verse he is said to be the light of men In the 7. verse that Iohn came to beare witnesse of the light of whom did Iohn beare witness but of the Messiah Iesus Christ Iohn seeth Iesus Verse 29. comming to him and saith Behold the Lambe of God that taketh away the sinne of the world And a little after he Verse 33. professeth that it was reuealed to him by God which sent him to baptise that hee vpon whom Iohn should see the spirit come downe and tarry still on him was he which baptiseth with the holy Ghost Now vpon Iesus Verse 34. did Iohn see the holy Ghost light and settle and thereupon confidently affirmeth that he is the Son of God I might add hereunto that he is the Word by beliefe in whom we haue the prerogatiue to bee the Sons of God Verse 12. And who knows not that he is Christ l Gal. 3. 26. we are al the Sons of God by faith in Christ Iesus That m Ioh. 1. 14 the word which was made flesh dwelt among vs was no other but Iesus of whom Iohn bare witnes But what should I stand heaping vp needless proofes in a matter that is out of question The conclusion of the first point is this that the Word of which our Euangelist speaketh is Iesus Christ It followeth that we should inquire how this name The word belongeth to our Sauiour In which inquiry if I should but euen recite the conceits and subtilties of diuers writers I should spend all the rest of this hower in that only and weary my selfe and you to smal purpose Therfore to make short I will commend to your farder meditation some few reasons of this name which to me seeme the most likely These reasons coÌ„cern our Sauior eitheras he is the Son of God or as he is the mediator betwixt God man For the former the n Nazian lib. 2â— de filio Athana sius Hilarius Ambrosius Augustinus Cyrillus c. ancient later Diuines that haue labored to shadow out that vnspeakable mysterie of the holy Trinitie haue thought it fit to giue vs a little glimse of this dazling light by comparing God the Father to our vnderstanding God the Sonne to that which inwardly our vnderstanding conceiueth I will endeauour to speake as plaine as possibly I can to the capacitie of the simplest When a man inwardly discourseth and reasoneth with himselfe it is sure and cuident that he frameth in his mind a certaine kind of speech or sentence and as it were a word without sound which is called the conception of the mind If he desire to communicate this conceit of his to other men hee formeth some outward speech and words either vttering them with his mouth or writing them with his pen. Thus doth he delâ—uer out a Copie of that the Originall wherof he reserueth still within where it was first bred Let vs according to the weakenes of humane capacity apply this to the vnsearchable mystery of the Sonne of God Confider them reuâ—rently and humbly that God being from all eternitie infinite in wisedome hath alwayes had some conception in him as a man hath when he discourseth in his vnderstanding This conception in man though it remaine in the soule yet is not of the substance of the soule But in God that is most simple and without all manner of composition there can bee nothing that is not of his Diuine substance This conception of God is the second person in Trinitie the Sonne of God Would any know why the like conception in man is not the Sonne of man Let him remember that the Sonne must be of the same nature with the Father as our conception is not without vnderstanding but Gods is of necessitie because as I said ere while there can bee no composition I adde nor imperfection in the diuine Nature The first reason then why the Sonne of God is named the Word is this that he is begotten by his father in such manner as our inwarde word or conception is framed in vs. These things I confesse seeme to mee somewhat curious and subtill that I can hardly perswade my selfe they were intended by the Euangelist neither would I haue aduentured to propound them to you but for reuerence of o Dionys Roma apud Athanas Athanas de de finit Euseb de praepar Euang. lib. 7. cap. 4. Hilar lib 2. de Trinitate c. very many learned Diuines who from time to time haue continued this exposition But there is more likelihood that the holy Euangelist in giuing our Sauiour this name had respect to his mediatorship p Origen lib. 1. in Ioan Clem. Epiphan haer 73 Chrysost hom 2. in Ioan. Euthymius ad hunc locum either because it is he that reuealeth the knowledge of the father vnto vs or for that he was promised to be the Messiah That the former is a part of our Sauiour Christs office and hath bene performed by him from time to time it hath bin held time out of mind and may be prooued for these later times out of the Scripture Who almost is ignorant that q Tertul. contr Iudae cap. 9. the ancient writers were of opinion and the later haue receiued it as it were from hand to hand that the second person in Trinitie appeared oftentimes to the Fathers in the olde Testament euen as often as he that appeared is specified by the holy Ghost to be Iehouah I shall not need to quote the seuerall places Begin at Gen. 12. 7. and so goe forward and where you find that the Lord appeared to Abraham Lot Isaac Iacob or any other of the Fathers in the old Testament there make account you see heare the Sonne of God declaring some part of his fathers will to them to whom he speaketh If wee come to the New Testament whom haue wee there preaching but the Sonne of God r Heb. 1. 1. At sundry times and in diuers manners God spake in the old time to the Fathers by the Prophets in the last dayes he hath spoken to vs by his Son whom also he hath commanded vs to heare Å¿ Mat. 3. 17 This is my beloued Sonne in whom I am well pleased heare him And indeed whom else should wee heare since t Ioh. 1. 18 No man hath seene God at any time but the onely begotten Son which is in the bosome of the Father hee hath declared him Fitly then may hee bee called the VVord who is the Embassador of God his Father to make his will knowen to mankind by word of mouth in his owne person and by the ministery of them whom it pleaseth him to employ to that purpose To make this opinion the more likely u Ioan. Maldon ad hunc locum a popish Interpreter in his Commentarie vpon this place confidently affirmeth that the Chalde Paraphrast translates Iehouah by this word Memar 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a word as
vpon his words doubt of the holy Euangelists credite and doctrine that had been so many hundreds of yeares continued and confirmed by so many glorious Martyrs with their bloud and maintaitained against all the wisdom power of the world before Mahomet was euer heard of And yet what brings he but ignorance and impudency against the eternitie of our blessed Sauiour All he can say is this that if God haue a Son he must needes haue a Wifeto not vnderstanding in his wilful ignorāce that the Lord God hath no more neede of a Wife to the begetting of his Sonne then of hands to the making of this world Yea if comparison might bee made it is easier for God to beget a Sonne like himselfe which is naturall to him then to make the World which dependeth vpon his will and hath no other necessity of being Thus wee are faine to speake according to our poore vnderstanding wee knowe that God hath a Sonne how himselfe knoweth As for the Iewes we will send them to be taught of their owne country-man Iohn the Baptist whome they worthily magnifie as a man sent from God He it is d Ioh. 1. 27 sayth Iohn of our Sauiour that commeth after me which was before me whose shoo-latchet I am not worthy to vnloose But if their owne long continued and greeuous calamity with the destruction of their owne City and Temple in which they trusted be not of force to draw them frō the blasphemous errors of their wicked ancestors surely there is no possibility for any man to perswade them Therefore we will leaue them to the gracious mercie of God to be conuerted to the truth in his good time e Phil. 3. 21. By that mighty power by which he is able to subdue all things vnto himselfe and commend our selues to his fatherly blessing that we may bee strengthened in faith against all the assaults and practises of Satan and his instruments and may neuer doubt of the eternity of our most glorious Sauiour but alwayes ascribe to him with his Father and the holy Spirit one true immortal inuisible and onely wise God all glorie power obedience and thanksgiuing for euer and euer Amen THE SECOND SERmon vpon the first Chapter of IOHN Iohn 1. Verse 1. 2. 1. In the beginning was the VVord and the VVord was with God and the VVord was God 2. The same was in the beginning with God IT is generally thought and I thinke not vntruly that the blasphemous heresies of f Anno 85 Ebion and g Anno 95 Cerinthus who denyed that our Sauiour was God or had anie being before he tooke flesh of the holy Virgine his mother was one especiall occasion of writing this Gospell To root out that impious conceit and to establish the faithful in an assured beliefe of our blessed Sauiours eternall God-head our Euangelist truly and with Apostolicall authority affirmeth that the VVord was in the beginning Neither doth he content himselfe therewithall but for the further instruction of them that belieue hee addes that The VVord was with God and was God yea that The same VVord was in the beginning with GOD. The first point of our Sauiours eternitie was expounded as it pleased God to enhable mee in my former exercise I am now by his gracious assistance to goe forwarde with that which followes The VVord was with God Wherein for the words themselues first wee must enquire what is meant by God then what the Euangelist woulde teach vs when hee sayth The VVord was with God 1. h Orig. in Ioa. lib. 2. Chrysost in Ioan. hom 2 God when the word is properly taken not applied to a creature signifieth either the Diuine nature in all three persons The Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost or only the first of the three The Father Examples of the former are in euerie leafe and page of the Scripture Let vs alleage one or two out of this Gospell i Ioh 4. 24 God is a spirit Not God the Father onely but the Sonne also and the holy Ghost For this spiritualnesse is a propertie of the diuine nature not of anie one person therein else should not the other two bee spirituall The k Ioh. 16. 2. time shall come that whosoeuer killeth you vvill thinke he doth God seruice Surely no man that killeth Christians for beleeuing in CHRIST IESVS can thinke hee doth seruice to the Trinity For our Sauiour CHRIST is one of the three But the idolatrous heathen and the superstitious Iewes make accompt that they performe acceptable seruice to God namely to the diuine nature when they destroy them that acknowledge the three persons to bee one God or deny that there are more Gods then one or worshippe our Sauiour Christ as God Of the later the old Testament affords vs few examples or none the new very many and to make short wheresoeuer God and the Sonne or Iesus Christ are mētioned together there by God the Father is signified l Ioh. 3. 16 So God loued the world that he gaue his only begotten Sonne God what not the diuine nature For that hath no Son to giue else should the second person haue a Sonne and the third to because both the Sonne and the holie Ghost are the diuine nature or God no lesse then the Father But euery mans owne reason teacheth him that the Sonne is the Fathers Sonne So that by God which gaue his Sonne God the Father is vnderstood The same Father is also meant by the name of God when hee is mentioned with Christ m Rom. 1. 8 I thanke my God sayth the Apostle through IESVS CHRIST euen him whom in the next Verse before he had called God our Father Verse 7 Verse 9 and whose Sonne in the ver following he maketh Iesus Christ God is my witnessewhome I serue with my spirit in the Gospell of his Sonne Of the same kinde are all those places where there is any mention of praying to God in or thorough CHRIST For to him hath our Sauiour taught vs to pray n Luke 11. 2 VVhen yee pray saie Our Father vvhich art in heauen o Ioh. 16. 23 VVhatsoeuer yee aske the Father in my name hee will giue it you Now let vs see in whether of these two significations the word God is to bee taken in this place Surelie not in the former because then The VVord should haue beene with himselfe which is no reasonable speech For who vnderstands not that euery thing which is said to be with an other is diuerse from that with which it is sayde to bee Therefore if the VVord vverewith God the VVord was not God But the Euangelist directly auoucheth that the VVord vvas God What remaines then if by God wee will haue the Diuine nature to bee meant but that wee must confesse there are two Gods The VVord and hee vvith vvhom the VVord vvas But it is certaine in Religion and reason that there is but one God And therefore God
which is then should not bee God If you say with Arius that hee was created you deny that the beginning of all creation is truely described by Moses when he saith g Gen. 1. 1. In the beginning God created heauen and earth For if that you say bee true the most excellent part of the creation was already past namely the making of him by whom all these things afterward were created Who taught this strange Diuinity Where is any such thing recorded in any part of Scripture Who is so shamelesse as to say he hath it by reuelation Who so senselesse as to beleeue him that will say so This is our wisedome to know what it hath pleased God to reueale to vs in the Scripture either expresly or by consequence and to accompt nothing else a matter necessary to bee beleeued So then when we read or heare that our Sauiour was with God wee learne thereby that hee is himselfe God For what can be bee but God that had his being before and without all creation The word perhaps troubles thee because he is said to haue beene with God and therefore as it may seeme not God but an other An other Thou saiest well h Tertullian contra PraxeaÌ„ cap. 8. For hee is indeede in person as I aunswered once before another But where thou saiest not God thou â—rt deceiued vnlesse by God thou vnderstand the person of the Father VVith God signifies distinction of person not diuersitie of Nature Therefore i some learned Diuines by with thinke the holy Ghost meant to note his coniunction with Hilar. de Triit lib. 2. God the Father whereby they are one in vnitie of the same Diuine substance To which also they apply that which followeth in this Chapter where k Iohn 1. 18. The onely begotten Sonne is said to bee in the bosome of the Father and that l Ioh. 14. 10. 