affirmable of every thing But the being of God is not so For wee say the body or soule of a Man or an Angell is being yet not God Therefore the being of God is not a being may be distinguished from other beings it will seeme not to be a simple but a compound being I answer that the proposition being without addition is affirmable of every thing is true of that common predicate or transcendent being onely of which I speake Introd logic sect 3. n. 2. 3. But the being of God is that one proper and pure being which belongs to him alone and receives no addition nor is affirmable of any other thing beside himselfe Secondly I answer that the conclusion of this syllogisme the being of God is not without additition being granted takes not away the former conclusion that his being is simple and pure Neither is the consequence rightly gahtered thereon that if Addition be made it is not then a simple being For these additions bring in no such beings as to make the being of God either compound or mixt but only distinguishable from other beings For to say the being of God is one is pure is simple is incommunicable are here onely negation differences as one therefore it cannot belong to any beside himselfe Pare that is not mixt Simple that is not compounded Incommunicable whereof none can be partaker beside himselfe Nay those very positive additions of Goodnesse eternity infinity power wisdome c. are not additions of new beings but onely essential conditions of the same most simple being distinguished by us in our understanding For because our understanding receives nothing but by the sences from the creatures Therefore when it findes these severall perfections in the creature and acknowledges that no perfection can be in the effect which is not more eminently and excellently in the cause thereof it is compelled as it received these perfections in the creature with differences so also to referre them unto the Creator So this difference or plurality of attributes in God growes first in regard of the weakenesse of our understanding and secondly by that superexcellency of the divine nature whereby the understanding is so farre exceeded Therefore although our understanding bee no way able to compare all these severall perfections of goodnesse power wisdome c. together and then to conceive them as one but onely in one yet our undertakings how ever wandring or unable to conceive them as one infinite being can no way make any difference or othernesse in them or put any thing to the purity and simplicity thereof but must acknowledge the more pure the being is the more powerfull and therefore by one only action of that simplicity and one manner of working doth it bring forth most different and manifold effects both of the object and in the object or matier whereon it workes 2. Secondly it may be objected that the simplicity is more where there is no distinction than where there is But in the Godhead there is distinction of persons Therefore it may seeme his being is not most simple I answer That the distinction is not made in the nature or being of the Godhead which thing only takes away simplicity but only in the reall relations in which the being is still one and the same in all And although the relations be truly and really distinct yet that reall distinction or distinct realitie is but only relative and not bringing in any other being than is in the Godhead understood without these relations but only imports the order or manner of being 3. Thirdly it may bee objected that every thing that is must participate of being that it may bee and of some other thing that it may be something or a being in itselfe distinct from other beings So God by his being is and by his greatnesse and power He is infinite and almighty Therefore it may seeme his being is not simple I say the proposition is true onely in things that are by participation But God is absolutely of himselfe not by participation and that absolute and simple being of His is of it selfe essentially infinite and almighty and not by participation as was shewed chap. 8. ante in the answer to the first objection CHAP. X. That God is altogether as infinite in working as he is in Being A Most necessary truth and needing sufficient proofe not onely for the cleering of that which hath beene spoken but especially for laying the sure ground-worke of that which is to follow concerning the Trinity Therefore lend me the eare of your understanding that we may goe together in a matter of such weight And although the word worke in our common English in which I desire to speake is growne to meane almost onely bodily toyle yet you know there is the working of the minde also and according to the things spoken of you are bound either in your wit or honesty ever to be as gentle as you can in the meaning of words and to take them according to their greatest fitnesse But first you will say it ought to appeare that God doth worke For as Epicurus thought He neither troubles himselfe with any care or businesse of his owne neither yet is troublous to any other or mindes what they doe or say For if so then as he supposed He cannot in any wise be happy that hath so many things to thinke of But against this thicke-skin lazy opinion of Epicurus it shall appeare that this working or Action of God is his endlesse glory But you must understand that this worke whereof I speake is not meant of that whereby the dignities of God are manifested without in the creature but of that which is in himselfe alone And that he doth worke is most plaine 1. For as an infinite action cannot be without an infinite power so an infinite resting cannot bee but either with an infinite unablenesse or want of skill or infinite unwillingnesse to worke but an infinite unablenesse cannot stand with an infinite power nor want of skill with infinite wisdome nor unwillingnesse with infinite will And it was proved before that the power wisdome and will of God are infinite therefore he worketh also infinitelie but if the resting be not infinite but supposed to be slacknesse onlie or by turnes because of wearinesse that cannot stand with an infinite power nor with the simplicitie of the divine being for wearinesse cannot befall but to such a being onely as hath heavinesse of parts but in God is neither heavinesse nor parts And so He workes and that infinitely 2. God is infinite and so evermore as great as be may be and that not in being only but also in working for otherwise greaternesse and lesnesse should be in him And because nothing can be in him beside His very being if the infinitie of greatnesse were in his being and a lesnesse in his working greaternesse and lesnesse should bee his very being so finite and infinite perfection and want good
God doth bring forth eternally his Sonne Re. 4. The truth of this conclusion hath beene diversly gainsaid For some have utterly denyed the Trinitie of Persons in the Unitie of the Godhead others with this truth have blended their owne devices The hereticks which held that as there was but one being in the Deitie so there was but one Person called by divers names of the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost were of divers families according to the names of the speciall maintainers of this opinion but best knowne by the name of Sabellius one of the most subtile defenders thereof about the yeere 260. which heresie after a long sleepe was againe awaked about the yeere 1110 by one Porretanus who affirmed that the Persons in the Godhead differ not save onely in the apprehensions of our minde not by any reall or true distinction The Iewes likewise among other reasons doe therefore disclaime the Christian Religion because they suppose that by the Trinitie of Persons is taught a pluralitie of Gods contrarie to that which is Deut. 6.4 The Lord our God is one Lord. The Turkes also denie the Trinitie of Persons and hold it therefore impossible for God to have a Sonne because he never had a wife Now of those that held a Trinitie Simon that witch of whom you reade Actes 8. when the gall of his bitternesse had levened him thorowour gave out of himselfe that he in the person of the Father gave the Law to Moses in the dayes of Tiberius suffered in shew under the Person of the Sonne and afterward came downe on the Apostles in fierie tongues August de Haeres Cap. 1. Hierarcha also from the words of the Nicen Creed that Christ was light of light affirmed that the three Persons were as three lights of which one tooke light of another and so he made the beings of the persons separate and apart whereas the Fathers in that Councell meant not any division or being apart but that the Sonne is of the substance of the Father without any lessening or abatement of the Fathers being as one light takes light of another without any losse of light in the former The Metangismonites so called from their opinion taken from vessels that they might avoid the opinion of the separate being of the Persons held that they were as vessels contained one within another falselie supposing with the Anthropomorphites or Man-shapers that God was bodily and so conteined within a certaine space and againe misunderstanding that text of Scripture Iohn 14.11 where our Lord saith I am in the Father so that in the Divine nature they supposed some thing greater which was the Father and something lesse which was the Sonne and a third thing within them both which was the Holy Ghost But against that bodily being which they conceived you have reasons sufficient in the 9. Chapter The text of S. Iohn makes the matter more plaine for as it is impossible that two bodies should bee each one within another except by way of commixation so it quite overthrowes that foolish opinion because it is thrice there added that the Father is in the Sonne so that of necessitie there can bee but one being of them both For if the being of God be not most simple and pure as was shewed before Chap. 9. And if every being answers to the Originall then the essence of the Sonne must be most pure as the Father is so that if each of the Persons be in the other there can be no difference but onely in the manner of being onely See August de Civit. Dei lib. 11. Cap. 10. Then concerning that third falshood which they supposed of a greater and lesser being it cannot possiblie stand with the nature of infinitie whether it be understood of extension or of vertue onely The Triformians likewise to crosse the errour of Sabellius affirmed three Persons and that the whole and entyre being of the Godhead was in all the three taken together yet not in every person wholly but so as one part of it was in the Father another part in the Sonne and a third part in the Holy Ghost By which falshood it would follow that the Godhead were in it selfe a divideable being and so a compound contrary to that which is concluded Chap. 9. The Tritheites are yet more mad then the former that it may appeare how boundlesse errour is They make the being of God not one and the sam as the Triformians did but affirme that there is a threefold nature and distinguish the Persons in their essence or absolute being in place also and other differences of particular substances as Peter James and Iohn and so make three Gods different and apart each from other The Tetratheites would seeme more subtile then all that had beene before them for they beside the three Persons of the Godhead supposed a fourth being which did communicate it selfe to all the three by which communication of divine nature everie one of those three became God By which sottish opinion it must follow that none of those three Persons could be