnation as our Saviour says in the very next Words v. 19. This is the Condemnation i. e. that which chiefly deserves Condemnation that Light hath come into the World and Men have loved Darkness more than the Light If this Rendring and Exposition of the Words be receiv'd Commentators will not need to trouble themselves so much as they have done with enquiring in what Sense the Unbeliever is said to be already condemn'd since this which I offer is a plain and easie Interpretation He that believes not is now condemn'd now after the Son of God's being actually come into the World after Miracles wrought and the Gospel preach'd by him because he believes not in the Name of the only begotten Son of God This Text then plainly shews the Danger and Desert of not believing and therefore it concerns us to beware lest as the Israelites of whom the Apostle speaks Heb. 4. did not enter into the promised Land by reason of Unbelief v. 6. so we be excluded the Heavenly Canaan for our Unbelief v. 11 CHAP. XXIV Of Repentance Baptism and Remission of Sins REpentance is as absolute a Condition of the Covenant of Grace as Faith and as necessary to be perform'd as that This was not only the Beginning of our Saviour's preaching but the Summ of all
concerning them for there is no Verb for this Nominative Case Men ignorant of Words c. But I suppose that it is to be supply'd out of that which follows so that his Meaning is this When it shall be made out that Men ignorant of Words or untaught by the Laws and Customs of their Country and all Men whatsoever do actually know and allow that it is part of the Worship of God not to kill a Man not to know more Women than one not to procure Abortion not to expose their Children not to take from another what is his tho' we want it our selves but on the contrary relieve and supply his Wants and whenever we have done the contrary we ought to repent be sorry and resolve to do so no more When I say all Men shall be prov'd actually to know and allow all these and a thousand other such Rules all which come under these two general Words Vertues and Sins there will be more Reason for admitting these and the like for common Notions and practical Principles Thus Mr. Lock who seems to deal very hardly with the Lord Herbert's third and fourth Propositions in that he will not admit them to be common Notions or as much as practical Principles until it be prov'd that all Men in the World even those that are ignorant of Words and untaught by the Laws and Customs of their Country do actually know and also allow of all these and a thousand other such Rules Methinks if all Men did actually know these and but half a thousand other such Truths we might see very great Reason for admitting those two Propositions to be of great use for directing our Practice and consequently to have a good Title to be accounted practical Rules or Principles St. Paul Rom. 1. instanceth in many things which the Gentiles actually knew to be ill Actions that will draw on Punishment upon the Doers and consequently according to Mr. Lock Sins for having enumerated them from v. 24. to v. 32. he says v. 32. that they knew that those who do such things are worthy of Death Now must not every one confess that the Lord Herbert's fourth Proposition That Men must repent if they would have those Sins forgiven and escape the Punishment due for them would have been of very great use to them Yea if Men have but Means to know that many things are Vertues or Vices the two fore-mention'd Propositions must not be deny'd to be practical Principles and such as might be very useful in Humane Life because through their own Default many do not actually know that they are Vertues or Vices The Lord Herbert makes that golden Rule St. Matth. 7. 12. Whatsoever things ye would that Men should do unto you do ye so to them to be a common Notion writ in the Hearts of Men and would they but call it frequently to mind and apply it to particular Actions by the Light of this they might know whether they have the Nature of Sin or no. The Application of this Rule to particular Actions would help us to the Knowledge of a great part of our Duty toward our Neighbour and therefore our Saviour says that this is the Law and the Prophets All my Duty toward my Neighbour depends upon it the whole Law concerning that is fulfill'd in it it is the Foundation of all Justice and Charity to Men. Hence it was that the Emperour Severus Alexander having heard this Sentence from the Jews or Christians we may rather think Christians caus'd it to be proclaim'd by the Cryer and to be writ on the Palace and on Publick Works see Jul. Capitolinus in Alexandro Severo To conclude then according to the Lord Herbert as that Proposition They must repent of their Sins if they would have God aton'd to them is writ upon the Hearts of Men so also is this Sentence All things whatsoever ye would that Men should do to