11 Chapter 14. I am in the Father and the Father in me yea m Epiphan â—aeres 93. saith one He is so with God that hee is in the substance of God and his very nature Wherfore if at any time thou beest disquieted by the word with as if it â—mplied some difference betwixt God and the Word remember that God signifies the person of the Father â—rom whom the Sonne is truly and really distinguisht â—et not by the nature of his Godhead which is one in both but by the property of his being the Sonne in which the Father and hee are alwayes not one but two â—he one the Father the other the Sonne And this last point concerning our Sauiour Christs person n Tertullian contra PraxeaÌ„ cap. 12. is manifestly vndoubtedly prooued by this part of the verse For it cannot bee imagined that any thing beeing in all respects one and the same should bee saide to bee with it selfe or in it selfe The word was with God If there be no distinction betwixt the word God how can it be conceiued that the word was with God I shall neede to spend the lesse time and paines in this matter because none but o August de haer cap. 4. the Sabellians euer made question of it They deceiued themselues and other men with an vnlikely fancy against euidence of Scripture that God was but one person called in diuers respects sometimes the Father sometimes the Sonne sometimes the holy Ghost But what respect can make this speech reasonable if there be but one person in the Godhead Let vs consider the point a little better Dauid was in regard of his gouernment a king in respect of his sonne Salomon a father in relation to his wife Bersheba an husband for his generall nature a man May I say of him because of these diuers respects that the father of Saelomon was with Dauid or with the man meaning Dauid Would not a man laugh at the absurditie of such a speech It cannot be then but that hee which was with God was really distinct or was truely and indeed another from him with whom hee was No respect will free the speech from a iust imputation of absurditie if the partie spoken of bee one and the same as well for person as for nature I reserue the farder handling of this matter till I come to the end of the verse following where I purpose if it please God to deliuer the doctrine of the holy Trinitie It may also farder be gathered that the Euangelist in saying The word was with God would haue vs to vnderstand that he p Gal. 4. 4. which in the fulnesse of time appointed by God tooke flesh of the Virgin Mary was till that time with God though vnseene and vnknowen to the world not as if he were not there still for euen while he was here vpon the earth he was also at the same time continually in heauen q Ioh. 3. 13. 17. 23. The Sonne of man which is in heauen and I will that they be where I am but because he came into the world where before he had not beene in the nature of man Heereto belongeth that which is other-where written by the r 1. Iohn 1. 2. 3. same Saint Iohn VVee declare vnto you the eternall life which was with Father and was made manifest to vs. Hee was with the Father from euerlasting he appeared in the world at the appointed time So is he now againe with God because he is no longer visible on earth as sometimes he was We may also adde hereunto that Å¿ Ambros de incarna domini Greg. Nysten de fide ad Simplic Rupertus aâ— hunc locum Cyril Hieorosol Cateches 11. this being with the Father implies the glory he had and hath with him as if he should haue said The word which was in the beginning was at the right hand of God in the glory of the Father equall to the Father Why seeke you the Creator amongst the Creatures If you desire to know where the VVord was consider that he was at the right hand of God the Father partaker of that glory which the Lord neither will nor can giue to any which is not the same God with him But of this enough Let vs come to the last part of the verse And the VVord was God or as the Greeke words lie God was the VVord but our tongue will hardly beare that kind of speech vnlesse the sense be altred For if you say God was the VVord an English man will conceiue that you tell him what God was and not what the Word was The Greeke and Latine may well beare such placing of the words the English will not yet perhaps it had beene plainer euen in the Greeke to haue set the words in order as the sense of them was intended and to haue said The word was God But the Euangelist as I noted once before vpon occasion followed an elegancie of speech which had bin lost if he had kept the naturall order of the words In the beginning was the
were moued by the holy Ghost So God is said to bee hee d Act. 2. 24. 25. 1. 16 that spake by the mouth of Dauid and the same God it tearmed the holy Ghost in an other place It is welknown that euerie where in the olde Testament the Iewes are accused resisting God That e Act. 7. 51. Stephen expoundeth of the holy Ghost O yee of vncircumcised harts and eares ye haue alwaies resisted the holy ghost as your fathers so you If then there bee but one God and â—et three distinct one from another be euerie one of them God how can it be denied that there are three persons f Mat. 28. 19. the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost To this the beginning as it were of our Profession leades vs when wee are baptised in or into the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost Now for the better conceiuing of this great mysterie touching the three persons it is necessarie for vs to vnderstand what a person is And then wee shall the more easily perceiue that euerie one of the three is a person And here if I should stand curiously to deliuer an exact definition of the thing and tell you that a Person is an indiuiduall â—ubsistence in an intellectuall nature or a seuerall or singular thing that subsisteth by it selfe in a nature indued with vnderstanding I should either leaue you more vncertaine then I found you or bestowe more time in expounding the wordes then shall neede I hope to make you discerne of the matter it selfe Wherefore to speake plainely rather then artificially it may please you first to bee perswaded that although the word person bee not in the Scripture applyed to the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost yet euerie one of them is so described therein that wee may and must needes conceiue him to bee a person according as wee vnderstand the word First who knowes not that there is no person but where there is a nature that hath reason and vnderstanding For no man euer calles any creature that is not indued with reason by the name of a person Who will or may say of tenne or twentie Lions Horses Oxen Apes or any creatures of the like kinde that there are tenne or twentie persons For example if wee haue a denne or a stall that will receiue tenne Lions or tenne Oxen no man will say such a denne or stall will holde tenne persons But if there bee a Table whereat tenne men may sit it is an vsuall speech to say it will holde tenne persons So that first to the being of a Person it is necessary that the thing which wee call a Person bee by nature indued with reason otherwise it cannot by any meanes be a person Secondly wee are farther to vnderstand that the word person notes vnto vs some one of that kinde and not many considered together For it were absurd to say of those tenne men before mentioned though necessarily they haue euerie one of them the vse of reason that they are a Person Thereâ—ore by Person wee meane any one of such a kinde Euery man euery woman euery childe is a person because euery one of them hath vnderstanding by nature and is seuerall or distinct by himselfe from al other so that no other man woman or child in the world in heauen or in earth is or can be the same person Some man perhaps will imagin that those qualities or vertues which are no where to bee found but where first there is reason as iustice wisedome temperance fortitude and such like may bee tearmed Persons especially since euerie one of these is seuerall from other But that cannot bee because whatsoeuer is a Person must depend on nothing as a part or property therof but must be intire of it selfe None of these qualities are such but all of them haue their being in some one person or other Salomons wisedom and Samsons strengtâ— haue no being but in Salomon and Samson with them they are if they cease to bee they are not The case is farre otherwise with Salomon and Samson themselues Let the wisedome of the one and the fortitude of the other be turned into folly and Cowardise yet shal each of them be still a person as before he was yea if there were no more Men Women nor Children in the world but they two or either of them yet should they both if both continued or the one of them if the one continued bee two persons or one person So then to the being of a Person it is required for the generall that the thing bee of such a kinde as hath natuâ—ally reason or vnderstanding more parrticularly that it be one singular thing of that kind and that it be such a thing as hath a subsistence by it self and depend not vpon any other as a part or property thereof whersoeuer we find such a thing we haue a Person yea so many Persons as wee haue such things Now let vs apply this to the blessed Trinity And first concerning the nature of God it neither is nor can be doubted but that he is the very fountain spring of all vnderstanding FroÌ„ which the smal streams continually do flowe which wee see in the shallowe channelles of the creatures g Psal 94. 9. Hee that planted the eare shall hee not heare Hee that formed the eye shall hee not see h Rom. 16. 27. To God only wise be prayse through Iesus Christ foreuer Amen Secondly it is apparaÌ„t in the Scripture that the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost are distinct each from the two other so that there is i Athanal Creed ver 24. But one Father one Sonne one holy Ghost and neither the Father is the Sonne or the holy Ghost nor the Sonne the Father or the holy Ghost nor the holy Ghost the Father or the Sonne Which proueth manifestly that euerie one of these three hath his subsistence by himselfe and so is a person Looke not that I should repeate that which before I deliuered take that one place for all Baptise them in the name of the Father of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost These three names Father Sonne and holy Ghost doe not signifie three vertues or qualities of one person but three distinct persons Therfore are they also alleag'd by the Apostle as three witnesses k I. Iohn 5. 7. There are three that beare record in heauen the Father the Word and the holy Ghost But this mater belongs rather to the second part of this discourse wherin I am to shew how they are distinguisht one from an other But ere I come to that point and yet I will hasten to it all I can I must needes forewarne you that none of vs for ought that hath beene or shall bee sayde conceiue of God as of the creatures There is one generall nature common to all men whereby they are men and so men as that euerie seueral person is a
seueral man Paul Peter Iames and Iohn are foure men aswell as foure persons But the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost are onely three persons and not three Gods For the establishing of your faith in this point I pray you remember that I haue made it euident to you out of the scripture both that euerie one of these is a seuerall person and also that they are all three but one God That euery one of them is God it hath been manifestly proued and no lesse that there is but one God Whereupon it must necessarily follow that they are all three not three Gods but one God And this is that which you haue set downe in the Creede named before l Athâ—nas Creed ver 3. That we worshippe one God in Trinitie and Trinitie in Vnitie that is one God and yet three persons Three persons and yet one God If any man for the satisfying of his minde desire farther to vnderstand the reason of this difference betwixt the Creator and the Creatures why euerie seuerall person amongst men should be also a seuerall man and not all one man and yet the three persons but one God he must knowe that this proceedes from the diuersitie of nature in God and man The nature of man being finit may be multiplyed into many seuerall men of the same kindes But the nature of God being infinit cannot possibly admitte any multiplication because there cannot be many infinits or infinit substances as there may be and are verie many finit substances seuerall and differing each from other He that can with iudgement and learning examine those points that concerne the nature of God may conceiue the truth of that I say they that cannot haue sufficient ground for their beliefe in the word of that God who neither can be deceiv'd in discerning his owne nature because he is infinitly wise nor will deceiue any man in speaking of it because hee is infinite in truth and goodnes â—et vs goe forwarde therefore to learne of him the doctrine of the Trinitie The word Trinitie as I sayd ere while of Person is in no place of Scripture but the thing being there we are not to refuse or mislike the word especially since it is of good vse and hath beene of so long continuance in the Chruch It is enough if wee vnderstand that whensoeuer the Trinitie is named all three persons are signified as for example when wee say the Trinitie is holy blessed and glorious wee meane that the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost are holy blessed and glorious When wee say the Trinitie of persons it is our purpose to shew the nuÌ„ber of the persons that they are three These two points touching the vnitie of the god head and Trinitie of the persons are set out at large in l â—â—th mas Creed ver 3. 4. 5 c. Ver. 4. the forenamed Creed from the beginning of the third verse to the ende of the twentie one verse The summe of all is this that wee must neither confound the persons nor diuide the substance To confound in that place signifies to mingle together and so to make one of many and that is the verie naturall meaning of the Latine word So that when wee are forbidden to confound the persons wee are taught that wee may not so hold the vnitie of the Godhead that we denie the Trinitie of the persons and in stead of three make but one whereas Ver. 5. according to the next verse There is one person of the Father another of the Sonne and another of the holy Ghost and not one of all three Neither yet may wee diuide the substance as if the diuine nature were multiplied according to the number Ver. 6. 7. of the persons For as it followeth immediately the Godhead of the Father of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost is all one the glorie equall the maiestie coaeternall Therefore all the attributes properties and titles which appertaine to God belong equally and in the same respects to all onely they are distinguished by that which is proper to each person The particulars whereby Ve. 8 9. 10 c. this matter is declared in the same Creede are these To be vncreated Incomprehensible Eternall Almightie to be God and Lord. All these and all the rest of this kind which are many are common to all three persons because the nature of all three is one and the same wherefore although wee must acknowledge euerie person by himselfe Ver 19. to bee God and Lord yet wee may not say there are three Gods or three Lords Ver. 20. I haue shewed you that there is but one God which is three persons euerie one of them being alike and equall in all things that belong to the nature of the godhead It remaines that I should speake of the distinction of the three persons onely so farre as to make vs vnderstand wherein that distinction consists For the better conceiuing whereof wee may say in one word that the manner of being which each person hath proper to himselfe is that by which they are distinguished in all other things there is no reall distinction of any one of them from another The very names themselues which are giuen to them seuerally in Scripture point to the distinction that is amongst them The Father as euery man knowes in that hee is a Father or as hee is a Father is conceiv'd to bee of himselfe and to giue being to his Sonne Consider Adam the first man without looking backe to his creation by which he had his being from God but looke onely forward as hee was his Son Abels Father Do you not plainely perceiue that Adam thus considered is author oâ— Abels being Apply this to God the Father Being God hee canne in that regard haue no authour nor beginning of being Consider him as the Father Hee Ver. 21 is of himselfe not made not created not begotten not proceeding It is not possible truly to imagine any thing of his Being but that Hee is May wee reasonably affirme the like of the Sonne Surely as hee is God there can nothing be sayd or conceiv'd of the Father but may truely and must necessarily bee spoken and thought of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost seuerally aswel as of the Father wherin then lies the distinction Euery man can readily answer In his manner of being or in his being the Sonne Take the former example Adam and Abel are both men in respect of their humane nature there is no difference betwixt them What then Is there none at all therefore yes sure Adam hath not his being of any other as hee is a Father Abell hath his as hee is a Sonne of his Father Adam Let it not trouble you that I mention a difference betwixt Adam and Abell and acknowledge no difference but onely a distinction betwixt God the Father and the Sonne the reason is because Adam and Abell are as two persons so two men God