either infinite or eternall if they receive their being from another if they be God by grace onely and communication of another being than their owne neither can their being be simple and one having one being of themselves and another imparted unto them But if that being which they call that fourth common being be that one most simple pure and eternall being which wee confesse to be God then it must follow necessarilie that in that being there bee three Persons as hath been declared in the Chapter before in every one of which the whole Godhead is all in all and all in everie one not by communication from another nor by participation onely but by the whole and proper possession of every Person essentially so that the Godhead is no other being than that which is in the three persons nor the three Persons any other thing than that manner of being which is in the Godhead eternally but they prove it thus Where are one and three trulie and really different there must needs bee foure But in the Deitie there is one being and three Persons really distinguished therefore foure severall beings I answer Where is one and three absolute beings there must needs be foure but in the Godhead there is one absolute being and three manners of being which are the Persons but the manner of being doth not make a number different from the being as Isaac is one absolute being in himselfe yet Jsaac the sonne of Abraham is not a second nor Isaac the father of Iacob a third So the follie of this opinion and the weaknesse of their reasons appearing it remaines for the better understanding of this most high mysterie first that answer bee given to those arguments which Sabellius brought for his opinion secondly that the reasons which are brought of the Tritheits be discussed But that no errour or mistaking may grow concerning the faith in the truth
equall to God yet as man had beene made in his likenesse and lost it so would hee bee made in the likenesse of man and to restore that first image unto man became obedient unto death even the death of the crosse Phil. 2.6.7.8 O Holy and most blessed teacher of our most glorious faith what high doctrine what holy mysteries what pretious promises doth the Christian faith containe That which is infinite dwels in in that which is finite the circumference in the centre The greatest of beings and the least are one Two births eternall and temporary and but one Sonne And because the essentiall proprieties of both natures doe still remaine he that is the Father of eternity is become a childe Esay 9.6 And hee that is the wisdome of the Father increases in knowledge Luk. 2.52 hee that no place can containe doth grow in stature and the Sonne of an eternall love doth grow in favour with God and Man In briefe hee that hath all things with God the Father save this that he is begotten hath all things with man except his sinne But although there be two generations and that of divers kindes eternall and in time in which respect almost all things are double in him yet is not hee two sonnes because Sonneship respects not the diversity of the natures divine and humane but onely the unity of the Person so that if there be but one Person of both natures there can be but one Son Wherefore seeing the Sonne of God took on Him not the Person but the nature of man yet the whole nature body and soule of the substance of his Mother And seeing that whole nature subsists in the Person of the eternall Son He in both respects both of his divine and humane generation is still the onely begotten Sonne of the Father onely begotten I say that he may be discerned from us that are adopted only sonne because we are not hereafter to looke for any other Saviour His onely Sonne not of Ioseph or any man according to the flesh For as according to the law of the eternall life which is in God He is begotten of the substance of the Father not without but in the Person of the Father yet distinct therefrom so according to that generation which was in time was He begotten by the power of the Father without the Person of the Father being conceived in the wombe of the virgin For as a thing conceived in the minde of a man is the first word or expression of his understanding which being spoken or written becomes sensible and to bee understood of others So the Sonne is in the Father that eternall word understood conceived or begotten before the worlds and in the fullnesse of time not ceasing to be eternally begotten as before He was made manifest in the flesh even that word or life which was eternally with the Father was seene with eyes was looked upon and was handled with hands 1 Ioh. 1.1.2 So that as there is but one Father both in the eternall and timely generation so is there but one Sonne by a most holy most true and substantiall generation God and Man the Sonne of God and the blessed virgin Mary Now this one Sonne one Christ one Immanuel one Mediator one Person is such not by mixture not by confusion not by composition of the two natures nor yet by change of one into another but one by assumption or taking of the humane nature into the divine wherein the deity is to dwell eternally without separation but not without distinction And these two natures so dwell together in the Person of our Saviour as that for the unity of the Person the attributes which belong to one nature are given to the other as Ioh. 3.13 No man hath ascended up to heaven but hee that came downe from heaven even the Sonne of man which is in heaven And againe Acts 20.28 Feed the church of God which He hath purchased with his owne bloud And although I said before chap. 11. that relation properly so called was not in the divine generation but supereminent because all things here are coessentiall a the subjects no other beings than the termes that is the Father and the Sonne the foundation also coessential that is the divine and unconceiveable generation for the termes sake in the Father active in the Sonne passive And although in the second generation neither the subjects nor the termes are coessentiall the subjects are the Person of the eternall word and the Virgin Mary the foundation is the generation whereby the manly being passively was taken of the Virgin unto the person of the word yet in respect of this hypostaticall union or ioyning of the humanity unto the Person of the Eternall Sonne Mary the mother of Iesus is truely said the mother of God not that the Godhead tooke beginning from her but because she brought out that manly being which from the time of its first union was never separated from the Godhead And because the supposition or person wherein both natures are is one Christ of which Person she is truely called the mother though she be mother onely according to the flesh as is said Math. 1.23 A virgin shall bring forth a Sonne and they shall call his name God with us And againe Rom. 9.5 of the Israelites as concerning the flesh came Christ who is God blessed above all for evermore Amen But although there be one only Sonne yet in respect of the two nativities Hee is truely called the Sonne of God and the Sonne of the virgin though with this difference that by the eternall generation he tooke of the Father both his eternall nature and his Person by which he is the sonne of his Father by a supereminent reall relation but of his mother he tooke in time the humane nature but not any humane Person And therefore this Sonship is only rationall except it bee understood with the divine person in which the humanity subsists and so hee is truly said this man and the son of the virgin For as b he tooke on him the humanity soule and body to dwell therein for ever as the Evangelist speaks Ioh. 1.14 The word became flesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and made his tabernacle in us So did hee give unto the humane nature to bee one Person in him So that God is now truely one with us that wee hereafter may bee one with him according to that prayer of our eternall mediator Iohn 17. I in them and thou in mee that they may bee one as wee are one So the advantage is onely on our side For the humane nature comming to our Lord in the perfection of the infinite deity could adde nothing to His perfection onely the infinite love of God toward man was perfected thereby because the humane nature being taken unto the Sonne of his love wee are assured thereby of his eternall love that Hee hath loved us as Hee hath loved Him Ioh. 17.23 Whereas if our Lord had
By which texts it is plaine that the Saviour of mankind must bee both man and God dwelling in man and the second person of the holy Trinitie which we call the Sonne Notes a THe subject no other than the termes For the understanding of this see my second part of Logonomia Introduct Sect. 4. numb 11. b Hee tooke on him the humanitie If it bee most true which is said Col. 1.19 that all fulnesse should dwell in him yea all the fulnesse of the Godhead bodilie how can it bee but that if Christ dwell in our flesh all the persons likewise must bee incarnate For all the Persons together make but one infinite fulnesse of the Deitie And therefore 1. Tim. 3.16 it is spoken without any distinction of Persons that God was manifest in the flesh Answer To become man was a personall proprietie of the Sonne of God for the incarnation was not of the Godhead wherein the Persons are one but of that subsistence according to which the three Persons are distinguished So that as in the Trinitie there be three persons in one nature so in the mysterie of the incarnation there is one person in two natures Now why the person of the Sonne and none other could become man the reasons before doe make it plaine And although it bee most true that all the Persons together are but one God in the infinitie or fulnesse of the Deitie yet is it as true that the infinite fulnesse of the Deitie is in all and every person alike as the fulnesse or perfection of mankinde is in every man equally Neither is that in Tim. spoken without distinction of the persons for it followes immediately He was justified in the Spirit What is that but that the Spirit of God the holy Ghost did justifie his doctrine and Gospell as most true in causing the hearts of all the faithfull to beleeve it But it is most manifest that the witnesse is neither the thing witnessed nor the person in whose behalfe the witnesse is given Neither was this witnesse of the Holy Ghost onely but also of the Father from heaven 2. Peter 4.17 1. Iohn 5.9 10 11. Compare herewith if you please the note g on Chap. 24. § 9. Object 1. In the end of which Chapter you may see other objections fully answered Our Lord. CHAP. XXIIII That this Jesus the Sonne of the Virgin Mary whom the Christian faith confesseth is the Saviour of the world THat reverend and fearfull name of God is a name of glory but the word Lord importeth the title of that right which he hath in his creature And how justly this belongs to our Lord Christ may appeare by that interest which he hath in us both by the right of our creation and of our redemption and of all the benefits which we hope thereby What right he hath in us for our creation it hath appeared in that wee are his workemanship Chap. 13. § 9. Now it remaineth that we make it manifest that he alone is our Mediatour and that besides him there is no other for if the Saviour of the world must of necessitie be man that hee might satisfie the justice of God for the sinne of man as we have proved Chap. 20. and likewise that he must be God that hee may be able to heare and to save all them that come unto him as was manifest Chap. 21. and that the Sonne of God tooke on him our flesh that by