you do ye likewise to them By which if they be not wanting to themselves they may know in a great measure what particular Actions are Sins and what they ought to do so that if that Proposition be not useful and instructive to them it is their own Fault Mr. Lock having said that when all Men shall be prov'd actually to know and allow all these and a thousand other such Rules there will be more Reason for admitting these for common Notions lest this Concession should be too liberal adds Yet after all universal Consent were there any in Moral Principles to Truths the Knowledge whereof might be attain'd otherwise would scarce prove them to be innate which is all I contend for Thus Mr. Lock But I do not well understand the meaning of the last words which is all that I contend for Doth which relate to that which is here express'd viz. that universal Consent to Truths the Knowledge whereof might be attain'd otherwise will scarce prove them to be innate so that this is all that he contends for Or doth it refer to something not express'd Mr. Lock having a Privilege to use Words otherwise than ordinary Persons are allow'd to do To this latter I incline that it is his meaning that he contends for no more than this that the Lord Herbert's Propositions are not innate tho' this is not express'd But let the one or the other be his meaning unless we were certain that by his Notitiae communes or Catholick Truths written in the Minds of Men the Lord Herbert meant the same that Mr. Lock doth by his innate Principles we cannot say that that honourable Person is at all concern'd or that Mr. Lock 's Conclusion doth contradict any thing that he hath deliver'd Thus I have consider'd all that Mr. Lock hath said in these five Sections wherein he hath to do with the Lord Herbert And now must it not seem strange that he should take upon him to examine what is written by a Person so eminent for his Parts as well as his Quality and after all have so little to say against him He only toucheth very slightly upon three of his Propositions or Notitiae communes viz. the first second and fifth and as to the third and fourth he had done better if he had pass'd them by as slightly unless he had said something more to the purpose Yea he is so far from confuting that he comes very far up toward the confirming all that the honourable Person design'd For he says plainly § 15. that all the five Propositions are such Truths as if rightly explain'd a rational Creature can hardly avoid giving his Assent to Now of such things as so soon as they are alledged all Men acknowledge them to be true or good they require no Proof or farther Discourse to be assured of the Truth or Goodness of them we need not fear to say that they seem to have a good Title to be receiv'd for common Notions or Catholick Truths written in the Hearts of Men which is all that the Lord Herbert contends
after thirty Reasonah of Christian. p. 300. The Epistles resolving Doubts and reforming Mistakes are of great Advantage to our Knowledge and Practice I do not deny but the great Doctrines of the Christian Faith are drop'd here and there and scatter'd up and down in most of them But 't is not in the Epistles we are to learn what are the Fundamental Articles of Faith where they are promiscuously and without distinction mixed with other Truths We shall find and discern those great and necessary Points best in the Preaching of our Saviour and the Apostles to those who were yet Strangers and ignorant of the Faith to bring them in and convert them to it Ibid. p. 298. Many Doctrines proving and explaining and giving a farther light into the Gospel are published in the Epistles to the Corinthians and Thessalonians These are all of Divine Authority and none of them may be disbeliev'd by any one who is a Christian. Second Vindicat of Reason of Christian. p. 319. Generally and in necessary Points the Scriptures are to be understood in the plain direct meaning of the Words and Phrases such as they may be suppos'd to have had in the mouths of the Speakers Reasonab -of Christian. p. 2. He that will read the Epistles as he ought must observe what 't is in them is principally aim'd at find what is the Argument in hand and how managed he must look into the drift of the Discourse observe the Coherence and Connexion of the Parts and see how it is consistent with it self and other parts of Scripture The observing of this will best help us to the true meaning and mind of the Writer Ibid. p. 294. The Scripture gives light to its own meaning by one place compar'd with another Vindicat. of Reasonab of Christian. p. 22. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS How happy would it be if Mr. Lock and I and all of us could presently condemn and quit any Opinion of ours so soon as it is shew'd that it is contrary to any part of Scripture I do not know any one that affirms that all or most of the Truths contain'd in the Epistles are Fundamental Articles so necessary that without an explicit Belief of them none can be a Member of Christ's Church here or admitted into his eternal Kingdom hereafter Mr. Lock without any necessity takes upon him to determine a Chronological Question and is very positive in his Determination Most of the Epistles says he were not written till above twenty years after our Saviour's Ascension and some after thirty But there are who refer our Lord's Ascension to his thirty third Year and the Date of the First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians to An. Dom. 53 that of the First to the Thessalonians to An. Dom. 49 making the Second to the Thessalonians to have been writ shortly after it the Date of S. Peter's First Epistle to An. Dom. 44 as there are who refer that of the First Epistle to the Corinthians and of both the Epistles to the Thessalonians to An. Dom. 50 so that according to them here are five Epistles of which it cannot be said that they were not written till above twenty years after our Saviour's Ascension If Mr. Lock say Suppose it were so that these five were not written above twenty years after the Ascension it is true still that most of the Epistles were not written till above twenty years after it I reply That a Person that is so positive should not barely say it but also prove it How knows he that there are not some other Epistles which were not written after twenty years after Christ's Ascension As to that which he adds That some were written after thirty years from our Saviour's Ascension it may be observ'd that he is so prudent as not to let us know what Epistles they are And farther the Martyrdom of S. Peter S. Paul and S. James is supposed by some not to have been after thirty years from our Lord's Ascension and their Epistles were certainly all writ before their Martyrdom and therefore it is impossible that their Epistles should be writ later then the thirtieth year after Christ's Ascension it being suppos'd that that their Martyrdom was not later then that year According to Jos. Scaliger the Martyrdom of the two great Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul was exactly thirty years after the Lord's Assension according to Syncellus nine and twenty according to Lydiat eight and twenty and S. James's Martyrdom according to all of them preceeded theirs so that if we follow the account of these three great Masters in Chronology the Epistle of S. James the two Epistles of S. Peter and those of S. Paul could not be writ after the thirtieth year from Christ's Ascension There remain the Epistles of S. John and S. Jude and how will Mr. Lock prove that those were writ after thirty years from our Saviour's Ascension One that spent much time and pains in the Study of the Chronology of the Old and New Testament says That among all the Apostolick Epistles there is none about whose time of writing we are so far to seek as about those of S. John If Mr. Lock say That there are who give other Accounts of the time of the writing the First Epistle of S. Peter and of those to the Corinthians and Thessalonians as also of the time of S. Peter's suffering and S. Paul's different from those that are given here of them I grant it but what can be inferr'd from this Disagreement of Expositors or Chronographers but the Uncertainty of the time of the Date of the Epistles which should caution Men not to be so positive in such things as too many are Many of the things which Mr. Lock saith of the Epistles may be apply'd also to the Gospels For instance All or most of the Truths contained in the Gospels are not to be look'd on as Fundamental Articles so necessary that without an explicit belief of them none can be admitted into Christ's Church here or his eternal Kingdom hereafter Also Fundamental Articles are promiscuously and without distinction mixed with other Truths in the Gospels So he that will read the Gospels as he ought must observe what 't is in them that is principally aim'd at find what is the Argument in hand and how managed must look into the drift of the Discourse observe the Coherence and Connexion of the Parts and see how it is consistent with it self and other parts of Scripture Finally There are some Fundamental Articles that are distinguish'd from other Truths in the Epistles As in Rom. 10. 9. If thou confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe with thy heart that God rais'd him from the dead thou shalt be saved So 1 Tim. 1. 15. It is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation that Christ Jesus came into the World to save Sinners And so Heb. 11. 6. He that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of them