Ver. 22. the Father and God the Sonne are indeede two persons but not two Gods Wee see then that the Father is truely and really a distinct person from the Sonne who though hee be neither made nor created by the Father yet is begotten of him and so hath not his being of himselfe but of his father and therefore in the manner of his being is distinguisht from the Father So is the holy Ghost or spirit from both of them You wil aske me by what he is distinguisht from them I answere Ver. 23. by his proceeding from them First it is manifest he is distinct from the father because he is not of himselfe in regard of his person as the father is Secondly although he agree with the Sonne in that each of them hath his being from a Third namely the Father yet in the particular maner of his being he is distinguisht froÌ„ him For the Sonne is begotten by the Father so hath his being but the holy Ghost is not begotten but proceedeth From whome doth the holy Ghost proceed From the other two persons the Father and the Sonne Of his proceeding froÌ„ the Father our Sauiour m Ioh. 15. 26. speaks distinctly and plainely The comforter shall come whom I will send you from from the Father the spirit of truth which proceedeth from the Father Therefore also hee is called the spirit of the Father It is not you that speake n Mat. 10. 2â— saith our Sauiour but the spirit of your Father which speaketh in you Now that he also proceedeth from the Sonne it may thus appeare All things o Ioh. 16. 15. saith our Sauior that the Father hath are mine And speaking to the Father he p Ioh. 17. 10. saitâ— All thine are mine The later of these two Texts may be vnderstood I grant of those things that are as wee speake without God but because it hath vsually beene applyed to proue this point I thought fit to alleadge it You will reply that all the Fathers is not the Sons That personall property whereby he is the Sonne is not the Fathers but the Sonnes that by which the Father is the Father is not the Sonnes but the Fathers Whatsoeuer else the Father hath the Sonne hath also But that the holy Ghost proceeds from the Father is not the personall property of the Father and therefore the Sonne hath that and so with the Father as it were by breathing produceth the holy Ghost who therfore is called the spirit of the Sonne and of Christ q Gal 46. God hath sent the spirit of his Sonne into your hearts If any man r Rom 89. haue not the spirit of Christ the same is not Christes It is not said indeed that the holy Ghost proceedeth from the Sonne as it is that he proceedeth from the Father but since he is called the spirit of the Sonne as wel as of the Father wee truely gather that hee proceedeth no lesse from the Sonne then from the Father though the one be exprest and the other be not To conclude then we see what the properties are by which the persons are distinguisht among themselues The Father begetteth neither is begotten nor proceedeth the Sonne is begotten but proceedeth not the holy Ghost neither begetteth nor is begotten but proceedeth All these 3. He that begetteth He that is begotten and He that proceedeth are all one and the same God to bee blessed and praised for euer and euer Amen Therefore are all 3 absolutely equall in all matters appertaining to the nature of God only there are 2 things wherein the Father hath as it were some praeeminence among the persons The one I noted by the way before that He is of himselfe so is neither of the other but both are of him The other is that the father is the first in order in these respects he is sometime called by Diuines the fountaine vâ—rse 25. of the Trinitie And whereas it is said in that Creed ofteÌ„ named that None of the 3 persons is afore or after other the meaning is that none of them is in time afore or after Verse 26. other all being eternall as the next verse sheweth saying that All 3 are coeternall that is alike eternall The Sonne also hath the like preaeminence aboue the holy Ghost For both he is in order before him beeing the second and the holy Ghost is of him as well as of the Father But these praeeminences concerne the persons which are distinct not the diuine nature which is wholly absolutely one as by which these 3 persons are one God To whome be all glory c. THE THIRD SERmon vpon the first Chapter of IOHN Verse 3. By it were all things made and without it was nothing made that was made Verse 4. In it was life c. ALL true knowledge of things ariseth either from an vnderstanding of their inward nature or from a consideration of their workes and actions The former teaching vs the hidden causes is the pefecter but the harder the later shewing vs the secret nature by the manifest effects is the lesse perfect but the more easie That nothing might be wanting whereby any man might be drawne or perswaded to the acknowledging of our Sauiour Christs Godhead our Evangelist hath both laid open the mystery of his nature and set out to all mens viewe the wonderfull glory of his workes Hast thou a desire to fill the depth of thy vnderstanding with the profouÌ„d knowledge of his eternall being Behold sufficient matter of continuall meditation and study In the beginning was the word and the word was with God c. Will not thy capacity or leasure serue thee to sound the depth of these bottomelesse mysteries Behold a shorter and easier meanes of knowledge by which thou maist see the glorious Sonne shining in his workes whome in his naturall brightnesse thy dazled eies cannot looke vpon If thou canst not perfectly comprehend the infinitnesse of his light yet thou shalt certainely discerne that it is infinite And with this desire and hope lette vs come to the expounding of this verse Wherein we are first to vnderstand what it is that our Euangelist here teacheth Secondly to see how it proues our Sauiour Christes diuinity In the former part I will speake of the clauses of this verse seuerally then I wil consider the matter of them ioyntly both together By him were al things made that is to speake plainly He made all things I am not ignorant that Å¿ Erasmus ad hunc locum some meÌ„ cast more doubts then need because the word Him in the greeke may bee referred either to God or to the Word and therfore they thinke it meete and needful so to translate it that it may be certainly and necessarily by the very translation restrained to the Word so that in their opinion we must say t Istud not IpsuÌ„ It not Him For mine owne part I will not striue
He that beleeueth in him that sent me hath euerlasting life and shall not come into condemnation but hath passed from death to life And in the same Chapter afterward hee Ver. 40. reproues the Iewes because they would not come vnto him that they might haue life Whereas the ende of his comming was Å¿ Ioh. 10. 10. That they might haue life and haue it in abundance Therefore doth t Act. 3 15. the Apostle Peter call him the Lord of life But whome shoulde wee rather heare in this case then u 〈◊〉 the Euangelist himselfe expounding his owne meaning The life appeared and wee haue seene it and beare witnesse and shew vnto you that eternall life which was with the father and appeared vnto vs. Can any man doubt but the Euangelist speaketh of the same life in the beginning of his Epistle whereof he intreateth in his Gospell Compare them together and see if you can perswade your selues otherwise Will you heare him speake yet more plaine x 5. 11. This is the recorde that God hath giuen vnto vs eternall life and this life is in his Sonne This later is called Eternall life in the wordes before Then surely the Euangelist speaketh in the Gospell also of eternall life which the Sonne of God bringeth as mediatator not of this transitorie life which hee giueth as Creator Now because this supernaturall life is double either of grace in this world or of glorie in the world to come I should farther inquire whether of these two is here meant or whether both be not meant But of that as also of the reason why our regeneration saluation is tearmed life I wil speake when I come to giue the meaning of the place In the meane while let vs goe forward in examining the words and first let vs see why he vseth this kinde of speech In him Why doth he not rather say as before by him doubtlesse hee might well haue sayde so For it is by him indeede that wee haue life y Rom. 5. 1. 2. By him wee haue peace toward God By him wee haue accesse through Ver. 11. faith vnto this grace wherein wee stand By him wee haue receiued the attonement But this manner of speech though it bee as true as the other yet it is not so fitte in this place nor so significant Not so fitte because the Euangelist would put a difference betwixt the Creator and the Mediator All things were made by him not in him though * Origen hon 2. â—n â—â—uers some would haue without to imply as much whome I aunswered the last day But our spirituall life is as by him so in him The things that are made by him howsoeuer they alwayes depend on him for the continuance of their being yet they are not one with him Is it so with them that receiue the life of grace from him No no They are ioyned close vnto him and the life that they haue is from that spirit by which hee liues Therefore is a Eph. 5. 3â— the Church flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone yea all the faithfull are members of his bodie himselfe being the head This neere coniunâ—ction with him could not bee exprest so significantly if the Euangelist should say By him was life as it is when hee sayth In him was life yet doth not say Hee was life which also is true because heâ— speakes of it not as it rests in him but as it is communicated by him to vs. But why sayes hee was and not rather Is in him Is there no life nowe to bee had Or is there any to bee had nowe but in hiâ— No surely There is no saluation in any other b â—â— 4. 12 For amonge men there is giuen no other name vnder heauen whereby â—ee must bee saued How then sayes the Euangelist that lâ—â—e was in him c Tolet. in â—â—â— innot 13. Wee may not imagine that â—ee meanes to shewe vs anye other way of attayning to life as if was excluded is No more then wee may conceiue that the Word is not GOD nowe because hee sayeth of him The Worde was God What may then bee the reason of this manner of speech It is thought to bee double either in reâ—uard of Gods eternall purpose or in respect of the â—mes before the comming of the Messiah The former wee must thus vnderstand that the Lorde God fore-seeing the fall of his creature man decreed in himselfe to recouer him by sending his Sonne to make satisâ—action for sin by sacrificing of himselfe vpon the altar of the crosse Of this saith d 2. Tim. 1. 9. the Apostle He hath saued vs and called vs with an holy calling not according to our works but according to his owne purpose and grace which was giuen vs through Iesus Christ before the world was Therefore also sayth our Euangelist e 1. Ioh. 1. 2. other where that this life was with the Father and appeared vnto vs. When the fulnesse of time was come sayth Saint Paul God sent his Sonne What fulnesse of time was this but the very hower appointed by God So that Saint Iohn may well say In him was life Because euen before the foundations of the world were layd life was setled and shut vp in the person of the Sonne who was in due time to become the mediator of mankinde by taking the nature of man vpon him If there bee any man whome this aunswere doth not content it may bee the other coniecture will satisfie him Let vs not wearie our selues with looking so far as to the eternall decree of GOD but keepe our sight within the compasse of the worlde within that time also wee shall finde some reason of this speech When was life in him euer since there was any to whome that life might appertaine it was ready for him in the Sonne of GOD the promised Messiah f Gen. 3. 15. Where had our first parents Adam and Eue their spirituall life after the Curse but in him In whom was the couenant established with g Gen. 12. 3. Gal. 3. 8. Abraham but in his seede Iesus Christ What name I some speciall men Did not this life offer it selfe generally vnto all that came of Abraham Brethren I would not that you should bee ignorant sayeth h 1. Cor. 10. 1. 2. 3. 4. the Apostle that all our fathers were vnder the Cloude and all passed through the Sea And were all baptized vnto Moses in the Cloud and in the Sea And did all eate the same spirituall meate And did all drinke the same spirituall drinke For they dranke of the same spirituall Rocke that followed them and the Rocke was Christ What though many thousandes dyed before the Sonne of God became men were they therefore without meanes of life and saluation Nothing lesse i Heb. 13. 8. Iesus Christ yester-day and to day and the same for euer They beleeued in Christ to come wee beleeue in him being come