him the love of God might be manifest to the creature as it was proved Chap. 23. If there can be but one Sonne of God as it was shewed Chap. 12. and the note thereto it must follow of necessity that there can be but one onely Saviour of mankinde which Saviour is our Lord Iesus the Sonne of the blessed Virgin Mary as it is further manifest by these reasons following 1. It is necessary that all the dignities of God bee magnified in the creature according to the uttermost greatnesse which they can have therein But if this Iesus whom we confesse be the Saviour of the world then all the dignities of God are magnified according to the uttermost extent of greatnesse which it is possible they should have in the creature and that without any abatement or lesning in any one of them for his mercy is magnified to the uttermost in pardoning the sins of many for the merit of one his justice and love in this that he spared not his only Son but gave him to death for a satisfaction for the sin of mankinde his glory in that the creature once sinfull and mortall is made partaker of glorie and immortality his wisdome that out of the greatest ill the destruction of the creature by the malice of the devill he hath brought the greatest good that is the exaltation of the creature beyond that state of happinesse wherein it was created Chap. 18. § 2. and so in the rest But if this Iesus bee not the Saviour of the world as the Iewes affirme if when that other Bar-Coziba of theirs shall come he preach the same doctrine and doe the same glorious miracles which our Lord hath done though it be impossible that God should suffer the world to be so mocked then the same most high and glorious truth should bee both preached and confirmed by a most false and lying Prophet who should professe himselfe the Saviour of the world and was not yet neverthelesse seeing our Lord was the authour and manifester of that truth he shall have the honour to be beleeved and the falshood shall dwell with that other to come But if he shall preach any other doctrine than this which wee have received then neither can the dignities of God bee magnified in his greatest and most excellent worke in the creature that is in the salvation of mankinde as was shewed before neither can his Scriptures bee of absolute authority when another manner of Saviour shall come than they have described unto us but both these things are utterly impossible and therefore this Iesus whom the Christian faith confesseth to be our Lord is the Saviour of the world and beside him there is no other 2. If this Iesus whom wee acknowledge bee the Saviour of the world then the expectation of the most excellent and virtuous men is quieted and at rest in the assurance of his heavenly promise But if this bee not hee but that the Saviour is yet to come for wee have already proved that man having sinned should be restored by a Saviour that should bee both God and man then since that time that Christ the Sonne of God and the virgin Mary came wee that have beleeved in him are in the greatest errour that may bee and all our hope in God through the satisfaction of Christ must bee ashamed all our beleefe in his word is vaine and all the virtues the constancie love and patience of the Martyrs is perished so that when that pretended Messiah shall come he shall not be beleeved or if
himselfe but that other person of the humanity by whose death our reconcilation was wrought and so not by his owne bloud but by the bloud of another person should hee have entred into the holy place So God should not have sent his owne Sonne into the world that the world by him might be saved contrary to that which is Heb. 9.12 Ioh. 3.16.17 But he that is mighty to save even Iehovah our king hath saved us Esay 33.22 and that not with forraine bloud but by his owne offering of himselfe hath he purchased for us eternall redemption This then being the great mystery of our salvation that God was manifest in the flesh 1 Tim. 3.16 That God is one with us Matth. 1.23 That that holy thing which was borne of the virgin is the Sonne of God Luk. 1.35 it may appeare how detestable that heresie of Photinus and his predecessours was who made our Mediator the Sonne of man by nature and the Sonne of God by adoption only and how dangerous this consequence of Nestorius is who of that one Mediator betweene God and man 1 Tim. 2.5 would make two persons If you desire to know the growth of this heresie and the other positions of the Nestorians you may reade M. Breerewoods enquiries chap. 19. § 9. Arius and his followers held that Christ was truly man so that be might truly be called the Sonne of the virgin Mary borne in time as concerning his manly body and the Sonne of God as being the first begotten of every creature and so the most excellent creature created by the will of God the Father before all times and ages but not coeternall with him because there was a continuance when he was not and therefore was hee not say they 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or coessentiall with the Father because hee was created of that which was not from which Errour these Arians were also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This poysonous fountaine overflowed afterward into divers streames For the halfe Arians of whom Acatius was chiefe held that Christ was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or of the like being withthe Father by nature but others said that this likenesse was not in nature but only in will and powerfull working Whereupon Asterius is by some affirmed to have said that Christ was the vertue only or a creature indued with the power of God other heretickes againe as Aetius and his scholler Eunomius said that Christ was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or of another manner of being unlike to the Father both in nature and will and hence arose the errour of the Dultians who thought him onely the servant of God in the worke of the creature and so of the Bonosians who held him to bee the Sonne of God onely by adoption And although this Hydra might seeme to have beene nipt in the head by the writings of Athanasius and other learned men of former times and especially by the first Councell of Nice Anno 327. and other that followed afterward yet never was there any heresie in the primitive Church that went on with that violence and strength or that caused more trouble and persecution as being confirmed by divers Councels and set forward by the authority of sundry Emperours And for the continuance thereof it hath been such as that unto this day not onely among the Turkes but ever in the Church of Christ if at least they may bee said to bee of his Church who falsly denie unto him the truth and excellencie of his being some have beene found from time to time even since the clearer light of the truth hath shined that have maintained this heresie of Arius in whole or in part as Socinus Gittichius David the Hollander Servetus Neuserus and with us Legat Mannering and others In Polonia also and Transylvania they swarme as you may reade in Wents à Bud. pag. 229 c. But say you is it possible that an heresie so foule as this is taken to bee should continue so long and be upheld by Councels and maintained by Emperours and justified by learned men except there were both reason and authority of Scripture for it For as no man is wilfully ill but by the errour of his judgement betweene good and bad so no man doth erre wilfully but onely by mistaking of falshood for the truth Answer Saint Paul saith that there must be heresies and this I suppose should come to passe because men would not be content to learne the doctrine of Christ and his truth according to the simplicity of the truth as he had taught it in the holy Scriptures whereunto if men would take heed and trie the truth as they ought the things of God by the word of God matiers of Religion by the rule of Religion that is the holy Scripture alone so many heresies had not sprung up For mans understanding so long as it doth follow the true guide thereof the revealed truth of God it cannot deceive nor be deceived But if it will presume to be guide and make the truth of the Scriptures to follow it it is impossible not to stray and so by the just judgement of God men also grow hard and obstinate in their owne errours not onely to resist the truth but also to persecute it as these Arians did very grievously at severall times But see their reasons and their authorities 1. The Godhead is in the Father wholly or else hee cannot bee perfect God and if the Deitie be wholly in the Father then can it not be in the Sonne nor in the holy Ghost Answer The word wholly is equivocall or of doubtfull meaning for wholly may signifie as much as with all the parts but this cannot belong to that which is infinite or wholly may signifie onely and so the proposition is false or it may meane asmuch as perfectly and so the proposition is true but the consequence is false for the Deitie is wholly and perfectly in all the persons alike 2. He onely is the true God that is prayed unto by the Mediator But God the Father onely is so prayed unto therefore God the Father onely is the true God I answer If we worship the Godhead in the nature or being of God we worship one onely being in the three Persons But if we worship the persons we worship them in the vnitie of the Godhead that is acknowledging every person to be God And this is that Father that one God whom we pray unto by that one Mediator of God and man the man Iesus Christ 1 Tim. 2.5 who having himselfe in his owne body borne our sinnes upon the tree 1 Pet. 2.24 is set at the right hand of God and makes intercession for us Rom. 8.34 and hath commanded all them to come unto him that travaile and are heavie laden that hee may refresh them Mat. 11.28 3. When the Sonne was begotten and the holy Ghost proceeded either hee was or he was not If he were before he was begotten then was he not