that diligently seek him CHAP. XIV Of the Preaching of Christ as also the Commission he gave to his Apostles and the LXX Disciples and their Preaching THE Religion our Saviour and his Apostles proposed consisted in that short plain easie and intelligible Summary which I set down in my Reasonab of Christian. in these words Believing Jesus to be the Saviour promised and taking him now raised from the Dead and constituted the Lord and Judge of Men to be their King and Ruler Mr. Lock Vindicat. of the Reasonab of Christian. p. 28. As to our Saviour and his Apostles the whole aim of all their Preaching every where was to convince the unbelieving World of these two great Truths First That there was one eternal invisible God Maker of Heaven and Earth and next That Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah the promised King and Saviour Second Vindicat. of the Reason of Christian. p. 237. Our Saviour preach'd every where the Kingdom of God and by his Miracles declar'd himself to be the King of that Kingdom The Apostles preach'd the same and after his Ascension openly avow'd him to be the Prince and Saviour promised Ibid. p. 252. By these and the like places we may be satisfied what it was that the Apostles taught and preach'd even this one Proposition That Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 282. This one Doctrine That Jesus was the Messiah was that which was propos'd in our Saviour's time to be believ'd as necessary to make a Man a Christian The same Doctrine was likewise what was propos'd afterward in the preaching of the Apostles to Unbelievers to make them Christians Ibid. p. 318. There is yet one Consideration remaining which were sufficient of it self to convince us that it was the sole Article of Faith which was preach'd and that is the Commissions of those that were sent to preach the Gospel Our Saviour's Commission or End of his being sent and the Execution of it both terminated in this That he declar'd the good News that the Kingdom of the Messiah was come and gave them to understand by the Miracles he did that he himself was he So the Commission that he gave the Apostles was that they should acquaint their Hearers that the Kingdom of the Messiah was come and let them know by the Miracles they did in his Name that he was that King and Deliverer they expected And his Commission to the Seventy whom he sent to preach was so exactly conformable to that which he had before given to the Twelve Apostles that there needs but this one thing more to be observed to convince any one that they were sent to convert their Hearers to this sole Belief that the Kingdom of the Messiah was come and that Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 289 290 296 299. Accordingly the preaching of the Apostles every where in the Acts tended to this one Point to prove that Jesus was the Messiah Reasonab of Christian. p. 31. What that Word was through which others should believe on Christ S. Joh. 17. 20. we have seen in the preaching of the Apostles all through the History of the Acts viz. this one great Point that Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 186. OBSERVATIONS It is strange that Mr. Lock should say in so many places without any Restriction or Limitation that this that Jesus is the Messiah is the sole Doctrine that one Point or Article which was preach'd when he himself otherwhere puts so many Restrictions and Limitations upon it As 1. When in his Reasonab of Christian. p. 195. he says This was the only Gospel-Article of Faith which was preach'd to them He doth not say The only Article of Faith but the only Gospel-Article He grants that the Apostles preach'd the Article of one true eternal and invisible God Maker of Heaven and Earth see Reasonab of Christian p. 43 44. but he doth not call this a Gospel-Article 2. When he says that it was the only Article necessary to be believ'd to make a Man a Christian the sole Doctrine upon their assent to which or Disbelief of it Men were pronounced Believers or Unbelievers and accordingly receiv'd into the Church of Christ. Ibid. p. 195. 3. He limits to the Preaching of our Saviour and his Apostles to those who were yet Strangers and ignorant of the Faith to bring them in and convert them to it Ibid. p. 298. See also p. 295. and 297. It is strange also that he should contend so much that this was the only Article of Faith that was preach'd when he acknowledges that several other Articles were preach'd Indeed now after his Death his Resurrection was also commonly required to be believ'd as a necessary Article So Mr. Lock Ibid. p. 31. Their great business was to be Witnesses to Jesus of his Life Death Resurrection and Ascension which put together were undeniable Proofs of his being the Messiah So the same Mr. Lock Ibid. p. 188. speaking of the Apostles who certainly did not fail to execute their great Business which was to preach or bear witness to the Articles of Christ's Life Death Resurrection and Ascension and not only that of his being the Messiah In the next Page viz. 190. he hath these words We see what it was that was to be preach'd to all