strange in it and which but by reuelation from God could not possibly bee knowne or thought on Behold sayth hee a Virgin shal Isay 7. 14. beare a Sonne Neither doth hee onely prophecie of his miraculous conception but also hee signifies the great mystery of his person consisting of two natures diuine and humane She shall call his name Emanuell Which is Mat 1. 23. by interpretation sayeth Saint Mathewe God with vs. His life and death is shortly but verie liuely described by the same Prophet Hee shall growe up before him as Iâ—ay 53. 2. a braunch and as a roote out of a dry ground c. Hee was cut out of the Land of the liuing Yea hee addes Ver. 8. to this the maine point of Redemption forgiuenesse of sinnes by his sufferings and death Hee was wounded for our transgressions he was broken for our iniquities the chastâ—sement of our peace was vpon him and with his stripes wee are healed Daniell describes the verie time Dan. 9. 25. and settes downe an exact computation by the direction of the Angell Gabriell till the death of the Messiah and withall preacheth forgiuenesse of sinnes by him Were not these witnesses were they not sent from GOD to beare witnesse of the Messiah What though they were also imployed in other matters of renroofe and instruction So was Iohn too as it is manifest by all the other 3. Euangelists Mat. 14 3. 4. Mat. 6. 17. 18. Luk. 3. 19. who shew that the occasion of his death was the rebuking of Heroa for taking his brother Philips wife But the Prophets only spake of such an one that was to come they did not witnesse that hee was come they did not shew which was he they did nor say Beholde the lamb of God This is hee as Iohn did Therefore is his ministery in this respect preferr'd far before theirs by our Sauiour Christs owne iudgement Iohn was more then a Mat. 11. 9. 11. Prophet Among them that are begotten of women arose there not a greater then Iohn Baptist Well let him haue the name of a witnesse aboue all the Prophets that went before him yet the Apostles haue that title giuen them by Christ himselfe aswell as hee yee shall be witnesses to me saith our Sauiour in Ierusalem Act. 1. 8. and in all Iudea and in Samaria and wherein their commission went beyond Iohns vnto the vttermost part of the earth And Iohn himselfe though he were magnified aboue the former Prophets in regard of his ministery Yet is he euen therin made inferior to the Apostles Mat. 11. 11. He that is least in the kingdome of heauen is greater then he It is not to be denied but that the Apostles were witnesses in a very extraordinary sort being chosen before to giue notice of such things as should befall our Sauiour to all the world Therefore to them did hee appeare after his resurrection Him saith Peter God caused to bee Act. 10. 40. 41. showne openly Not to all the people but to witnesses chosen before of God to vs which did eate and drinke with him after he was risen from the dead Notwithstanding the witnesse of Iohn was of an other kinde then either the Prophets or Apostles For the one foretold that hee should come into the world the other affirmed that he had bin in the world Only Iohn was hee that shew'd him while hee was in the world who was long before prophecied of for an immediate forerunner of him at his comming Luk. 1. 17. and to make ready a people for him We see of what kinde his testimony was Iohn came and preached in the Wildernesse of Iudaea let vs now inquire what it was that hee witnessed Whereof I shall neede to say verie little because I spake of it in handling the former point In one worde the summe of his testimonie was this first that the kingdome of Mat. 3. 2 heauen was at hand that is as Saint Luke expresseth the matter He preachedthe baptisme of repentance for the remission Luk. 3. 3 of sinnes Hee testified to all the Iewes and to al that heard him that there was no means nor hope of saluation but by repentance of their sinnes and resting vpon the Messiah who was now amongst them though they knewe him not for pardon therof by his death and sacrifice The second and most proper part of his testimony was the pointing out and shewing of him that was the Messiah that all men might knowe and embrace him Behold the Lambe of God that taketh away the sinne of the world This was the testimony of Iohn But that which principally concerneth the reason why our Euangelist mentions his bearing witnesse is to bee fetcht out of the third Chapter of this Gospell where a Sermon of his is recorded in which he commends our Sauiour to all meÌ„ as him who being sent froÌ„ God to be the Messiah speaketh Ioh. 3. 34. the words of God so that by him all other are inlightned who are of the earth and speake of the earth wheâ—eas Ver. 31. 32. he testifieth nothing but that which hee had seene and heard Truely therfore he is called the light who being in the bosome of his father reueales to men the secrets of his rather touching their redemption which no man euer knew or can knowe but from and by him What vse then was there of any witnesse If neither Iohn had any knowledge but from him and hee onely was able to inlighten whom hee would why did God end the Baptiâ— to beare witnesse of the light Needes â—â—e Sunne the day starre to shewe him to the world This was a meanes likelier to make Iohn bee for Ioh. 1. 19. 20. the Messiah then to credite the Messiah by his reportâ— as wee see also it came to passe whereof hereafter But that no man may either conceiue amisse or bee euer-much troubled with this doubt let vs take a shorte viewe of the purpose of GOD herein The ende of all teaching and preaching concerning Christ is to bring men to beleefe in him This was first to bee done amongst the Iewes For the better performing whereof it pleased God to deale gratiously and bountifully with them in affording many and diuers meanes by which they might bee moued and perswaded to beleeue Among the rest this was one whereof the Lord thought good to make choyse euen to send them a man after so extraordinary a manner who being in especiall credite and fauour with them by his authoritie and gratiousnesse might draw them to beleefe Coulde there anye more likely meanes bee deuised to perswade them He was lookâ— after as one that would prooue some rare man from his very Cradle His course of lise was such as might yet procure more admiration When hee came to the execution of his ministerie how powerfully did hee worke vpon the hearts of them that heard him what a fame went there of him farre and neere what
that should be written VVhat worlde may bee said to containe or not to containe but the space of heauen and earth Sometimes it is taken more particularly for the earth where men liue and this Mat. 4. 8. is very common The Deuill shewed our Sauiour all the kingdomes of the world As long as I am in the worlde saith our Sauiour I am the light of the worlde Ioh. 9. 5. In what worlde was our Lorde when hee said so Heere on earth amonge men whose light hee vvas Into this worlde hee sent his disciples Goe into all Mat. 28. 15. the worlde that is into all partes and coastes of the earth To this signification of the worde belonges that in the verse next before and such other places Euery man that commeth into the world that is Verse 9. Ioh. 16. 21. borne In an other text it is more plaine A woman when shee is deliuered of child remembreth her anguish no more for ioy that a man is borne into the world These significations are common and well knowne as comming neere to the ordinary and first vse of the worde Besides these it is very often taken more especially or Men who are the principall parts of the world and for whome the whole was made VVhen the worlde 1. Cor. 1 21. in the wisedome of God knewe not God by wisedome Knowledge is proper to men and belongeth not to any other of these visible creatures God was in Christ 2. Cor. 5. 19. reconciling the world to himselfe not imputing their sinnes To whome are sinnes forgiuen but to men Who are reconciled vnto God by Christ but men IIee tooke Heb. 2. 16. not the Angells who shall euer remaine vnreconciled But hee tooke the seede of Abraham Thus the world signifieth in generall all kinde of men whatsoeuer But because that naturally men are naught and wickked the worde is sometimes put in particular for the wicked and almost for wickednesse You are of the world saith our Sauiour to the Iewes that woulde Ioh 8. 23. 77. not beleeue I am not of this worlde The worlde cannot hate you saith hee in an other place but mee it hateth They are of the worlde saith Saint Iohn of tâ—e false teachers that denyed Iesus to bee come 1. Ioh. 4. 5 in the flesh Therefore speake they of the vvorlde and the world heareth them In this respect is the Deuill called the Prince of the worlde Yea the world is as it Ioh 12. 31. 1. Ioh. 2. 16. were the fountaine of naughtinesse All that is in the worlde saith Iohn as the lust of the flesh the lust of the eies and the pride of life is not of the Father but of the worlde I may adde in the last place that the riches honours pleasures and such like that the worlde affordes are tearmed sometimes by the name of the worlde though they bee not so much partes as appurtenances thereof VVhat should it profit a man though he should winne the whole worlde if hee lose his owne Mar. 8. 36. soule VVhat is this whole worlde but the honours pleasures and riches of the world But I haue stood too long vpon this matter Let vs now apply it to our present purpose for the vnderstanding of the holy Ghosts meaning But we cannot certainely determine in what sense the world is here spoken of till we knowe of what being in the world the Euangelist is to be vnderstood Now our Lord may be said to haue beene in the worlde in two respects either as he was God or as he was the Messiah In the former sense he was alwaies and is still and euer shall bee after the same sort in the world In the later he was not in the world till he tooke flesh of the Virgin his mother nor since his ascension into heauen As God by his prouidence power and wisdome he maintaines and gouernes al things As the Messiah he taught and informed the world of his Fathers will touching the saluation of mankind His being in the world as God was and is for the preseruation of naturall life His presence as Messiah was to bring supernaturall life by the light of grace Whether of the two is it moâ—e likely the holy Ghost meaneth in this place If we vnderstand it of the former seeing hee speakes not of the nature of the Godhead which is the same in all three persons but of the person of the Sonne how can the world be iustly condemned for not knowing him wheÌ„ he was present For it is a rul'd case in diuinity that the mystery of the Trinity cannot bee discerned by the light of nature or gathered from any contemplation of the creatures It is true indeed that since it pleased God to reueale this incomprehensible secret many men haue labored to set forth the point by similitudes and to apply somethings in the creatures to the manifesting of the trinity in vnity But all the light they bringe to this point is such as rather shewes that themselues were perswaded of that truth then is of force to conuince their Iudgement that will not beleeue In one worde they giue vs to vnderstand that such a thing in likelyhood maye bee they doe not demonstrate that of necessity it must bee As for those shadowes of this mystery which seeme toly hid heere and there in the writinges of some Philosophers neither are they sufficient to argue that the penners of those books acquainted with the doctrine of the Trinitie and they are so sparingly and fearfully deliuered that a man may easily see they were altogether vncertaine of the truth and almost of the meaning of that they writ And in what authors doe wee meete with any shewe of these matters but onely in theÌ„ who profess they receiued their instruction from the Egyptians and Chaldeans who learned those points by Tradition from Noah and so from Adam to whom God reuealed the knowledge thereof or else are knowne to haue beene the Schollers of the Hebrewes from time to time Neither doth it suite well with the course of our Euangelists writing to expound this being in the world of such naturall maintaining thereof For the whole discourse from the beginning of the fourth verse as I haue shewed is a description of the Messiah Such was the life that wee haue in him such the light wee receiue from him wholly supernaturall Of that Iohn beares witnesse not of his creating or preseruing all thinges That was it which he laboured to haue all men beleeue That is the thing which our Euangelist denies of the Baptist Hee was not the light In regard of that is our Sauiour called the true light Who shall perswade mee then to apply this verse to his diuine power of preseruation and not to the gratious worke of his medâ—ation especially considering the next verse is generally for the most part so interpreted and as it is apparant by the verse following ought to be Wherfore I willingly subscribe
bolde with your good liking I doubt not to declare the point more fully and plainely by the opening of these two things what adoption is how God hath adopted vs. Adoption if wee consider the Adoption word for the nature of it is nothing else but choosing to a mans selfe whatsoeuer it bee that is chosen From this generall signification the word is applyed to note that particular choyse of sonnes or children The Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expresseth the particular and signifieth an appointing of children The word being vnderstood it is no hard matter to knowe the nature of the thing it selfe which not to stand vpon any curious definition is a choosing or taking of them for our Children which by nature are not ours So as wee heard Iacob made choise of Iosephs sons Ephraim and Manasses Pharaohs daughter tooke the childe of an Hebrew whome shee knew not Mordicai chose Esther his Vncles daughter to bee his childe Let vs apply this to our owne Adoption The father that adopteth is God the childrē to be adopted are men and women If they must become the children of God by Adoption it is cleer they are none of his by nature Whose then I am a shamed and affraide to vtter it Our Lord himselfe hath told vs discouering the naturall estate of all men in describing the Iewes Wee Ioh. 8. 41. are not borne of fornicatiō say they to our sauiour We haue one father which is God But what doth he answere them Ver. 44. Ye are of your father the Deuill If the Iewes Gods owne children after an especiall manner yea his first borne were notwithstanding the children of the Diuell surely no man in his naturall estate can be the childe of God Rom. 9. 4. They had the Adoption they had the Couenant Other people had nothing affoorded them by God but those generall helpes which are common to all by nature What becomes of these children of the Diuell As many of them as beleeue in Christ are by Adoption made the sons of God Being sons they haue withal conuaied vnto them not onely an interest and claime to their fathers estate be it neuer so great but also the inheritance of heauen If we be children we are also heyres This passeth the ordinarie course of Adoption A man may adopt many sonnes and yet not make them all heyres I doe but name these things now They shall be amplified if it please God in the next point where the Prerogatiue must be declared In the meane while let vs go forward to shew How we are adopted There are two things that offer themselues to be considered in respect of the party that adopteth The generall motiues why he will adopt The particular reason why he will make choise of this or that person The generall motiues are ordinarily two either simply default of naturall issue or at the least want of such children as are fit for such an estate or inheritance I confesse it was otherwise with Iacob who had sonnes enouw of his own body The case was extraordinarie hee directed by the spirit of prophecie to make choise of them to that dignity But ordinarily the motiues are such as I named and in likelihood were the same or one of thē in Pharaohs daughter Mordecat What place had they in our adoption by God Certainly none at all Touching the former which is the more cōmon of the two was God without issue If he had bin seeing himselfe is eternall as with out beginning so without end he needed not feare the decay of his house for want of Posteritie to succeede him Dauid was to be gathered to Psal 132. 11. his fathers therefore it was a singular fauour to him that he should haue children to sit vpō his throne after him But he that neuer dyeth neuer groweth weake or weary hath no neede of a successor or assistant in his kingdome But he had issue euen a sonne the brightness of the glory the ingrauen forme of the fathers person Milk is not so like to milke as that son is to that father being in nature all one with him differing in nothing but that the one is the father not the sonne the other the sonne not the Father But perhaps he might be vnfit for the managing of such an estate succession to such a father Go to let vs for the better setting out of these points imagin a succession conceiue of God for a while as of a mā The vnfitnes in a son for succession is either from the weaknes of his body that he is not likely to leaue issue behind him or for the badness of his cariage want of capacitie dissoluteness in gouernment or some such matter This son of God that I may not dwell too lōg vpon this point nor speak any thing with out due reuernce of his maiesty was euery way so qualified fitted to his fathers minde that it was impossible I will not say that any adopted sonne should come neere him but that greater fitnes could be desired or imagined This is my beloued sonne saith the father of him Mat. 3. 17. Chap. 17. 5. in whom I am well pleased And he repeats that testimony the second time at his transfiguration It was not for neede then as it is with men that the Lord vouchfaf't to thinke vpon adopting of sonnes But admit the case had so stood with him that it had bin requisite for him to make him sonnes by Adoption What is vsually the reason of mens particular choyse Is it not an affection or liking that the partie hath to some one rather then to another There may sometimes be some other respects but this is the commonest and best setting that of kinred aside Consider a little the dealing of our God in this behalfe Must he choose som creatures to be his sonnes and ioynt heires with his owne naturall son He hath thowsands and ten thowsand Dan 7. 10. thowsands of Angelles round about his throne Glorious in their nature Obedient in their seruice Holy in their desires Neuer a one of these is chosen to this fauour of Adoption It may be the Lord intendes to shew the riches of his mercy by extending compassion to thē that are in miserie Behold the Angels that ly 2. Pet. 2. 4. lud ver 6. in darkenes reserued to the iudgement of the last day Is there any mans estate more desperate Haue any creatures greater need of succor Can there be more pitty shewed to any They are left in that damnable estate The Lord turnes his face away from their misery and casts his eyes of compassion on our wretchednesse So makes he difference betwixt men and Angels Hee will adopt men rather thē Angels because his loue is greater to men then to Angels Our Adoption then proceede◠no◠for the generall motiues or the particular respects from any other spring then the loue of God who adopteth vs making vs