welfare of the righteous and account it no sinne if they can have any pretext to say they are innocent Thus our Lord was denyed His right to His Kingdome Luke 19.14 betrayed by His rebellious Subjects His life was set at nought to save a murderer vnjustly accused stript of His clothing And beside all this of losse which He endured He suffered all that paine and punishment which they could bring upon Him As first His base and scornefull apprehension as of a thiefe in the night 2. His being hurried from place to place from Iudge to Iudge 3. The most unjust sentences of Blasphemy of Treason of Death 4. His Buffeting Mocking Whipping Crowning with all kind of contempt and scorne and 5. That by a most unjust Iudge who still profest Him innocent He was betrayed to the will of His adversaries to be Crucified 6. And yet because nothing could glut the gorges of those bloody Priests in the agonyes of death behold a fresh onset of Scorne and Reviling Matth. 27 41. 7. Neither will the abjects be left out with their Gall and Vinegar 8. No nor yet the theeves in the same condemnation with their upbraidings O man of sorrowes and contradiction Behold and see all you that passe by if there were ever any sorrow like unto that which was done unto Him wherewith the Lord afflicted Him in the day of His fierce anger Yet were all these things but small afflictions in comparison of this that God had withdrawne the light of His comforts from Him For this cause alone were His roarings powred out My God my God why hast thou forsaken mee Yet may it not be thought but that He was still one with the Person of the God-head and that not onely in His agony on the Crosse but in death also when His soule was parted from the body So that although there was a dissolution in nature of the Soule and the Body yet the unity of the Man-hood with the God-head was still saved in the Person of the God-head See Acts 2.27 But although this acte of Pilate in himselfe was most unjust yet in God the Father whose Person Pilate in that iudgement did represent the act was most righteous and just That Pilate in his Iudgement represented God the Father it is manifest not onely by this That all power is of God Rom. 13.1 but even in this very case by that which our Saviour answered unto Pilate Thou couldest have no power at all against mee except it were given thee from above Iohn 19.11 In this act therefore of Pilate God did summon and judge the whole world to answere for their sinnes And because euery mouth was stopped and the whole world was found subject to the judgement and wrath of God for their sinne therefore was it necessary that the condemnation and punishment should fall on Him to the full that had set Himselfe to answere for us lest no flesh should be saved So through His sufferings as we were condemned in Him by Him are we also saved But it comes now to be enquired Why our Sauiour should be condemned to a death so infamous as to be 2 Crucified THere were foure kinds of death appointed for Malefactors by the Law of God Stoning Burning the Sword Hanging by the necke The particular offences you may finde gathered from the Hebrew Doctors by Henry Ainsw on Exod. 21.12 And although Hanging amongst all those was accounted the most easie death yet on that kind of death was the curse pronounced as you see Deut. 21.22 But if they that committed the least sinnes and therefore suffred the most easie death were accursed as the adulterer c. how much more they which sinned in higher degrees and were judged worthy of greater punishment This kind of death by nailing to a Crosse more cruell then any appointed by the Law of God was in common use among the Romanes after their first Kings especially for their slaves See M. T. Cic orat pro Rab perduell and Lips de Cruce lib. 1. cap. 12. over whom every Lord had power and vsed to crucifie them for theft and especially for running away After it grew in use for the baser sort of malefactors though free-men as theeues and such like and for their provincialls And when the lawlesse power of the Emperours had made all slaues then they that called themselues Free-men and Citizens of Rome were also crucified at the will of the Emperours as you may see Lips de Cruce lib. cap. 15. et lib. 2. c. p. 7. But although this kinde of nayling on the tree by which our Lord did dye was not in use among the Iewes as Lip de Cruce lib. 1. cap. 11. supposes unduly confounding the staking strangling on a Gibbet or bough and nayling on a Crosse yet by the interpretation of S. Paul Gal. 3 13. did the curse directly belong to this suffering of Christ wherein He was made a Curse for vs. Now among those reasons why our Saviour should dye by this most vile and infamous death of the Crosse The first shall bee even from thence because it was most base and shamefull For seeing man-kind by his sinne had forsaken God his just and lawfull Lord and made himselfe a slaue to the Divell what manner of death but the most vile and shamefull could He be judged worthy of that had so falsly and basely transgressed And therefore was it necessary that He who had made Himselfe mans surety and put Himselfe in his stead to beare his punishment should also die by the most infamous death of the Crosse the punishment of slaves that had run away from their Lords 2. It is fit and necessary that the Sonne of God should be exalted to the highest degree of glory The greatest glory is not due but to the greatest humility The lowest degree of humility that can be is to be subject to the most shamefull death Therefore that our Lord the Sonne of God might be exalted to the highest degree of glory it was necessary that He should first be abased to the death of the Crosse Neither is this an argument of amplification but founded in the rules of the infinite Iustice and therefore urged by Saint Paul Philip. 2. verse 8 9 10. He humbled Himselfe and became obedient unto death even the death of the Crosse Therefore God hath exalted Him and given Him the Name which is above every Name that every tongue should confesse that Christ is Iehova 3. And seeing He suffered under the power of the Romanes it was necessary that He should die by that manner of death which was most usuall with the Romanes which for their seruants and provincialls was the Crosse And although it seemed unto Pilate himselfe an unworthy death for Him Shall I crucifie your King Yet nothing could content His enemies but Crucifie Him Crucifie Him And because our Lord had no such priuiledge to plead for Himselfe that He was a free man of Rome as Saint Paul did Act. 16.37 22.25 29.
ascension into heaven belong to us as it were in common with Christ in as much as the faithfull must rise againe and after judgement ascend with Him into Heaven Iohn 17.24 and 2 Thes 5.17 Therefore to sit at the right hand of the power of God is peculiar unto Christ alone And although it be said Ephes 2.6 that we are made to sit together in heavenly places in Christ yet that is spoken onely of that abundant happinesse and joy which we shall finde in eternall life as the text was cited euen now out of Psal 16.11 Notes a BEcause of His vnion with the God-head The Apostle in the first Chap. of the Epistle to the Hebrewes proves by many arguments that the Mediator must be God in the second Chapter that Hee must bee man Among those reasons whereby He proves that Christ is God this is one because it was said vnto Him Sit at my right hand For God that gives not His glory unto another Esay 42.8 doth not give this glory to sit at His right hand unto any one that is a creature onely Therefore doth not our Lord sit at the right hand of God but as man subsisting in the Person of the Sonne of God neither yet as God being one with the Father in the infinitie of being and power is Hee said to bee so exalted as to Sit at the right hand of God but onely as He is God manifested in the flesh For this exaltation and glory was given unto Christ as the reward of His humiliation as it is said Phil. 2.8.9 Hee humbled Himselfe and became obedient unto death even the death of the Crosse Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him and given Him a Name which is above every name c. So that the glory of sitting at the right hand of God is due unto Christ as the Mediator that is both God and man in one Person b Some preheminence above man-kind Although the graces and perfections and consequently the glory of Christs humanity in the Person of the Godhead be so super-excellent as all the Angels in heaven cannot comprehend yet doth not that glory and perfection take away the proprieties of the humane nature nor yet His sitting at the right hand of God take away His subjection unto God For Hee is excepted that did put all things under Him and when all things are subdued unto Him then the Sonne also Himselfe shal be subject that God may be All in All 1. Cor. 15.27.28 because that then the government and mediation of the Sonne is perfected in the creature when it doth appeare that God hath loved the Church euen as He hath loved Him Iohn 17.23 If then Christ our Lord be still God and man or else He ceases to be our Mediator and if to take away the properties of His humanity as to be contained in a certaine place be to deny Him to be man as Saint Augustine saith Take away place and you deny all bodily being How can that falshood of the every-where being of Christs body be iustified I said enough against this errour in the Note on the Chapter before but they argue also from this Article thus The right hand of God is every where Christ in His bodily being sits at the right hand of God Ergo His body is every where If this be a good conclusion then why not this The right hand of God is eternall Christ in His bodily being sits at the right hand of God Ergo His body is eternall But this against the Article He was borne of a Virgin Beside the Assumption should be the body of Christ is the right hand of God but that is most false and this is most faulty of all to take a tropicall speech as if it did signifie properly See Log chap. 21. N. 5. The errours mentioned with this in the Note on the Chapter before need not to be remembred Another errour against this Article of Christs sitting at the right hand of God and making intercession for the Saints is of them who pray to Saints and Angels and so deny the Al-sufficiency of His mediation and make void that text of the Scripture 1. Tim. 2.5 There is one Mediator betweene God and man the man Christ IESVS But they have a pretty distinction for it if it were ought worth that the Saints are not Mediators of satisfaction for so is Christ alone but of Intercession only If we should be content with this yet all their workes of Supererogation are vanished and all their saleable treasure of their Church not worth a mite For the merit of Christ is not saleable but for every one that will to buy without money Esay 55.1 And that because it is infinite and unvaluable as the ransome of sinne must be and no mans merit can be Beside the Scripture saith That Abraham knowes us not and Israel is ignorant of us Esay 63.16 And therefore as a Father saith It is the most safe aduenture for a man to commit himselfe onely to the hands of God A third errour is of them who sacrilegiously withhold those tithes which God hath allotted for the Ministers of the Church as you may see it prooved by them who have writ to this argument whatsoever any lying Legend hath brought to the contrary you may reade Sir Henry Spelman Iames Sempal and especially the Reverend Bishop of Chichester to this argument And so no lesse are they in this heresie who withhold or curtaile or inuert by any meanes those maintenances which the founders of Schooles or Colledges have appointed as Seed-plots for the Church And these sacrilegious errours are the more damnable as an errour in fact is worse then an errour in opinion And if you looke unto the state of those Churches where that competency of which they prate was first established in France in Germany and else-where you may see not onely the contempt and beggery wherein the Ministers live but that even the whole Churches have ever since the time of this competency lived under persecution And if whole Churches and Common-wealths suffer for this shall you sacrilegious Impropriators you saleable Latrones and you false feoffees that are unfaithfull in other mens wealth unfaithfull in that which is committed unto you onely in trust escape though you be long forborne He that shall come will come and will not stay to give to every man as his workes shall be not as they are here in shew or with pretext that I am but one And this is the next Article whereto ye shall be summoned Arise ye dead and come to judgement ARTICLE VII ⧠From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead CHAP. XXXII § 1. THe word to Iudge hath many significations in the Holy Scripture But in this Article of our Creed it is taken onely for the execution of that eternal doome upon men and Angels when God by Christ shall raise up all that are dead and by the ministery of the Angels shall bring all both