Nations viz. That he was the Messiah that had suffer'd and rose from the Dead the third day and fulfill'd all things that was written in the Old Testament concerning the Messiah and that those that believ'd this and repented should have remission of Sins through this Faith in him And p. 191. he tells us that S. Paul preached that Jesus was the Messiah the King who being risen from the Dead now reigneth and shall more publickly manifest his Kingdom in judging the World at the last day Surely nothing can be more plain than that by Mr. Lock 's own Acknowledgment the Apostles preach'd the Articles of our dear Lord's Suffering Rising the third Day fulfilling all the Prophecies of the Old Testament concerning him now reigning and future coming to judge the World and that those who truly believe and repent shall receive remission of Sins through Faith in him and not one Article only And therefore he very fitly calls them concomitant Articles since the Apostles in their preaching often join'd them with that Article that Jesus is the Messiah The belief of Jesus of Nazareth reth to be the Messiah together with those concomitant Articles of his Resurrection Rule and coming again to judge the World c. Thus Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 293 294. To reconcile these Acknowledgments with his Doctrine of one Article he tryeth many ways but all in vain 1. As to the Article of the Resurrection he would persuade us that the Article of Jesus's being the Messiah and it are but one These two important Articles are inseparable and in effect make but one For believe one and you believe both deny one of them and you can believe neither So Mr. Lock in his
future State of Bliss or Misery and see there God the righteous Judge ready to render to every one according to his Deeds to them that by patient Continuance in well-doing seek for Glory and Honour and Immortality eternal Life but to every Soul that doth evil Indignation and Wrath Tribulation and Anguish To him I say who hath a Prospect of the different State of perfect Happiness or Misery that attends all Men after this Life depending on their Behaviour here the measures of Good and Evil that govern his Choice are mightily changed Ibid. § 60. Our Saviour requires the Obedience of his Disciples to several of the Commands of the Moral Law he afresh lays upon them with the Enforcement of unspeakable Rewards and Punishments in another World according to their Obedience or Disobedience Reasonab of Christian. p. 234. The Son of God would in vain have come into the World to lay the Foundation of a Kingdom and gather together a select People out of the World if they being found guilty at their Appearance before the Judgment-Seat of the righteous Judge of all Men at the last Day instead of Entrance into eternal Life in the Kingdom he had prepared for them they should receive Death the just Reward of Sin which every one of them was guilty of This second Death would have left him no Subjects Ibid. p. 211. Open Mens Eyes upon the endless unspeakable Joys of another Life and their Hearts will find something solid and powerful to move them to live well here The View of Heaven and Hell will cast a Slight upon the short Pleasures and Pains of this present State and give Attractions and Encouragements to Vertue which Reason and Interest and the Care of our selves cannot but allow Ibid. p. 291 292. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS As to the Article of the Resurrection the first Enquiry must be Whether there are to be found any such express Words in the Scripture as that the Body shall rise or be raised or the Resurrection of the Body where the general Resurrection is spoken of If when Mr. Lock denies that such express Words are found in the Scripture see his Third Letter p. 210. his Meaning be that those very express Words are not found I grant that they are not but if he mean farther that express Words which signifie the very same thing are not to be found the contrary will easily appear In Rom. 8. 23. there are these express Words the Redemption of our Body and Mr. Lock in Reasonab of Christian. p. 206. tells us that thereby is plainly meant the Change of these frail mortal Bodies into the spiritual immortal Bodies at the Resurrection when this Mortal shall have put on Immortality In the same Chapter v. 11. we find these express Words Quicken your mortal Bodies He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal Bodies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall make them to live restore them to Life after Death as he restor'd the crucified Body of Christ to Life so that to quicken our mortal Bodies is the same with raising them And Mr. Lock in his Third Letter p. 199. saying that in the New Testament it is said Raise the Dead Quicken or make alive the Dead the Resurrection of the Dead clearly makes to Quicken and to Raise to signifie the same And St. Chrysostom not to mention Occumenius and Theophylact who follow him gives a Reason why St. Paul says Quicken or give Life to our mortal Bodies rather than raise them viz. Because he here speaks only of those who should be raised to Life i. e. a blissful or happy Life viz. the Faithful who have the Spirit of God dwelling in them not of the Wicked who shall also be rais'd but says he unto Punishment not unto Life There is a third Text which hath so near a Resemblance to these that it may well be join'd with them viz. Phil. 3. 