can hardly perswade my selfe to thinke so For thought it be true that by flesh and bloud man oftentimes is signified yet the wordes in that sense are neuer so diuided or placed Let vs take the examples which they alleage that so expound these wordes Flesh and bloud hath not revealed these things to thee Flesh and bloud Mat. 16. 17. 1. Cor. 15. 50 cannot inherit the kingdome of God All the rest are like these wherein who doth not easily marke both that Flesh is still set in the first place and Bloud neuer Flesh and Bloud not Bloud and Flesh and also that they are alwaies ioyned together and not seuered the one from the other If our Euangelist had meant to haue spoken of man by that kinde of speech hee woulde haue said which are borne not of flesh and bloud May wee diuide those former places Flesh hath not reuealed Bloud hath not reuealed Flesh caÌ„not inherit Bloud cannot inherit These were marueilous strange kinds of speech not agreeâ—ble to the phrase of the holy Ghost in Scripture Wherefore thoh I acknowledge that interpretatioÌ„ to be true for the generall sense of it yet I see not how I may like of it in the particulars especially seeing the holy Ghost vseth a diuers manner of speech in these 2 later from the former There hee said no more but Not of bloud In the other he denies also the will or desire not of the will of the flesh not of the will of man Let vs then if you please vnderstand by bloud the matter by flesh the man the efficient cause and maker as it were what shall wee say of the will of the flesh and man Surely I will not grratly striue with any man who thinkes it should be taken for concupiscence It is enough that I propounded the reason of my doubt before Giue mee leaue now to deliuer what I conceiue of the matter which is no more but this that I had rather vnderstand by will desire then lust What then shall bee the sense of it This as I take it that the Euangelist giues vs to vnderstand that the Sonnes of whom hee intreates are not borne according to or by any desire of man which might procure or affect or wish that kinde of Son-ship How fitly this will agree with the scope of the place it shall appeare by and by when I haue examined that which remaines All that wee haue said hitherto concerning this birth is to shew whence it is not Not of bloud not of man VVhence is it then Of God God sometimes notes the nature of the God head sometimes some one of the three persons How may wee most fitly expound it in this place What if wee referre it to the Ioh. 3. 5. sanlen in concord Euang. cap. 1. holy Ghost the spirit of whome euery man must bee borne that shall enter into the kingdome of God I doubt mee wee shall hardly finde any one place of Scripture where the worde God signifieth any seuerall person but the Father I deny not that in some place that is said to be don by God which in som other is particularly ascribed to the Sonne or to the holy Ghost but I say that in those places where God is so named the nature is to bee vnderstood nd not any one person The compareing of these places together doth teach vs that the Sonne and the holy Gost are by nature God but it doth not proue that where God is named there either of these two persons is specially signified Neither is it necessary to apply this to God the Father but rather the opposition standeth betwixt the diuine humane nature not of man that is not of man-kind or of the nature of man but of God of the diuine nature which is one and the same in all three persons Thus haue wee the meaning of the Euangelist that the Sonnes hee spake of arise not to that dignity by any power or wisedome of man but meerely and only by the mighty worke of God himselfe who begets them to himselfe by the effectuall working of his spirit and of his owne gratious fauour vouchsafeth to adopt them for his Sonnes I doe the rather make the sense so large because I woulde not willingly omitte any thing which it may bee reasonably presumed the holy Ghost did or might intende For the cleerer vnderstanding whereof let vs cal to minde what was before deliuered at the twelfth verse that there is a double Son-ship in respect of GOD the former is that whereof our LORD disputes with Nicodemus by which wee are borne againe Ioh. 3. 35. c. of the spirit and fitted for the later which is our Adoption by GGD the Father The prerogatiue of being the Sonnes of GOD is our being adopted which is not vouchsaf't vs by GOD at the first while wee are in our corrupt naturall estate but then only bestowed vpon vs when by beleeuing wee are become one with IESVS CHRIST the naturall Sonne of GOD his Father The other Sonne-ship is but a preparing of vs therevnto by which that beleefe is begotten in vs by the powerfull working of the holy Ghost in the ministery of the worde In this sense the thirteenth verse dependes thus vpon the last wordes of the twelfth Saint Iohn had said that they become the Sonnes of GOD which beleeue in the name of the Messiah Hee proceedes to shewe how they attaine to this beleefe By being borne not of bloud c but of God They haue it not by nature in their birth they get it not by any naturall desire or will but they are borne anew of God and haue it by him framed and formed in them The doctrine of both these points is most true the wordes will beare them both they will both stande with the scope of the place and purpose of the Euangelist Chrylost in Io. homil 9. The oph ad hune locum that I am not afraid of doing any wrong to the Text though I make so large an interpretation therof Let vs then in the feare of God handle these things some what particularly but shortly as the time requireth What a prerogatiue it is for men to bee the Sonnes of God wee heard in the last exercise here the Euangelist farder sets foorth the excellency thereof by shewing the basenesse of our naturall birth which for the matter of it is bloud for the making at the best but humane whereas the other is wholly and only from God I will not amplify the former point touching our naturall birth as I might doe but only referre you to the consideration of it by your selues For your better direction wherein I will name two Iob. 10. 9. 10. 11. Ezech. 16. 4. 6. places of Scripture which I commende to your humble and diligent meditation In the former the naturall breeding of man-kind is purposely described in the later his birth is shewed by way of allegory if wee consider the intent of the holy Ghost but
preuaile is so contrary to the desire of flesh and blood taking away all manner of glory from man and couering him with shame ignominy yea stripping man of his greatest pride the freedom of his will without the comfort wherof he hath naturally no ioy in any of his actions whatsoeuer The holy Ghost then is the enditer of these bookes Men especially authorised by him the Penners Amongst whome this our Euangelist was not the least a man singularly affected by our Sauiour Christ and therefore often thus described r Ioh. 13. 23. 19. 26. 20. 2. 21. 7. 20 The Disciple whom Iesus loued That this Gospell was of his writing it appeareth by the end thereof where it is said s Iohn 21. 24 This is that Disciple which testifieth these things wrot these things Now what that Disciple was the twelfth verse sheweth Then Peter turned about and sawe the Disciple whome Iesus loued vppon that sight of him Peter tooke occasion to question with our Sauiour about him and in the end of that conference set downe by the Euangelist follow the wordes I recited before This is that Disciple But how shall we knowe that This beloued Disciple was Iohn Surely the Gospell no where expresseth who it was as you may see in the places before alleaged where there is no signification of his name and other place wherehee is called the beloued Disciple there is none Wee are therefore in this point also to haue recourse to the perpetuall iudgement of all Christians who haue without any doubting deliuered this vpon their credit as it were from hand to hand Whereof we may the better be perswaded if we remember consider how easie it was for them that liued in this Euangelists time and were as we shall heare anone the occasion of his writing to informe themselues most certainly of the Author of this Gospell It may be some man wil yet doubt whether the Apostle Iohn were the penner of this Gospel or no because he hath not named himself as hee hath done in the Reuelation For the satisfying of which doubt it may please him to vnderstand that this book is an history as those of the Kings are that of Ester of Iob such like to which the Authours of them haue not set their names But the other of the Reuelation is a prophecie as the writings of Isay Ieremy Ezekiel Daniel and the rest euery one of which hath the Authours name particularly rehearsed in it Now for the name it self if it may adde any credit to the person or signify any part of his nature or grace bestowed vpon him whom may we prefer before this our Euangelist whose very name Iohn in the originall Hebrew soundeth out grace fauour To which if we adioyne that testimony of the holy Ghost so often repeated in this Gospel that he was the Disciple whom Iesus loued what can bee thought wanting that might commend him to vs For howsoeuer the loue of God be no proof of any excellency in the party beloued frō which this loue should arise yet it is a most certain demonstration of some great worth in him after hee is beloued Because t Ezec. 16. 3. 6. 7 13. 14 the loue of God alwayes bestowes on him whom it once embraceth some assured testimony that hee is beloued of God It findes nothing worth the louing but it giues something it makes the party louely though of himselfe he be worthy of hatred And surely if euer this effect of Gods loue appeared in any as it sheweth it self in all that are beloued of him more or lesse it was euidently to be seene in this our Euangelist u Matth. 4. 21 who of a poore Fisherman ignorant and young became in a short space admirable to all the world for varietie and certainety of all diuine wisedom and knowledge insomuch that x Basilius homil in Ioa. c. 1. the most learned and excellent of all the Philosophers are reported to haue wondered at the mysteries conteined in the beginning of this Gospell which y August de ciuit dei lib. 10. cap. 29. they thought worthy to be written in letters of Gold And yet poore souls they wondred at that which they fully vnderstood not If they had been vouchsaf't that honour and happiness wherof the Lord in his infinit mercy hath made vs partakers To conceiue feele the truth of these mysteries to our euerlasting saluation oh how would they haue triumphed And is it possible wee should so lightly esteeme it Therfore shall they be our iudges if we stirre not vp our dead affections to embrace as it were with both armes the kinde offer of so glorious and wondrous knowledge deliuered by him who was of all other most deare to our Lord and Maister Iesus Christ Wherof if any man desire to see more particular proofe let him looke vpon this our Euangelist * Iob. 13. 23. 24 laying his head louingly and familiarly in the bosome of our Sauiour and behold Simon Peter a man in no small fauour with his Lord Iesus Christ beckning to him as one that might bee most bolde to aske that which it seemes none of the rest durst demande Hee knowing the interest hee had in his Lords affection makes bolde to aske the question who it was that should betraie him and presently without any second request receiues a plaine and sufficient answere And that it may yet more plainly appeare what opinion the other Disciples had of our Sauiours especiall loue to him remember I pray you the question moued by Peter a Iohn 21. 21 Lord what shall this man doe By which it is manifest that the disciples perswaded themselues that our Sauiour had a principall care of him aboue the rest therefore also did they so interpret their masters speech that it was commonly held amongst them b V. 23 that Iohn should not dye But there can be no greater argument of our Sauiours entire affection to him of his strong perswasion of Iohns extraordinary loue then c Ioh. 19. 26. 27 28 the commending of his dearest mother to the keeping of Iohn and Iohns readinesse willingnesse in accepting and entertaining her which is yet the more apparant if we consider that Iames and Iude were of the blessed Virgins and our Sauiours kindred by bloud Iohn only by alliance because of her marriage to Ioseph * Page 14. line 21. c. Onely I mustadde a word or two of that title which is commonly set before the names of those that were the penners of the bookes of the Newe Testament The Gospell according to S. Mathew S. Iohn The Epistle of Saint Paul Saint Peter Saint Iames. This title or Epithet though it be both common auncient yet questionlesse was not annexed by any of these writers as not agreeable to true Christian discretion and modesty yea perhaps it was also if not iniurious yet likely to proue offensiue to all