of God they utterly forget that hee is Iust Vnto which infinite Iustice of God if they had taken due regard the same light of reason would further have shewed unto them that the soule that sinnes must beare a punishment answerable to his sinne And because by every sinne against God an infinite Iustice is offended therefore it is impossible that any man by his owne righteousnesse which can never bee any more than by the Law of God he is bound unto should bee able to make any satisfaction for his sinne Vpon which true principle it will follow necessarily in the light of reason either that there is no possible returne to the favour of God which conclusion a man would by all meanes avoid or else that the reconciliation of mankinde unto God must needs bee by the mediation of a man in every respect free from Sinne who bearing the punishment due to sinners might finde redemption and mercy for all them that would beleeve it and live worthy thereof But because all men conceived in lust and sinne are originally tainted therewith for out of uncleannesse who can bring that which is cleane therefore must the generation of this Mediator bee wonderfull and not after the common manner of all men but so that no sinne or taint of the flesh must bee therein So that being both borne and living without sinne hee might by his death become a ransome acceptable for the sinnes of others And although reason could not conceive nor finde how this should bee yet seeing that in the necessitie of the divine justice it must bee thus reason would as easilie yeeld that it might bee as it did finde and see the creation of mankinde and the whole creature out of nothing as by the discourse ensuing it will hereafter appeare If this were not thus how should the whole world of Infidels and misbeleevers bee liable to the justice of God for their ignorance of him for their neglect and for their unbeliefe So taking it as granted till it doth further appeare by the Treatise following that reason hath right good and necessarie use in the things of faith it is too manifest that these wretched times are such as seeme to call aloud for the publishing of some such worke as this for though the fooles that have said in their hearts there is no God dare not in words profes it yet by their continuance in their sinful deeds they do proclaime that their thoughts are so Neither are they altogether wanting which say that Religion is but a politicke invention to keep men in civill obedience but if the conclusions of the Christian Religion bee inferred upon necessarie principles then are they not made out of policie as these Atheists say but cannot prove it except they could also make it appeare that policie was able to make naturall reason I will not denie that Mahumed setled his religion so as they say but hee forbids to dispute of the principles thereof because it is against both reason and Scripture and so perhaps it may bee said of those Will-worships that are or have beene among other Gentiles to whom God vouchsafed not the knowledge of his Law But our most holy faith because it alone is true hath no other author than God himselfe who hath revealed it by his word and because no man shall bee excused if hee beleeve it not hee hath commanded reason whereof all men are partakers to seale thereto in everie point but because in the Treatise before mentioned and by the whole practice of this booke this thing is manifest I will here turne mee onely to answer those doubts which may bee brought against the perswading of matiers of faith by humane reason First it may bee objected that the matiers of faith are farre above humane reason and that therefore it is a great presumption to question or skan them thereby for it is said by S. Paul Rom. 11.33 that his wayes and wisdome are past finding out I confesse we know nothing of God but what he hath revealed of himselfe by his workes or by his words for hee dwelleth in the light that none can approach unto even as S. Paul speakes there of his calling and election to faith a will unrevealed but the Articles of our faith hee hath most plainely taught and revealed And further to the argument I confesse that humane reason turning it selfe to behold the divine truthes is as the eye of a Bat to looke on the Sunne But yet the eternall and infinite truthes are so apprehended by mans finite understanding as the light of the Sunne is by the eye that is verely and indeed the same light and no other for though the eye cannot receive all the light of the Sunne yet that which it doth receive is truly that same light which is in or from the Sunne But you say that if in things of common use as hony salt or any other things vegetable or minerall wee must confesse our exceeding ignorance of their nature properties and possibilities both alone and much more in all manner of compositions it may seeme that our dulnesse may much rather be acknowledged in things divine I yeeld not altogether to this consequence for to the knowledge of naturall things we have our owne witlesse experience to helpe us and the deceitfull authoritie of mistaking men but all those truthes whereon our faith relies are grounded on the infallible rules of Gods owne word revealed by himselfe unto us for this end that we should not bee deceived or mistaken And although it was impossible for humane reason ever to finde out the conclusions and most fundamentall points of our faith as the mysterie of the Trinitie the incarnation of God the resurrection of the body c. yet being by the cleer light of Gods own word made known unto us we approve the same truth by the judgement and voice of reason So the reasons that are brought hereunto are not to establish any truth new or unheard of but for that faith which was heretofore taught delivered unto the Saints if the reasons of themselves be weak and by their weakenes shew how mans understanding is dazled at the divine light yet the conclusions stand sure and unmoveable but if the reasons bee certaine and true then questionlesse they are grounded in the Word and truth of God and the conclusion true either for the reason delivered or for a higher reason which wee cannot finde To this purpose the Father Anselm de Conc. Gratiae lib. arbit saith not unfitlie Sacra Scriptura omnis veritatis quam ratio colligit authoritatem continet cùm illam aut apertè continet aut nullatenus negat Quod enim apertâ ratione colligitur illi ex nullâ parte Scripturae contradicitur quoniam ipsa sicut nulli adversatur veritati itae nulli favet falsitati hoc ipso quiae non negat ejus auctoritate suscipitur Yet you will say that this endeavour is altogether needlesse seeing the
beene brought to beleeve if S. Augustine himselfe who had been among them and proves it by witnesses had not recorded it de Haeres Cap. 46. The filthines of the Gnosticks was yet more abhominable if it be possible to be true which they write will you account them Christians The Philosopher Plotinus no Christian Ennead 2. lib 9. intituled against the Gnosticks shewes the falshood of their opinions concerning the creating of the world and proves that in the government thereof their opinion was more wicked than that of Epicurus and though Simon the Sorcerer was baptised Acts. 8. yet when his gall of bitternesse had made him a professed enemie and father of all those heresies that followed will you count him a Christian Therefore you may with the Apostle say of these of Cerinthus of Carpocrates and of many of the rest They went out from us but they were not of us But because I am busied in things of more importance than this and yet the honour of the Christian name is no small matier I will most brieflie recount the contrarie opinions whether they be of the elder Philosophers or the later Hereticks as they have beene gathered by the most ancient among the Fathers Irenaus Epiphanius S. Augustine and others I say most briefly and onely for a taste that you may love the truth the better and adore that mercy which hath manifested it unto us And therefore I will not tell you of Varros thousands of gods nor trouble you needleslie with remembrance of those gods of the Heathen which you may reade in the holy Scripture and know better by Master Seldens just Commentarie de Djs Syris if you understand Latin § 2. Above fortle disagreeing opinions among the Philosophers concerning the gods are reckoned up by Cic. de natura Deorum lib. 1. of which some directly gainsay this conclusion of the Vnitie of the Godhead for although Antisthenes confessed there was but one God the God of all nature yet he added that there were divers Gods for divers peoples and countries Xenocrates said there were eight gods in the seven planets and one that ruled over all the Starres Anaximander held many gods and so many gods so many worlds but said that these gods were brought forth in time and after many ages dyed againe Alomeon seemed to acknowledge three gods inasmuch as he gives divinitie to the Sunne to the Moone and to the soule of man Xenophanes would have all that is infinite to be god whether in being or in working as he held the understanding Democritus would have all the Ideas or representations of things being and that understanding whence they proceed and mans understanding also to be gods The inconstancle of the Philosophers in their owne opinions brought us in yet more gods Cleanthes one while said the world was god sometime the soule whereby it was quickned and governed then againe the pure and uppermost ayre that compasseth the whole Globe of heaven and earth sometime the Starres other while reason as so the rest as you may heare hereafter And if the Philosophers the guides were blind it is no marvell though the blockish rout ran into all Idolatrie as they are described Wisd Chap. 14. But to suppose it reasonable to give honour to the memorie of the dead who where founders of cities or procurers of some great and publike good because they though dead were thought to favour and maintaine their owne endeavours or to be so unreasonable as to thinke with the Aegyptians that there was something divine in all those things by which they received any kinde of good and so to worship men horses birds serpents wolves dogs and cats See Iuvenall Sat. 15. Cic. de natura Deorum lib. 3. yet what could so mad the old Romanes not onely to allow all the hee gods and the shee gods of others but to consecrate imaginations as Victory Concord Peace yea and among these their owne plagues and punishments as the Ague Mildew and blasting ill fortune c Cic. loc cit § 3. But there was no opinion among all these more foolish than that which went out in the name of the Hereticks Cerdon first of all August cont advers leg Proph. l. 2. c. 12. said there were two gods one good whom they called Oeomazes and another stark naught whom they named Areimanius This opinion his scholer Marcion upheld but added * Tertullian who disputes against him in sive books hath it not nor Irenaeus and Augustine brings it doubtfully out of Epiphanius a third whom he called the Iust After that the Gnosticks reeal'd the opinion of the two gods with many additions The Manichees also followed this madnesse and added their fiction that the good God set upon the wicked god to have supprest him but in that conflict the powers of darkenesse tooke many parts of the good god prisoners and tyed them unto earthly matiers for the ransoming of which this good but verie weake god takes great thought but as these parts of his come to be eaten in the matiers wherein they are tyed by their Catharists or Puritanes they are parted from the impure matiers and so restored to the God againe Are these Hereticks are these Christians found you any thing like to this among the pure naturallists of the heathen Phil. Mornay de verit Christ Relig. Cap. 2. drawes this opinion of two gods by the autoritie of Plutarch de Iside Osiride First from Zoroaster and so among the Persians thence to the Manichees It is true that Manes their father was a Persian but it is manifest that Plutarch was most grosly deceived first in the circumstance of the time wherein hee mistakes about some foure thousand two hundred yeeres a great fault in an Historian for if Zoroaster lived in the reigne of Ninus as the best Records doe make him See Fra. Patr. in Zor about three hundred yeeres after the floud it will not be above eight hundred ninetie or nine hundred yeeres before the destruction of Troy which is put about the yeare of the world two thousand eight hundred fortie so that Plutarch who makes him to have lived five thousand yeares before the destruction of Troy makes him above two thousand yeeres elder than Adam Then in the substance of the matier the mistaking is nothing lesse for by the diligence of worthy men divers of those magicall oracles of Zoroaster who was the Sonne of Oromazes Plato Alcib 1. are come to light and printed at Paris in the yeare one thousand sixe hundred and seven and before that many more of them gathered out of the old autors by Fra. Patricius and printed at Venice 1593. and since that elsewhere By which it is apparent that Zoroaster held the mysterie of the Trinitie in Unitie of the Deitie and one Godabove all the Creator of all things who according to his owne goodnesse made every thing perfect and good as his words witnesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For from the Fathers workmanship