21. Who shall change our vile Body that it may be conformed to his glorious Body When shall the Saviour the Lord Christ effect this wonderful Change that our vile Body shall be made conformable to his glorious Body Surely then when he shall quicken or raise it and that will be when he comes from Heaven to judge the World see v. 20. Here is not indeed the Word Raise but it is plainly imply'd The Blessed Jesus when he comes from Heaven will raise our vile Body and make it conform'd to his own glorious Body Will Mr. Lock say that the general Resurrection is not spoken of in these Places He cannot say it of the first viz. Rom. 8. 23. without retracting his own express Words in Reasonab of Christian. p. 206. He cannot say it of the third viz. Philip. 3. 21. because the immediately foregoing Verse points us to the Time of Christ's coming from Heaven to judge the World He may perhaps say it of the second viz. Rom. 8. 11. because some before him have said that the general Resurrection is not spoken of in that Text particularly Calvin and Piscator Calvin in loc hath these Words Mortalia corpora vocat quicquid adhuc restat in nob is morti obnoxium ut mos illi usit at us est crassioram nostri partem hoc nomine appellare Unde colligimus non de ultima resurrectione quae momento fiet haberi sermonem sed de continua Spiritus operatione quae reliquias carnis paulatim mortificans caelestem vitam in nobis instaurat He tells us that by mortal Bodies is understood whatsoever remains still in us obnoxious to Death which we may grant him for our Souls are not obnoxious to Death and therefore our mortal Bodies contain all that remains in us liable to Death He tells us also that it is the Apostle's usual manner to call the grosser part of us by that Name i. e. by the Name of Body and we may likewise grant him this for every one grants that the Body is the grosser part of us But now what would he gather from this Whence says he we collect that the last Resurrection is not spoken of His Argument put into Form is this The Apostle by mortal Bodies understands whatsoever remains still in us obnoxious to Death therefore the last Resurrection is not spoken of Mr. Lock may try if he pleases whether he can find out any thing to tie this Antecedent and Consequent together but I can pronounce that it will not be very easie for him to do it Piscater's Words are these Quum certum sit Apostolum hic non lequi de resurrectione corporum sed animarum Tho' our own Eyes tell us that the Apostle uses the word Bodies not Souls yet if we will believe Piscator it is certain that here he speaks not of the Resurrection of Bodies but of Souls And how is it certain Mr. Calvin hath said it that is all the Assurance that I know of He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal Bodies these
says he the Gentiles not having the Law do by Nature the things of the Law these not having the Law are a Law to themselves who shew the Work of the Law written in their Hearts their Conscience bearing witness and their Thoughts accusing or excusing one another By the Work of the Law here may be understood either 1. That Work which the Law prescribes or the Duties that are required by it or 2. The Effect of the Law or that which it effecteth i. e. the Knowledge of our Duty or of that which we ought to do as also of the contrary i. e. of that which we ought not to do as the Apostle says expresly Rom. 3. 20. By the Law is the Knowledge of Sin or 3. By the Work of the Law we may understand as Origen Theodoret and several others seem to do the Law it self i. e. not the Letters and Syllables of the Law but the Sentence Summ and Substance of it Which soever of these Expositions we follow the Sense is in effect the same so that when St. Paul says that the Gentiles had the Work of the Law written in their Hearts his Meaning is that they had the Sentence and Substance of the Law or many of the Duties prescribed by it and the Knowledge of them ingraven or imprinted in their Hearts And is it not as clear from hence as any thing possibly can be that they had some Principles or Communes notitiae written in their Hearts And therefore if the Lord Herber only say that there are some common Principles or Catholick Truths written in the Hearts or Minds of Men he says no more than the Apostle doth and Mr. Lock from the Apostle's saying that the Work of the Law was