propounded in the first verse and repeated in the second In the former he is set out to vs by that which concerneth the nature of his Godhead and his person in the Godhead For his nature he is first said to haue beene eternall In the beginning Secondly to be God And the word was God Touching his person he is cald the Word or Sonne In the beginning was the Word Secondly his distinction from God the Father and yet his equalitie with God the father is signified when it is said that Hee was with God In the second 3. of the fiue points are repeated iointly in one sentence That the word was eternall equall to God and distinct from God O glorious and admirable mysteries Where are they now that lewdly and prophanely scoffe at Christian Religion because forsooth it teacheth nothing but that which is common and ordinarie Common and ordinarie So strange and extraordinarie are the secrets of the Gospell that no man of himselfe is able to deuise them by his wit or to beleeue them with his heart Take the deepest points of naturall Philosophie so they bee indeed true and a man of good capacitie will quickly and easily be brought to giue assent to the truth thereof because hee hath in him the light of naturall reason whereby they may certainely be discerned But the secrets of Christian religion are such and so farre aboue the reach of humane reason that although you make a man vnderstand them neuer so perfectly yet you cannot possibly make him acknowledge them for truth Truth in philosophie is such as that reason if a man suffer himselfe to be directed by it will enforce him to beleeue it Trueth in diuinitie is such as that the more we hearken to our naturall reason the lesse we are perswaded of the mysteries of religion It is for him and for him onely to incline the heart to the beliefe of those secrets who first reuealed them to be beleeued But what doe I While I labour to set out the excellencie of the Gospell by shewing that it conteineth many strange and hidden mysteries it may bee feared that I driue men away from the hearing and reading of it by the darkeness and profoundnesse of these secrets But be not discouraged brethren I beseech you If they were more obscure and deepe then they are yet who could despaire of sounding the depth therof as long as he may haue so skilfull and able a Pilot What though they be mysteries x 1. Cor. 2. 10 Yet hath God reuealed them to vs by his spirit euen by that spirit which searcheth all things yea the deepe things of God Could not hee y Iohn 11. 37 say the faithlesse Iewes that opened the eies of the blind haue caused that Lazarus should not haue died And cannot hee may wee confidently say that * Psal 8. 2 Out of the mouthes of Babes and sucklings hath ordeined strength because of his enemies that he might still the enemie and the auenger subdue the Rebellion of our corrupt reason bring it into obedience to beleeue his holy trueth Wherefore hath hee reuealed it but that it might bee knowen and acknowledged For your farder incouragement let our Euangelist S. Iohn be taken as an example Art thou young a Hieronym Catalog script in Ioann ad Dan. cap. 9 contr Ioui lib. 1. So was our Euangelist when it pleased our Sauiour to call him to the profession of the Gospell Witnesse the continuance of his life sixty eight yeeres after his Lord and Masters passion But thou hast not beene brought vp to learning What teaching and education had hee thinkest thou who b Mark 1. 19 was trained vp vnder his father a poore fisherman to get his liuing in the sweate of his browes by fishing What time could he haue to goe schoole whose maintenaunce depended on his labour and to whom all the paines he could possibly take would hardly afford some small means of a poore liuing You will say This fauour was extraordinarie Yet so that it was common to him with c Matth. 4. 18 his brother Iames and d Iohn 1. 44 with two other brethren his Countrimen Andrew and Peter But what speake I of two or foure Many and many thousands continually from time to time for almost these one thousand and sixe hundreth yeers haue beene brought to the knowledge and beliefe of these mysteries Is the Lords hand now shortened Doth he not still in mercy vouchsafe vs the meanes of knowledge and beleeuing What doe wee then with these doubtfull thoughts and vnthankefull hearts Away with them Away with them let vs desire and and endeuour to learne and e Ioh. 6. 45. wee shall bee all taught of God Yea with such a teaching as shall enlighten our vnderstanding incline our hearts confirme our memory reforme our affections and continually assure vs both of the truth that we beleeue and of the constant loue of God to vs in our perseuerance in beleeuing With this desire and confidence let vs in the feare of God addresse our selues to the hearing vnderstanding and beleeuing of these glorious mysteries The first whereof for I will handle them as they lie in the Text is this that The VVord was in the beginning Wherein for your better vnderstanding and memory f The course that is held in these Sermons I will first giue the sense of the Text 1. by expounding the words and 2. deliuering the meaning of the Euangelist 2. then I will handle the doctrine by 1. proouing the truth of it and 2. adding exhortation accordingly where it shall be needfull And this course if it please God I will follow in all the rest of the Gospell In seeking out the sense of this Scripture wee must enquire 1. who is meant by the VVord then wee must consider 2. what the Euangeliâ—â—â—aith of him In the former we must see how this tearm the VVord belongeth to him of whom it is spoken Secondly why that name is giuen him in this place In the later part these 2. points are to bee deliuered why it is said The VVord was rather then Hath beene 2. What is meant by those wordes In the beginning g The exposition of the words Who is meant by the Word The first point who is meant by the VVord is easie and manifest namely he of whom the whole Gospell is written Iesus Christ h Epiphan haercs 51. August de haeres cap. 8. 10 Theodor. haeret fabul lib. 2. the Sonne of God the promised Messiah Him the Heretickes Cerinthus and Ebion denied to bee God blasphemously auouching that he tooke his first beginning of his Mother the Virgin Mary Against their false and poysonous doctrine the holy Euangelist teacheth the Church that The word was in the beginning But let the Text it selfe speake Is i Ioh. 1. 1. not he called the Word of whom k Verse 7. Verse 4. Verse 7. Iohn came to beare witnesse At the 4.
may not at any hand bee conceiued in this place to bee put for the Diuine Nature or Godhead If it seeme to any man that the VVord may bee sayd to be with God though it be God as a mans soule is said to be with him whose soule it is p August de Trinit lib. 6. cap 2. I must desire him to consider that the reason is not alike For the soule is part of the man with whome it is sayd to be but the word is not part of the diuine nature which is most simple and free from all kinde of composition It is easie then for any man to conclude that God in this part of the Verse is the first person in the Trinitie God the Father And that it may the rather appeare vnto vs that wee rightly vnderstand and expound the Euangelist we haue his owne warrant where speaking of the same our blessed Sauiour hee sayth of him that q 1. Ioh. 1. 2 Hee was with the Father I forbeare to enlarge the matter Euery man may easily perceiue that our Euange list handles the same point in both places that hee need not doubt but that God r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with whom the Word was is God the Father What shall we say then of that collection that some make vpon the Article which is vsed by the Euangelist in the Greeke He saith not simply God say these men but The God giuing vs thereby to vnderstand that our Sauiour was with the true God not with him who was God but onely by fauour and not also by nature That they say concerning God is true and certaine But we haue learned that the person is there signified and not the nature And therefore it coulde not bee the Euangelists meaning to note vnto vs the truth of the diuine nature by that article Neither I thinke was there euer any heretick found who denied that God with whome the word is said to haue bin was God by nature what thē meaneth the article Doubtless either it is added only according to the custome of the greeke tongue wherof there are infinite examples in all authors and namely in the new Testament or els if any thing were intended by it the Euangelist meant to shew that in this clause of the sentence he put the word God in another sense then hee doth in the clause following where the article is omitted but I rather perswade my selfe that there is nothing intended therin by the holy Ghost but the manner of speech obserued according to the nature of the language Some man perhaps will yet farder demand why the Euangelist did not speak plainly as he meant and call him the Father rather then God To whom I answer that the Euangelist hauing in the former part named The VVord and not The Sonne doth here more fitlie mention God then the Father For so the nature of the things seemes to require The Sonne of the Father the Word of God Besides it helpes that elegancie which the holy Ghost vseth in this place making the last word of the former clause the first of the later In the beginning was the VVord and the VVord was with God and God vvas the VVord For so lie the words in the Greeke whereof anone Now if in the second clause hee had sayde The VVord vvas vvith the Father the grace of the speech had beene lost because he could not haue repeated the word in the beginning of the clause that followes For it cannot be truely said that the Father is the VVord or the VVord the Father but to say God vvas the the VVord is a true and an elegant speech What if we adde hereunto that in the olde Testament where the Messiah is spoken of there ordinarily not the Father but God is named when the first inkling of the promise was giuen who gaue it but God Then f Gen. 3. 14. 15 the Lord God said to the Serpent Come to the expresse making of the promise to which the holy Ghost calls vs t Rom. 4. 13. 16 Ga◠3. 14. 16 when he speaks of the promise by name and which u Gal. 3. 8 the Apostle Paul tearmes the preaching of the Gospell Was it not God that said to Abraham x Gen. 12. 1. 3 In thee shal all the families of the earth be blessed To be short look from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Malachy and see how often you finde any distinct mention of the first person vnder the name of the Father Therefore he that made choise of such a name for our Sauiour CHRIST as hee was well knowen by among the Iewes could not doe better then by the like wisdom so to speak of God the Father as his speech might bee best approued and vnderstood God then in this second part of the verse signifies The Father But what is the Euangelists meaning when hee sayth The VVord was with God What is it to bee with the Father Manie and diuers haue beene the coniectures of the learned concerning this matter That the vnity of nature in the Father and the Sonne was hereby signified But that is sufficiently manifest by the last clause where the Word is affirmed to bee God For seeing there can bee but one God and that the Sonne is auouched to bee God as well as the Father who sees not that they are both one and the same God and so all one in their diuine nature But this and most of the other opinions which I will not trouble you withall in this kinde of exercise are rather consequents that follow vpon that which our Euangelist intended then the verie point it selfe which hee did intende First therefore let vs search out the principall drift of these words and afterwarde as neede shall bee pursue those points that are necessary What may then bee the sense of this word with what shoulde wee seeke farre y Basil homil in haec verba take it as it commonly signifies and it will agree with Saint Iohns occasion and purpose Hee had sayde in the former wordes that The VVord had alreadie his beeing when all things that euer were created began first to bee What would a man reasonably doubt of heereupon Was the Word before the world before the creation before there was anie time or place wherein hee might bee where was he then To this our Euangelist answeres plainly and readily The VVord was with God As if hee should haue saide Doe you doubt whether the VVord were in the beginning or no because you cannot imagine vvhere hee should bee when as yet there was no world to be in Can you conceiue that God was who is the Father of the VVord Looke then vvhere hee vvas and there vvas the VVord For the VVord vvas vvith God Euen as the inwarde conception or word which the vnderstanding of man frameth within him is with the man where hee is so the Word of God is with God This I take to bee the plaine
and certaine meaning of the Euangelist and that according to the true iudgement of some auntient and later writers Here Arius bestirres himselfe and hearing that our Sauiour The VVord was with God hee dreames that Hee vvas nothing else but a created Spirit created indeede before the world but yet created as sayth hee it may euidently bee gathered because The VVord being with God was not God with whom he was Who is so blind as hee that wilfully refuseth to see Euery childe can answer Arius that The VVord was not God the Father with whome hee is sayde to haue beene yet was the same God distinct in person all one in nature so then hee was truely with the Father as another Alius nou aliud person not of a diuerse nature from the Father a◠another God Giue mee leaue heere I pray you to beginne a short examination and refutation of our Rhemists annotations vpon their Testament I will take them in my waie as I goe from verse to verse * Genebrard d◠Trinit lib. 1. Lindan dialog 2. Petrus Cams le Ioa. Baptista in praesat Some of the Papists of more reading then iudgement raysed a slaunder of Caluine as a blasphemer because hee denved CHRIST to bee God of God the Father and affirmed that being Iehouah hee was in that respect of himselfe This our Rhemists lay hold on and boldly enough censure him for blasphemy I haue no purpose to dispute the question with them neyther indeede do they so much as offer eyther to refute Caluines opinion or to confirm their own If shal be enough therfore to controll their malapertnesse and to ouer-waigh their presumption that a Bellarm. tom 1 de Chrisio lib. 2. cap. 19. Cardinall Bellarmine where he disputes the point of set purpose after he had considered all that the authours of that slander bring out of Caluin and examined Caluins writings himselfe refuseth to condemne him of anie such heresie as Genebrard Lindan Canisius and these Rhemists charge him withall Yea hee proceedes to alleage proofe out of Caluin that hee conceiued truely and writ accordingly of our Sauiour Christs diuine nature and person The summe of that which Caluine holdes touching this point is thus deliuered by Bellarmine that our Sauiours diuine nature is so of himselfe that if you remoue from the Son all relation to the Father there will remaine nothing but the diuine essence which is of it selfe That is in playne wordes If you consider our Sauiour as GOD onely not as the Sonne hee is not of the Father but of himselfe This is that daungerous heresie for which our iudicious Rhemists haue giuen sentence against Caluine as a blasphemer Bellarmine cleares him of the fault and condemnes onely the tearmes wherein hee deliuers his minde But it were easie to iustifie both the one and the other by the writings of b See Thom. de error Graec. cap. 4. Guliel Occhā Centilog Theolog conclus 62 Holkot in detec q. 5. art 2. ad 6. contra 1. concl q. 10. art 3. the most subtill Schoolemen if it were fit for this place and auditory In priuate I will bee readie to giue anie man satisfaction But to leaue these matters whereinto the peruerseness of men hath drawn vs to return to the Euangelists purpose It is to be held for an vndoubted truth in diuinity that our Sauiour the VVord was with God before the beginning of the world will you heare him say as much of himselfe c prouer 8. 