God spake in times past to the Fathers See Iacobi Brocardi praefat in interpretat Bib. fol. 25 26 c. if their doings and sufferings were not predictions of the sufferings of Christ and of the glories that should follow How much better was that saying of the father The new Testament is hidden in the old and the Old is manifest in the New But you say by these allegoricall and mysticall sences of Agar and Sinai and the like any forrein sence may be concluded I Answer The Scriptures being to give us hope and comfort in Christ there is one rule for their interpretation which out of Saint Peter I remembred even now that the interpretation be to manifest the sufferings of Christ and thereby our deliverance from the punishment of our sinne or the glory of Christ and therewith the hopes that are laid up for us in heaven And what allegoricall mysticall or anagogicall sence soever is brought in beside this rule the rule of our holy faith is as easily thrust out as it is brought in And this is the true Cabala of the Scripture both old and new Troubled with all kinde of heresies The heresies or errors abont this truth of our Lord Christ incarnate are in briefe of three kindes The first concerning the person who was this Christ the second concerning His nature and being the third concerning the attributes or proprieties of his being The most ancient heresie concerning the person of the Messiah was that of the Herodians of whom you reade in the Gospell Matth. 22.16 Marke 3.6 These as Epiphanius remembers Panarii lib. 1. held that Herod the sonne of Antipater the Idumean was the true Christ promised to the Fathers because the scepter did utterlie cease from Iuda in his time but the gathering of the nations was not to Herod as Iacob prophesied so their heresie vanished Hitherto you may bring all those false glosses of the Iewes who turne the prophecies fulfilled in Christ to other persons as to Ezechiah to Zorobabel to Nehemiah to Iehoshua and to others as they thinke fittest to mocke of the holy oracles from the true Messiah as you may reade in Pet. Galat. lib. 4. cap. 17. and in the note b above But their greatest mistaking was in their counterfeit Messiah who from Numb 24.17 called himselfe Barchochab that is the sonne of the Starre of whom they were foretold by our Lord himselfe Iohn 5.43 If another shall come in his owne name him ye will receive But it cost them the destruction of their citie by Titus and so many miseries as ensued thereon Such another Barchoziba they had in the dayes of Adrian by whom after the slaughter of innumerable * persons They cite the author of the booke Iuchâ—sia for twice so many as went out of Egypt Postel de orbe cond writes 600000. of both these you may reade Galatin lib. 4. Cap. 21. they were utterlie chased out of their countrie and not so much as the name of their citie from his owne name called Aelia left unto them and thus have they lived in banishment ever since But the lewdnesse and follie of other succeeding hereticks did equall this of the Iewes And first that of Simon the Witch who gave out himselfe to bee the Christ which though Augustine affirme in so many words yet Tertullian and Epiphanius have onelie so much in effect that hee was that virtue and great power of God as you reade Acts 8.10 How great then was his schollar Menander who to all the falshood of his Master added this that hee was greater than Simon Epiphanius in Pan. The hereticks called the Sethians held that Christ which was borne of the Virgin Mary was no other then Seth named Gen. 4. the sonne of Adam The Ophites held that the Serpent which deceived Eve was Christ as Augustine saith but neither Irenaeus Tertullian nor Epiphanius affirme it But Augustines authoritie alone is sufficient to make us thinke that the Maniches held that the Serpent which taught Eve knowledge and came in the last dayes to save the soules of men must needs bee Christ But these sotteries were so sencelesse as that they neither lasted long nor spread farre But the enemie of mankinde would not suffer the fountaine of life the sincere doctrine of Christ to bee untroubled and therefore beside these heresies concerning the person who was that Christ promised to the Fathers hee brought into this faith which wee hold concerning Christ the sonne of the Virgin Mary such confusion of opinions concerning his nature and properties for his offices are in question now that Mahumed Alcoran Cap. 20. rejoyced in himselfe that hee was delivered from the opinions of the Christians so monstrous in themselves so contrarie one to another that the verie enemies of these heresies were in confusion thereabout and as here and there contrary one to another so sometime to themselves You may reade if you will the stories of the hereticks in the Fathers Irenaeus Epiphanius Theodoret Isidore Eusebius Ruffinus and other historians of the Church and in briefe he that gathered from them all the commentator on Aug. de haer I for avoiding of confusion will remember as occasion is the heresies under the name or names of the most famoused authors or defenders therof and that without respect either of the time wherein they lived or other opinions which they held beside for I write not the historie of the wars but the triumph onely of the Christian faith 1. The Monophysitae or hereticks which held but one onely nature in Christ were of divers families for Eutiches while hee went about to refute Nestorius who held as two natures so two persons in Christ confessed that Christ was of two natures God and man before the uniting of them both but after the union of them they became as one person so one nature because the manly being was utterlie swallowed up of the Divine and changed thereinto as a drop of vineger in the Sea doth utterly loose both the taste and being of vineger This the Armenians and Iacobites heretofore have held but now they are returned to the true faith Mr. Brerewoods Enquirie pag. 154. and page 173. Euagrius hist Ecclesiast lib. 4. Cap. 9 10 11. charges Anthimus Bishop of Constant Theod sius Bishop of Alexandria and Severus to have taught one onely nature in Christ but what or how he shewes not But you may finde in Theodotus the Reader Collect. lib. 2. that their heresie was one with this of Eutyches 2. Apollinaris as others Apollinarius contrarily upon that text of Iohn 1.14 The word became flesh held that in Christ the flesh and the word were consubstantiate or made one substance so that somewhat of the word was turned into flesh not remembring the interpretation which followes in the same place that the word made his tabernacle or dwelling in us 3. The Timotheans said That of the two natures thus united in Christ a third thing must result which is neither very God
nor very man but a confused effect of both natures And this third being the Theodosians held to be mortall but the Armenians bold it to be immortall and no way subject to any suffering The Cophti in Egypt hold but one nature in Christ not by commixture to cause a third being of both but interpret their meaning according to the true faith Brerewood Enquirie Cap 22. 4. But on the other side Ebion Carpocrates and Theodotion affirmed that Christ was pure and onely man begotten by Ioseph of his wife Mary as other children and that God was in him as in Peter or Paul or any other man and by a greater progresse in virtue hee came to be more righteous than other because he received a more noble soule than other men by which he knew and reveiled heavenly truths and by an assisting power of God he wrought miracles as Moses or other of the Prophets had done before This herefie the Socinians as Wentz à Budowecks doth charge them have renewed of late yet after by him it seemes they are come to yeeld unto Christ as much as Arius 5. Artemou Theodotus of Byzant or Constantinople Paulus of Samosata and Photinus held that Christ had no being before hee tooke beginning of his mother and so was onely man by nature but that God which Epiphanius expounds the Word descended into him which error Athanasius Epistola de incarnat contra Paulum Samosat holds to be all one with that of Carpocrates 6. Cerinthus to that progresse in virtue of Ebion and Carpocrates added this That Christ which hee interpreted the holy Ghost descended into Iesus the son of Mary when he was baptised in Iordan and made knowne unto him the Father whom hee knew not before and hence it came to passe that Iesus afterward did such great miracles because Christ was in him Thus of one hee made two Mediators one Iesus wherein Christ was and another Iesus without Christ for hee added that Iesus suffered and died but that Christ without any suffering flew backe to heaven as Colarbasus also after him did teach This Cerinthus is that hereticke as saith Epiphanius that troubled the Church in the Apostles time affirming that the Gentiles ought to bee circumcised and keepe the Law which heresie of his the Councell of Ierusalem determined Acts 15. 7. The hereticks called Alogiani because they denied Christ to bee God the Word hold in effect as much as the former concerning his nature but yet deny not but that for his great grace and virtue he was made the Mediator for other men But the writings of Saint Iohn they vtterlie denie because say they the other Evangelists doe no where call Christ the Word Answer But they call him and prove him to bee God as Matth. 1 23. God with us from whence is the gift of pophecie and power to cast out devils Matth. 