written in the Hearts of the Gentiles may infer that he held innate Principles with as good Reason as he doth from the Lord Herbert's affirming some Truths to be written in the Hearts or Minds of Men that he held such Principles And the Truth is there have not wanted some Prudent and Learned Persons who have expounded these Words of the Apostle of innate Notices or Principles Quod inquit Paulus Opus scriptum in cordibus significat has notitias naturales dona esse attributa naturae nobiscum nascentia they are the Words of Melancthon in loc Mr. Lock having transcrib'd five of the Lord Herbert's Notitiae Communes adds These tho' I allow them to be clear Truths and such as if rightly explain'd a rational Creature can hardly avoid giving Assent to yet I think he is far from proving them innate Impressions in foro interiori descriptae Where I shall not stand to ask Mr. Lock what answers to the Word These but I must desire the Reader to bear in Mind that he allows all the five Notitiae Communes to be clear Truths and such as if rightly explain'd a rational Creature can hardly avoid giving his Assent to For this intimates that there is something of them written in the Heart which is the Reason why we can hardly avoid assenting to them so soon as they are propos'd to us and we understand the Terms of them To that which he says farther that he thinks that the Lord Herbert is far from proving them innate Impressions I briefly answer that as Mr. Lock hath not shewn so I have not found that the Lord Herbert any where uses the Phrase Innate Impressions It is true that he says that his Catholick Verities are in foro interiori descriptae and if it be said that Mr. Lock thinks that he is far from proving them to be so I reply that it will best appear whether he be far from proving it or no by examining the Reasons of Mr. Lock 's thinking so which we may expect to find if any where in the following Sections Ad § 16. Here Mr. Lock observes that the Five Propositions set down by the Lord Herbert are either not all or more than all the common Notions writ on our Minds by the Finger of God if it were reasonable to believe any at all to be so written To which I answer If Mr. Lock could prove that the five Propositions mention'd by the Lord Herbert are more than all those common Notions writ in our Minds by the Finger of God it would follow that some of them are not such Notions and that would make directly against the Lord Herbert But Mr. Lock hath not proved this and if he had it would not be for his Advantage unless he could prove farther that none of them are such Notions for his known Tenet is that there are no Notions or Principles at all that are so written in Mens Hearts On the other hand if Mr. Lock can prove that these Five are not all those common Notions writ in our Minds by the Finger of God this makes not at all against the Lord Herbert who never said or thought that they were all as Mr. Lock might have seen if he had given himself leisure seriously and deliberately to peruse his Treatise de Veritate He would have found that he very frequently names other common Notions and particularly he takes notice that there are many Notitiae Communes in Mathematicks which they call Postulata p. 181. Edit 1633. and speaks of tota notitiarum communium series p. 206. He would also have found that where the Lord Herbert sets down those five Propositions he is not speaking of common Notions in general but of those only which concern Religion Notitiae communes circa Religionem is the Title Yea in setting down those five he did not design to give us all the common Notions that concern Religion He himself plainly tells us this Notitias communes solenniores circa Religionem praemittendas curavi says he p. 207. he did not take care to premise all the common Notions that concern Religion but only the Solenniores Yea p. 227. he makes all the Ten Commandments to be Notitiae communes Mr. Lock says that this Do as thou wouldest be done unto and perhaps some hundreds of others may as justly pretend to be Notitiae communes as at least some of those five To which I answer 1. The Lord Herbert never design'd to exclude Do as thou wouldest be done unto from being Notitia communis for he more than once mentions it as such viz. p. 54 and 57 and 106. 2. When Mr. Lock says Perhaps some hundreds of others tho' possibly he intended it only as a Rhetorical Flight yet I question whether the Lord Herbert would have deny'd that there are hundreds of Notitiae communes However I think it is plain that there is nothing in this Section that makes against that honourable Person and if Mr. Lock had carefully read his Treatise de Veritate I believe he would have wholly omitted it Ad § 17. This Section begins thus All his i. e. the Lord Herbert's Marks are not to be found in each of his five Propositions viz. his first second and third Marks agree perfectly to neither of