27 Ver. 29. 30 VVhen he prepared the heauens I was there when hee set the compasse vpon the deepe A little after when hee appointed the foundations of the earth then was I with him Not onely reioycing to see the glory of God his Father but beeing himselfe full possesser of that glory which shone so bright that when he came into the world ouer-shadowed with the darkenes of our humane nature yet all the Angels of God discerned it and d Heb. 6. 1. fell downe to worship him The comfort of a poore distressed soule is in e 1. Cor. 2. 2. Iesus Christ crucified But the glory of a Christian is in Iesus Christ reigning with God his Father Therefore when the ende of his life approached f Iohn 17. 24. He prayed that all which his Father had giuen him might be euen where he was that they might behold his glory which God had giuen him But what glory meanes he Any new honour of late vouch saf't him No no. It is the same glory which he alwayes had and shall haue Glorifie me thou Father with Verse 5. thine owne selfe with the glory which I had with thee before the world was Let mee speake now to thee poore soule whosoeuer thou art that findest thy selfe grieuously vexed and daungerously assaulted by Sathan concerning these great mysteries of Religion would hee haue thee doubt whether our blessed Sauiour was before his mother or no The holy Ghost assures thee by the penne of our Euangeiist that The word was in the beginning Doth he presse thee farther to tell him where he was as if he could not be because there was no world for him to be in Herein also the wisedome of God hath preuented him The Word was with God Thou art perswaded assuredly that God was before the world else how should hee haue created the world Canst thou tell me where he was or doest thou thinke hee is any where now where hee was not then This goodly frame of the world which thou beholdest and wonderest at not without great cause is not any new house built for God to dwell in but a faire peece of workemanship that thou mightest see a little shadow of the workemans skill power and glory God is a Spirit infinite in all perfections that cannot remooue from one place to another because hee is euery where If thou canst beleeue these things which the very light of Nature can teach thee thou hast wherewithall readily to answere Satan The Word was with God If thou Satā dar'st not nor canst for very shame deny or doubt that God was before the foundations of the world were layd where thou seest God I see the Word my appointed Sauiour with him This I take to be the true natural sense of the words and the very proper meaning of our holy Euangelist S. Iohn Now let vs adde the other obseruations rather then interpretations which as before I signified are not directly intended but necessarily followe vppon the former doctrine And first we will consider that which shewes our Sauiours Diuine Nature then we will deliuer those poyntes which concerne his person both shortly and plainely as it shall please God to vouchsafe assistance Now the Diuine Nature or Godhead of our Sauiour Christ appeares in this that being with God when as yet there neuer had bin any thing created he culd be no other but God For how is it possible that when there is nothing but God that
word and the word was with God and God was the word The like figure also hath Moses t Gene. 1. 1. In the beginning God created heauen and earth and the earth was without forme But our Euangelist affordes vs more examples of it u Iohn 1. 4. 5 In it was life and that life was the light of men And the light shineth in darkenesse and the darkenesse comprehended it not Can any man doubt that the holy Ghost intended to keepe the elegancy of the figure Are not the Sermons of our Sauiour himselfe beautified with flowers of Eloquence Doth not the prophecie of Esaie flowe with streames of Rhetoricke I dare boldly say It is a very hard matter to match the beginning of that booke for varietie and force of Eloquence out of the writings of any of the heathen Orators Greeke or Latine quantitie for quantitie That we may iustly blame the ignorance and boldnesse of them who thinke it a dishonour to the Gospell that the preaching thereof should be graced with humane Eloquence I would know of these men what it is they call humane Eloquence and what Eloquence there is in the Scripture which may not beare that name without any disgrace thereunto Are there not the same tropes and figures both of the word and the sentence in the writings of men yea of heathen men which are in the Scripture Or if the Scripture haue any which men haue not yet obserued may they not learne from thence asto liue holily so to speake eloquently If any man imagine that the holy Ghost hath either appropriated any ornament of speech to himselfe in the Scripture or that he deuised new tropes and figures for his owne Secretaries the holy Prophets and Apostles the writings of the heathen wherein all those elegancies are to bee found will giue euidence against his ignorance I deny not that there is a certaine maiestie shining in the Scripture which no man can worthily expresse by imitation or by meditation conceiue sufficiently But this ariseth partly from the matter it selfe and partly from the skill of vsing those Rhetoricall ornaments wherein as in all things the holy Ghost that taught them is perfect whereas men haue but a shadow as it were of his perfection But I may not spend too much time in this matter onely thus much I will adde that he which in his publike ministrie shall either willingly refraine or carelessely neglect to vse the helpe of humaine learning and namely of Rhetoricke whereof onely wee haue now occasion to speake shall both faile in his duetie to God and come short of that worthy effect of preaching whereby the loue of God to vs is most gloriously set foorth and our loue to God most ardently set on fire It is the spirit of God that begets faith and obedience But not without those meanes by which hee hath enabled his seruants to teach and perswade The principall thing is the matter as it were the dart or arrowe that pierceth the heart of man by the power of the Spirit But speech is as it were the arme and Eloquence the thong or string whereby it is sent with force to the marke it aymes at He that trusts in Eloquence makes flesh his arme Hee that despiseth Eloquence takes strength from his arme It is our duetie to vse the meanes It is Gods blessing that the meanes take effect and of this vpon this occasion enough Now in expounding the words ere I come to the meaning of the place I will first touch a cauill of x August de doctrin Christia lib. 3. cap. 2. the Arians whereby they endeauoured to voyde the euidence that is brought in heere for our Sauiour Christs Godhead What could be spoken more plaine then for the Euangelist to say The VVord was God Yet would they shift off the matter by mangling the sentence in this sort God VVas say the Arians what shall then become of the Word That say they belongs to the next verse which must thus bee read The same word was in the beginning with God I told you before that the order of the words in the text is God was the VVord In our language word may not bee put before this or this same In Greeke it may and so in Latine How then shall wee answere the Arians Plainely and truely that there was no reason why the Euangelist should tell vs that God was For neither did any man doubt of it and hee had said sufficient to that purpose in the former clause when he affirmed that The Word was with God with whom the Word could not be conceiued to be but that the being of God must of necessitie bee presupposed Besides the holy Ghost in the Scripture neuer speakes of God to shewe his being by Was but either by Is the present tense or time as we call it y Exod. 3. 14 I am sent me or by all three times * Reuel 1. 8. Is VVas Shall be which was which is and which is to come yea the very clauses of the verse might haue taught them that the VVord must needes belong to this verse In the beginning was the VVord and the VVord was with God and the VVord was God Cut off the VVord from this last clause and you make it altogether vnlike the former and spoile the grace of the speech Let the Arians goe then with their foolish shift and goe wee forward in our exposition Wherein we are first to learne what the Euangelist meanes by God then to shew how the sentence it selfe is to be vnderstood In the former clause one person of the Trinitie euen the first God the Father was signified by the name of God which is common to all the three Here the same word is taken in the proper sense nothing the Diuine Nature There needs no other proofe of this matter but onely to make you see that if you vnderstādit of any one persō you auouch somwhat which is vntrue For example will you say God the Father is the Word or the Word was the Father By this maner of speech you confound so destroy the persons whose very being necessarily requireth that the one bee not the other Neither may we say that the holy Ghost was the Word or the Word the holy Ghost For the same errors ensue thereupon and the Trinitie of persons is ouerthrowen thereby It cannot be then but that God in this last part of the verse must of necessity be taken for the Godhead or Diuine nature whereupon it followes necessarily that our Sauiour Christ is God Against this the Sabellians who acknowledge no distinction of persons except and labour to perswade vs that the Euangelist is rather thus to bee expounded God was the Word that is say they That God the Father with whom the word was was nothing else but the word it selfe How false foolish this exposition is if any man see not by himselfe he may thus easily discerne To what purpose could it be for
the Euangelist to tell vs that the VVord was with God if hee were nothing else but God in no respect truely and really distinct from him with whom hee is said to haue beene Had it not bene readier and fitter for him to haue added this last clause to the first and to haue left the middlemost out If you doubt where This VVord was who I say was in the beginning he was God who can looke for any better answere For it were a senselesse blasphemie to aske where God was whom all men graunt to bee infinite But that middle clause The VVord was with God troubles the whole sentence darkens the sense yea to say the truth leaues no sense at all if there be no distinction of Persons For as I shewed erewhile no man can either truely say or reasonably conceiue that any thing because of some diuers accidentall respects is with itselfe Our Euangelist Saint Iohn was an Apostle of our Sauiour Christ the Disciple whom Iesus loued the brother of Iames the sonne of Zebede I might adde many other such differences But might I therefore say of him The Disciple whom Iesus loued was with the Euangelist Iohn and that Disciple was Iohn It is one thing to be the Euangelist Iohn another thing to be with the Euangelist Iohn That agrees to none but to Iohn himselfe this may belong to any but to him Therefore howsoeuer these later words God was the VVord might of their own nature admit such an interpretation yet considering the former clause to which they are ioyned it is absurd so to expound them What if I adde herunto that the holy Ghost himselfe seemes to tell vs that the word God is not to be vnderstood in this last clause as it was in the former because it is put here without the Article Surely the Sabellians shall haue nothing to aunswere but that which will confirme the distinction of the Father and of the Sonne as two persons But of this by and by The order of the words in English shewes the sense in Greeke it doth not so but that word which is first in place oftentimes is last in the meaning of the writer or speaker God was the VVord saith our Euangelist Yet a Basil homil in haec verba Hilar de Trinit lib. 7. the first word God in sense followes the last as if he should haue said The VVord was God How shall that appeare since the wordes will beare aswell the one as the other It shall appeare by these reasons First the question was not of God whether he were before the beginning of the world or no for that was neither denied nor doubted of by Christians or Heretickes But the eternall Beeing of our Sauiour Christ and his Godhead were impugned by Cerinthus and Ebion which gaue our Euangelist some occasion of writing this Gospell It was fit therefore that hee should teach the Church and confound the Heretickes by saying that The VVord was God Secondly we haue direction for the expounding of this clause from both the former wherein The VVord is still the first part of the sentence and looke what is affirmed it is affirmed of the VVord The VVord was in the beginning The VVord was with God In like manner the Euangelist continuing his discourse must needs bee vnderstood to say The VVord was God which indeede was the very thing hee meant to auouch of him This is farder confirmed by that which followes All things were made by it and without it was made noâ—hing Verse 3. 4 that was made In it was life and so foorth Do you not perceiue that all these particulars here spoken are spoken of the word If then both the clauses that goe before and the sentences that follow after belong to the word and not to God what shew of reason is there to take that one peece out of the middest of the rest and apply it to God contrary to the whole course of the matter and intent of the writer I wil not adde farder as I might that not only this beginning of the Gospell but the whole frame of it and the maine scope of it is to teach vs b Iohn 20. 31 That Iesus is the Christ the Sonne of God If any man be so peruerse as that all which hitherto hath bin said will not satisfie him yet let him be perswaded by the Euangelist himself who leauing out the Article before c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God and putting it before the Word leades vs to begin at the end for the sense of that hee writes This cannot bee exprest in English nor will be conceiued by them that haue no skill in the originall Greeke but in the text it selfe the difference is very manifest Wee haue then the true meaning of the holy Ghost in these words The VVord was God He that was in the beginning and was with God was also himselfe God Here ariseth a doubt why the Euangelist addeth this clause seeing the Godhead of our Sauiour might be certainly and necessarily concluded out of the two former branches as it hath manifestly appeared in the opening of them He that had a being when as yet there was no creature and was with God when there was nothing that was not God could not possibly be any other then God Why then is it added that The VVord was God Surely as I take it to preuent that obiection which might arise in the conceit of some If he were with God it may seeme that he was not God To which the Euangelist thus answeres in effect Though he were with God in respect of his person yet in regard of his nature hee himselfe was God This I graunt was implied in the former but in a matter of so great moment it pleased the holy spirit of God to haue a gratious regard of our weakenesse and to speake so as the trueâ—l might bee euident to all men and so high a mysterie of Religion haue a cleare and sound demonstration The point then which is here deliuered is this Iesus Christ the promised Messiâ—h is God And because the matter is of especiall importance and no place so fit as this for the handling of it I thinke it best to follow it somewhat largely the rather because I meane to doe it now once for all but as occasion shall be offred for the cleering of some textes here and there in this Gospell The first proofe that our Sauiour Christ is God may be taken from those places of Scripture where the names that are proper to the true only God are giuen to Iesus Christ For it is out of questioÌ„ that howsoeuer some of those titles are now and then ascribed to men with some addition or in some respect yet no creature is absolutely called God Lord the most high or by any other such name Of all these the most common for ordinary vse is God which we find ofteÌ„ in euery leafe of the Scripture where the true God Iehouah is spoken