7.22 so Marke 1.24 The devils confesse his power and him to be the Holy one of God And Luk. 1.34.35 The Angel professes that holy thing which was to bee borne of the Virgin to be the Sonne of God All his glorious miracles prove as much which were neither wrought by the power of Baalzebub as the old Iewes nor yet by magicke or by the meanes of the Cabala as the later Iewes affirmed but onely by the power of God as our Lordhimselfe proves by an unanswerable argument Luk. 11. vers 14. to 23. And these are the most famoused heresies of them who held but one nature in Christ divine as Eutyches who changed the humane nature into the divine or humane as Apollinarius who thought the divine nature was changed into the humane or one mixt nature of both these as the Timotheans beleeved or purely humane as Ebion Cerinthus Photinus and the Alogians wherein it will not be unfit that we briefly consider their reasons and see what answers are or may be made thereto § 1. And first concerning the heresie of Eutyches you may by this see how dangerous it is For if it be put that after the union of both natures the humane nature was utterly swallowed up of the divine so that the divine nature onely remayned then it must follow of necessity either that we are still in the state of damnation or that God must suffer and dye for us in the divine nature which as it is impossible so yet should wee be still in the state of condemnation For if our redemption bee not wrought for us in our owne nature the divine Iustice is still unsatisfied so wee are still in our sinne And therefore the Councell of Chalcedon held by six hundred and thirty Fathers to condemne these errours of his viz. that the natures were apart before the union as if the humanity had had any being before it was taken to the Godhead or that the beings in themselves or their proprieties were either confused or changed confessed him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is one and the same Sonne in the two natures but remember the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the nature together with the proprieties thereof neither by mixture nor change of natures but as one individuall being consisting of both natures inseparably But some of the later Eutichians minced the mattier and said that unity of nature was not till after His resurrection But that both against the authority of the Scripture and reason it selfe For Hee received power of the Father to raise the dead to give eternall life to execute the Iudgement as he is the Sonne of man Ioh. 5. v. 25.26.27 all these things not yet performed And how can the heavens containe Him Act. 3.21 if hee bee onely God whom the heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot containe Kings 8 27. or what hope can wee have of being made like unto Him if Hee bee onely God yet have we assurance that as we have borne the image of the earthly so shall wee also beare the image of the heavenly 1 Cor. 15.49 The words of our Lord himselfe are yet more cleare Luk. 24.39 Handle me and see me for a Spirit hath not flesh and bones as yee see me have The truth of his bodily being after his resurrection is there argued by his eating and many other infallible proofes during the time of 40. dayes Act. 1.3 And in the last two chapters of Saint Iohns Gospell all to this purpose that wee may beleeve that he that descended into the grave is even the same that ascended in the perfection of His manly being to appeare for us before the Father till the day of our redemption when he shall present us unblameable in his sight as it is said Heb. 2.3 Behold me and the children which thou hast given me see Ioh. 6.39 But see the reason of this heresie of Eutyches delivered by that second Synod of Ephesus called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which murthered the vertuous and faithfull Flavian and blasted with their stinking curs all them that should affirme that there were two natures
eternally ordayned in the counsell of God yet this Spirit here meant is that Spirit of the humanity of Christ as it appeares by the circumstance of the text For hee that searcheth the hearts knoweth the meaning of the Spirit so it is the Spirit of the heart of Christ our Mediatour whereby he intreates for the Saints For although our Lord Iesus be glorified in body yet is he the same body that he was before and his heart is touched with the feeling of our infirmities and even now sorrowes with us for our sorrowes as when he wept Iohn 11.35 For as Postel truely saith pag. 33. The beginning of his sufferings was in the body and though his bodily sorrow was ended in his death yet his sufferings in his soule and Spirit are not ended till that which is remaining to the sufferings of Christ be likewise fulfilled in the bodies of his Saints as it is plaine Acts 9.4 Col. 1.24 And therefore it is said of this Saviour or Angell of his presence in all their troubles he was troubled Esay 63.9 Heb 2.17 4.15 16. But Saint Paul Colos 2.2.3 saith That all the treasures of wisdome and knowledge are hid in that mysterie of God and of the Father and of Christ Where the Father by a manifest distinction from God and from Christ must meane this meane being or created Mediatour which tooke flesh of the Virgin Answer Not so for although the eternall power and Godhead were manifest to all men by the creature that wicked men might bee without excuse Psal 19. and Rom 1.20 Yet none of the Princes of this world did understand that mysterie of the Gospell of Christ 1. Cor. 2.8 For that had beene kept secret since the world began but was now manifest in the last times Rom. 16.25 Col. 1.26 Therefore these treasures of knowledge are first to know God one infinite and eternall being then to know him the Father that is to confesse in the unitie of the Deitie the three persons 1. the Father eternall which cannot be without an eternall 2. Son neither can an eternall Sonne bee without an 3. eternall procession or generation Now to know this one God and him the Father and that one Mediatour betweene God and man the eternall Sonne dwelling in the man Iesus the Sonne of the Virgin is the height and perfection of all knowledge whereto man by all his search could never attaine Then so to acknowledge this truth as to live in holinesse as they ought that know it is that perfection of wisdome that whole duty of man whereto hee is called and this answer may serve for the like objection out of Ephes 1.3 17. So Saint Paul also Heb. 1.3 seemes not to give unto Christ equall glorie with the Father for he saith of him that he is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the beame which is of one nature with the fountaine of the light nor yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the shine of that beame but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a glimpse brightnesse or shine by reflection from that glory whereby it followes that he is not consubstantiall with the Father and so of necessity a created mediator Answer It is said 1 Tim. 6.16 that God dwelleth in the light which no man can approch unto that is that centrall or incommunicable light of the deity which no man hath seene or can see for the creature cannot comprehend what God is except it bee united unto him but yet because the creature cannot bee blessed but in God therefore is that light spread abroad or dilated from the centre into the infinite circumference of the divine dignitie by the infinite obiect of that light the Sonne our Lord Iesus by whom that light is participate unto men and Angels in that blessed vision whereby they are blessed in him and this is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or brightnesse of Saint Paul the same glory of God made communicable unto us by our Mediator not any shine or reflection of light in a forreigne obiect as the wisdome of God in the creature or the light of the Sonne reflected in the Moone or starres in which the light is made other then it was as the obiection mistakes it 18. Revelation 3.14 Christ is called the beginning of the creation of God therefore Hee was the first creature Answer If he be the beginning of the creation therefore he cannot be a creature for so should He be the beginning of himselfe so should He be when he was not so should he be a cause and yet not be but these are impossibilities Compare herewith Colos 1.15 And see the reason of the speech in answer to the fourth obiection § 11. The heresies concerning the proprieties of the Mediator are principally three of the 1. Acephali the 2. Agnoetae and the 3. Monothelites The Acephali or headlesse because they had neither bishops nor priests nor set times nor order for the service of God though that as the two natures in Christ were confused for from the Timotheans they descended so also the proprieties of these natures But if the first befals as was shewed § 1.2 3. before then their confusion is also confounded The author of this heresie was one Severus a bishop of Antioch who dayly cursed the Councell of Chalcedon for that by their decree which you heard before § 1. they had forestalled this heresie But his blasphemous tongue cut out and he banished from his chayre were worthy rewards of such a Bishop Euag. lib. 4. c. 4. 2. From that heresie of Apollinarius came that of the Agnoetae that the divine nature of Christ was ignorant of many things as the day of judgement the grave of Lazarus c. For if the Godhead were changed into flesh as Apollinarius held Themistius might well conclude that both the being and also the proprieties of the Godhead must suffer losse thereby and so falsly ascribe unto the Godhead that which was proper unto the manhood But if the foundation were unsure as it appeared § 2. their building must needs fall to the ground 3. And because the opinion of Eutyches concerning the only divine nature in Christ began to be hated therfore Cyrus by shop of Alexandria upheld it by the opinion of one will in Christ for said he the humane will of Christ either is none or not at all moved as the will of man but onely by God But to take away those proprieties which doe necessarily follow the nature and being of any thing is to destroy the thing it selfe so that to deny either the divine or humane will of Christ were to make him an unsufficient mediator and is directly contrary to that scripture which is Luke 22.42 Father not my will but thine be done 4. From whence Iordanus Brunus a Neapolitan in my time in Oxford would inforce a more wicked conclusion That Christ was a sinner because His will was not in every respect answerable to the will of God And because that which comes into the
wicked imagination of one may proove a stumbling blocke to another I will by the way remove this out of the way Therfore I answer That because man knowes not nor may presume to know what the secret will of God is hee may in the freedome of his owne Will will desire pray for and indeavor any thing which is not contrarie to the revealed will of God and that without sinne especially in such things as stand with the naturall desire of all the creature in the preservation of it selfe in the present being which it hath As a sicke man without sinne may use diet medicine and prayer for recovery although God in His secret will have determined he shall dye Davids purpose to build the Temple though against the purpose of God was so well accepted of God as that he thereupon received the promise of a perpetuall succession even till Christ the eternall king to come of his seed 2 Sam. 7.11 to 16. Nay when Hezekiah had heard the sentence of death from God Himselfe by the voice of his Prophet Esay 38. was his prayer and his teares accounted finnefull which God did so far accept as that he confirmed his petition by a miracle And although our Saviour knew himselfe to have come into the world that He should dye for the sinnes of the world yet might he without sinne pray unto His Father to save Him from that houre John 17.17 especially divers figures affording that hope was not Isaak in the very stroake of death rescued by the voice from heaven when the Ram was offered up in his stead Gen. 22. was not the scape goate Leu. 16.21.22 on which all the iniquities and sinnes of the sons of Israel were put sent away alive into the wildernesse But wherein was this repugnancy of his will to the will of God Not my will but thine be done He denyed his owne will he laid downe not onely his life but even the desire of life that he might performe the will of his Father so that the true conclusions which arise from hence or the like places are these first seing all men naturally desire to live and would not bee unclothed that is would not die 2 Cor. 5.4 but rather that our mortality might be swallowed up of life as it shall be with them who are found alive at the comming of the Lord 1 Cor. 15.51 and 1 Thes 4.15 16 17. Christ our Saviour was truly man both in the nature and all the naturall properties of a man contrarie to the heresie of Eutyches and the Monothelites of which you may reade further if you will in Thom. Aquinas contra Gent. lib. 4. Cap. 36. Secondly and because every pure and meerely naturall propertie is concreated with the thing whose property it is and that the desire of life is naturally in every thing which hath life and that without sinne lest he that put this desire in the creature should be supposed a cause of finne it was no sinne in our Saviour to desire life upon that condition contrary to the folly and falshood of Brunus Thirdly seeing that God the Father so loved the world as that he refused to accept the prayer of his owne beloved Sonne when hee besought him with strong crying and teares for life but would give him to that most bitter death for us what confidence and assurance of life may wee have when the price of our redemption is paid and hee our Redeemer restored unto life for if while we were enemies we were reconciled unto God by the death of his Sonne how much more being reconciled shall we bee saved by his life Rom. 5.10 ARTICLE III. ⧠VVhich was conceived by the Holy-Ghost CHAP. XXV ALthough it were said to Abraham That in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed so that the Humanity of Christ was in Abraham and the fathers originally and so descended unto Him yet you may not thinke that any determinate * You may see the contrary opinion in Galatin lib. 7. cap. 3. matter descended from Abraham or the rest of which the Manhood of Christ was to be made peculiarly no more then the manhood of all others that descended from them And as no more so no lesse was He in the loynes of Abraham then the other Israelites But yet with this difference That whereas all other men being borne according to the law of concupiscence are subject to originall sinne from both the parents a Hee being not so borne was not subject thereto And because He was not borne according to the flesh but according to the promise according to the Law of the eternall life that is of the eternall Father onely on the one side without a mother and so of His mother onely on the other side without a father Therefore was He as not subject to sinne so not tithed in Abraham when he gave tithes of all unto Melchizedek Genes 14.20 as Levi was Hebr. 7.9 10. for tithes are an acknowledgment of sinne in him that is tithed and a confession that he needs a mediator unto God But Christ being a Priest for ever according to the order of Melchizedek did therefore in Melchizedek receive tithes of Abraham and by Melchizedek blessed him with whom He had before-hand established His promise Gen. 12.23 Now when the fulnesse of time came that this promise of God should bee fulfilled the blessed Virgin Mary being sanctified by the Holy-Ghost unto holinesse of life and puritie of affections was so highly favoured and accepted of God as that in her tender yeeres for they write that shee was not above fourteene yeeres at the message of the Angel shee was vouchsafed worthy to bee the mother of the Saviour of the World Her heart being therefore purified by the Holy-Ghost to beleeve the promise of God made to her by the Angel and by him to bee perswaded of the possibilitie thereof Hee wrought in her also a free consent thereto a full submission to the will of God and a desire of the performance of the promise Reade Luke 1. from 28. to 39. Thus according to the nature of the Holy Spirit she first conceived her sonne in her Spirit or understanding and holy desires then by the working of the Holy Spirit that seed which is the originall of man-kinde was sanctified separate and sequestred into the place of naturall generation and the Eternall Son invested therein that according to the time of life Hee might bee borne the Son of man O sacred mysterie O miraculous conception Yet thus must His conception be who was to vnite all things in one But for all this is not Christ our Lord said to bee the Son of the Holy-Ghost although hee were thus conceived by Him nor yet the Son of the holy Trinitie as the Abissine Church confesseth For as concerning His eternall being Hee was the Son of the Father onely so for this His manly beeing Hee was the Son onely of His mother having His humane nature and birth of
truenesse of his Religion because he finds no familiar reason to perswade but onely the racke of authorities to constraine him to acknowledge it may perhaps bee hereby satisfied and finde comfort and that they who are already strong may by this overplus triumph in the goodnesse of God who requires them to beleeve no more then they may by that understanding which hee hath given them bee perswaded of I have for their sakes who may reape benefit thereby neglected all froward Censurers not guilty unto my selfe of any offence which I can commit in making it publike Such as it is accept kinde Sir as a parcell of that assertion which may hereafter follow of every Article of our Christian faith if God shall vouchsafe me understanding leisure and maintenance thereto I therefore offer it unto you both because I know you are diligent in reading of bookes of good argument and because I have none other meanes whereby to shew my selfe thankefull for your manifold kindnesses and your love London this 20. of April 1601. Your loving and assured friend A. G. THE TREATISE THough many things discouraged mee to write unto you of this Argument in such sort as I intend considering that neither your daily reading of the Scripture neither the perswasion of learned Divines can moove you to accord unto the truth though by manifest testimony of Scripture they conuince your heresie and most of all that God hath left you to beleeve that lying spirit of Antichrist who denyeth that Iesus is that Christ Yet neverthelesse having some hope that God of His goodnesse will at last pull you as a brand out of the fire and quench you with the dew of His grace that you may grow in the knowledge of His Sonne I will as briefly as I can lay downe some few reasons of that faith which every one that will be saved must hold Whereby if I perswade you nothing yet shall I obtain thus much that you who neither beleeved His word nor yet opened your eyes to see the light of reasonable understanding shall at last confesse that His word and judgments are holy and true But before I come to the point let me first perswade you that although the knowledge of the holy Trinity be one of the most high mysteries which can be knowne or beleeved and that it is the only worke of the Holy-Ghost to worke this faith and knowledge in the heart of man yet neverthelesse God hath not left us destitute of meanes whereby to come to this faith and knowledge but hath also with His word given us a reasonable soule and understanding whereby to grow in the knowledge of Himselfe and His will For when Adam was created he had given unto him all perfect knowledge meete for him Now God who created the world for no other purpose then the manifestation of His owne glory might not leave that creature without understanding of the Godhead who being by nature and creation the most excellent in this visible world was made for that purpose especially above all other to set foorth His praise and to call on Him Now how could he doe this if he knew Him not But I thinke that seeing it is said that man was created in the jmage of God you will not deny that man before his fall had much more perfect understanding of the Godhead then it is possible for him to have till he come to know even as he is known but that by sin you may say this knowledge was lost not lost but corrupted only even as mans will For then it should follow that we were inferior to bruit beasts who have in them a sensible knowledge meete for that end whereto they were created Furthermore it is not possible that mans sinne should frustrate the end which God intended in His creation but it is manifest that man was created to know and honour the Creator Againe seeing in Christ all things consist he being ordained of the Father before all worlds in whom the world should be both created and restored It is plaine that this light of our understanding both proceedeth from Him and is restored in Him as it is said Iohn 1. He is that light that lightneth euery man that cometh into the world not onely His chosen with knowledge of His saving trueth but even generally every man with reasonable understanding whereby we may know whatsoever is to bee knowne of God and how even by the workes of God as it is plainely concluded Rom. 1 19 20. Therefore are they not to bee heard who hold any thing without the compasse of Faith which is without the compasse of Knowledge For Faith ought so to be grounded on Knowledge as Hope is grounded upon Faith So that as Faith Hebr. 11.1 is said to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an eviction or proofe of things hoped for though they be not seene so may I say that Knowledge is the proofe of things which are beleeved For Faith is nothing else but the Conclusion of a particular Syllogisme drawne from the Conclusion of an universall which the knowledge of God had concluded as it is manifest Iam. 2.19 and Hebr. 11.3 By conference of which two places it appeareth that this knowledge of which I speake this Historicall Faith as to beleeve that there is one God which made all things of nought is onely such a knowledge as the devils and wicked men have but to beleeve and have confidence in this God is that particular conclusion and that faith which causeth us to have hope in His promises Therefore said Christ Have Faith in God that is strive to know God that knowing you may have faith and beleeve in Him And wee see that in these things where a bare faith without knowledge might seeme to be most required because as a man would thinke there were no reason to be given of them namely concerning the maintenance of this life and the resurrection to the life to come both Christ and His Apostles use no other reasons but such as every reasonable man may easily bee perswaded by though authorities of Scripture were not wanting to both purposes as it is manifest Matth. 6. and 1. Cor. 15. Yea Paul at Athens or wheresoever hee perswaded the worship of the true God among the Gentiles hee perswaded not by authoritie of Scripture which amongst them had beene very weake but by such arguments as they knew to bee sufficient even in themselues If these things were not so how then could the Gentiles which knew not the Scriptures be without excuse for their ignorance of God Therefore I conclude that there is nothing which is beleeved but it may also be knowen Now knowledge we know is ingendered by such principles as have trueth in them the which is evident of it selfe So that by plaine and reasonable understanding a man may know whatsoever he beleeveth You will say To what purpose then serue the Scriptures I answere That God infinite in goodnesse hath together with this