the true God is spoken of I will goe no furder to confute this error then this present Chap. Was it not the true God that sent Iohn Baptist before the Messiah Is not he called the Lord of hosts by q Maâ—ach 3. 1 the Prophet Malachy Behold I will send my messenger Who wil send In the latter end of the ver Behold he shall come sayth the Lord of hosts And yet of him r Ioh. 1. 6 saith our Euangelist There was a man sent s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from God vvhere there is no article Shall we belieue the Prophet of the Lord or this false Prophet Arius The one saith the Lord of hosts sent Iohn the Bap. the other tels vs Hee that sent him was not the true God because the article is not set before God This one place were sufficient to confound that vaine and false exception especially beeing in the same Euangelist and within so few lines after the former But I will briefly note some other to make it more cleere if it may be It cannot bee doubted but that God whom no man hath seene at anie time is the true God t Exo. 34. 20. 23 Thou canst not see my face saith the true God to Moses thou shalt see my back parts but my face shall not be seene Doth not S. Iohn speake of the same true God when he sayth u Ioh. 1. 18 No man hath seen God at any time Is not x 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word in this place also without an article So is it there To them he gaue prerogatiue to be the sons of y 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God The like examples are euery where to bee found in this and the other Euangelists in the writings of the Apostles And surely if the addition of the article be sufficient to proue that the true God is signified wheresoeuer that is set before the Arians are manifestly conuinced by that place of * Rom. 9. 5 Chrysost in Ioa. hom 3. Theophil aâ— hunc locum Saint Paul who is God aboue all which is spoken of our Sauiour Christ and yet hath the article though not immediately before it If you enquire more particularly why the article is put in before God in the former clause and left out in the later First I say the Euangelist might vse his liberty as all that write in Greeke doe to take it or leaue it at his good pleasure where the matter did not require the presence of it Secondly it was fit rather to put the word without it then with it because as I signified before God in the former place noteth the person of the Father who is the first of the three in order but in the later the nature of God which is common to all three persons If he should haue left it or vsed it in both the sense would haue bene more darke and the distinction of the persons not so easily obserued Thirdly it could not haue bene so plaine or certaine that the word was to be taken â—or the former part of the speech but it would haue beene much doubted whether the Euangelist meant to tell vs that God was the word as the words lie or that the word was God as some haue vnderstood him Therefore there is neuer a word nor letter in this first verse wherby our Christian faith touching our Sauiours God head can be weakned Nor any thing saith Arius whereby it may be strengthened No Doth not the holy Ghost auouch that â—e is eternall hauing his perfect being already when all things created began first to be Is it not affirmed that He was with God when nothing had any being but God your vaine and friuolous exceprions haue bin prooued void Let all this passe Can any thing be plainer then this direct affirmation that the word was God The word saith Arius was God but no otherwise then some men are called by that name The true God a Exod. 7. 1 sayd to Moâ—es I haue made thee a God to Pharaoh yea to all them to whom the word of God came he saith as much b Psal 82. 6. I haue said yee are Gods A poore shift The very sight of the place affords a sufficient answere c Hilar. de Trinit lib. 7. Moses is made Pharaohs God and those Rulers were said to be Gods Doth the holy Ghost say either of Moses or any other that they were God simplie as our Euangelist doth of the VVord If the VVord had bene made God or if the Lord had onely affirmed of him that he had called him God there might haue bene som occasion of doubting because there are some such like speeches of other men in the Scripture But what wilfull wrangling is it to call so plain a matter into question vpon so vnlike a maner of speech Moses was God to Pharaoh not simply God They were vouchsaf't the name of gods They were not simply gods There was no daunger in either of both those speeches Hee that reades I haue made thee God can readily conceiue that this made God is not the true God And as easie is it for any man to assure himselfe that those rulers are not God indeed aswel because they were many but God is one is also for that they are presently threatned d Psal 82 7 that they shall dye like men But simply to name him God whose eternity was before auouched whose preseÌ„ce with God before the world was affirm'd and to whom afterward the creation of all things is ascribed had been the realy waie to fill the hearts of men with idolary if Iesus had not been indeed very God by nature Therefore it is not possible to perswade any Christian man whose eyes are not blinded with the mist of preiudice and error that the holy Ghost would open such a gate to impiety calling him God without addition limitation or exposition who had affirmed asmuch of himselfe and of whome the whole Christian world was so perswaded when this Gospell was to be written Nay rather he would by all meanes haue refrayned to giue the â—east suspicion of such a conceit by which men might haue beene drawen into so horrible and dangerous an â—eresie But no truth of reason no authority of Scripture could reforme the error or stop the mouth of that wretched hereticke till the Lord Iesus himselfe our God vtterly destroyed him by a most fearefull iudgement For e Ruffin hist eccl lib. 1 cap. 3 at the verie time when hee was ready to goe to the Chruch to maintaine his blasphemous heresie being forced by necessity of nature to goe aside into a coÌ„mon place appointed for that purpose as it might be Queen hithe here in London he voyded with reuerence bee it spoken his very entrails and so ended at once both his life and his blasphemie Doe wee tremble at the horror of this iudgement Oh then let vs take heede my brethren how wee like of his doctrine
things created began first to be There is then no great likelyhood that the reasoÌ„ of this repetition was to teach vs that in the beginning must be added to the second clause or vnderstood with it How much easier might it haue bin set down in the place to which it properly belonged if there had been any need thereof There f Tertullian con Praxean ca. 15 is another coniecture somewhat more likely that it was the purpose of the holy Ghost to giue vs to vnderstand that the Word before the creation was with God onely and so continued though hee were not seene of men till his incarnation But this exposition also was needlesse For where could he be conceiv'd to be but with God when as there was nothing but God As for the time of his incarnation the Euangelist signifies that afterward where hee sayth The VVord became Verse 14. flesh and we sawe his glory Yea the whole Gospel is well knowen to all men to be nothing els but an history of his comming into the world and continuance there till the time of his ascending vp to heauen I would not trouble you with this diuersity of interpretations but that I am desirous now in the beginning both to speake fully of such matters as concerne the God-head of our Sauiour and the holy Trinity and also to giue you som direction by example how to iudge of the expositions of Scripture Let vs see now what new matter we may gather out of this verse if it be not intended as a repetition First it serues to stop the mouthes of those Heretickes who fondly and lewdly teach that there are two Wordes one which is indeed as it were in God the other without him or not vnited to him The former say they was not the Messiah but the later and of the former S. Iohn speaketh in the beginning of this Gospell It is hard to say whether this conceit be more blasphemous or more absurd What is it but blasphemy to denie that our Sauiour is the same God with the Father And what is more absurde then to dreame of two Words without anie inkling of such a matter giuen by the Euangelist or to imagine that the word here spoken of â— not the same that afterward became flesh First this â—erse is apparantly of the same Word that was descriâ—ed in the former as if the Euangelist had sayd This â—ord which I have auouched to g Ioh. 1. 1. 2. have been in the beginning â—o haue been with God and to be God this same word was in the beginning with God Is there any least signification here of any Word but one what followes By it were Verse 3. all things made By what By the Word What word but that which was mentioned before For to what else can it possibly be referred Let vs goe forwarde In it was life and so to the sixt verse Who sees not that the Euangelist continues his speech of the same Word Verse 4. Then followes Iohn the Baptists testimony Of whom Verse 6. but the same Word the light of men as before ver 4. who is afterward called the true light What need more Verse 9. Ver. 10. 11 Verse 12. words his intertainement hee had by men is shewed and the honour they haue that receiue him by faith described From which the Euangelist passeth to the incarnation of why should I doubt to say so the same Ver. 14 Word And the VVord saith he became flesh Be not so vnreasonable as to imagin that the holy Ghost would make a discourse in so many verses of one Word and vpon a sodaine fal into a new matter of an other Word neuer heard of neuer thought of before Tell mee I pray you if you can to what purpose all the formeâ— speech was if our Euangelist now first begin to write of him whome only his Gospell dooth concerne But what doe I spend time in refuting such absurdities It is one and the same Word that was in the beginning with God that in due time took flesh of the blessed Virgin Mary his mother But these heretickes make shewe of proofe for that they say as if they were blasphemous with reason If Christ say they be that Word of the Father since the Father and the Word are of the same substance the Father also must be the word First this makes no more against our Sauiours being the Word then against the the other Word which you fancy to your selues For the Father and that Word also by the like reason must be one word because they are one in substance that is one God and yet not one Word because to bee the word is a propertie belonging to the person not to the nature or substance of God as it shall appeare God willing when I handle the Doctrine of the Trinitie They add that the word being as it were made by speaking must needes differ from the word which is spoken for the making or producing of it wilfully refusing to vnderstand that although the act of speaking and the word that is spoken be distinct each from other yet there are not two Words but one namely that which is formed by speaking The Father doth not speake one word by which the second is framed but by speaking frames begets the Word Lastly whereas they tel vs that the word which our Sauiour saith hee kept and which the Iewes heard of him was not all one with Christ himselfe they say true but nothing to purpose For that worde was not any thing vnited in nature to God but the CoÌ„mandemeÌ„t of God which is ordinarily in the Scripture called the word of God As for their grosse absurd conceite that the Word meant by our Sauiour in such speeches of his should be I knowe not what speaking in him as it were a spirit in a body possessed it is fitter to be laught at then laboured against For how is our Sauiour Christ said h Ioh 8. 55. to keepe the worde of God which is the place which these fonde Heretikes bring By hauing it shut vp within him as it were in prison not rather by remembring and dooing that which God enioyneth The other place they alleage is no lesse absurd i Ioh. 14. 24. The word that yee heare is not mine but the Fathers that sent me Is it not euident that our Sauiour means the word spokeÌ„ the word that I speak So spake verse 23. he before If any maÌ„ will loue me he wil keepe my word And immediatly before the words they bring Hee that loueth me not keepeth not my word then followeth And that word which you heare is not mine Hee should rather haue said in your sense And it is I that you heare speaking But to conclude this point that which our Sauior saith here of the word he speaks in another place of his doctrine k Ioh. 17. 16. My doctrine is not mine but his that sent me Thus
much and indeed too much for this sottish heresie It is also gathered from hence by some that the word is coeternall or equal to the Father in eternity A doctrin very true needfull to be knowne but such as was signified before when it was said that The VVord was in the beginning that it was with God Neither doth the beginning in this or the former clause note eternity but the time when all things began to be created Wherfore to shut vp the interpretation of this verse with shewing what I conceiâ—e to be intended in it by the holy ghost I am perswaded that the purpose of the Evangelist was to repeate that which in the former verse he had deliuered For if he had meaÌ„t to add a fourth point of the like kind to the other 3 in all liklyhood he would haue continued the same manner of writing by coupling this to that which went before and haue said And this was in the beginning with God If any man obiect that he doth not so in that which followeth he is already answered that in the next words the Evangelist comes to a new kinde of argument wherby he proues that which before hee had avoucht namely that the word was in the beginning was God At the least he describes the Word by outward effects towards the creatures not by his owne nature or properties Neither is this a bare repetition but a plainer instruction for the simplest that they may â—ssure theÌ„selues that the Word was in the beginning with God I graunt so much was implied before but not exprest to euery mans capacity Here the Evangelist speaketh so that all may vnderstaÌ„d him giues directioÌ„ for the interpreting of that clause The VVord was with God When was the Word with God In the beginning When as yet there was neither time nor place euen then had the Word his being with God I would gladly adde to all this that which is obseru'd by l Toletus in Ioâ—n cap. 1. Annot. 11. some as I perswade my selfe not without great likelihood that the Euangelist by his repetition would farther giue vs to vnderstand that The VVord not only was in the beginning but was then with God a worker in the creation of all things The ground of this interpretation is taken from that place in m Pro. 8. 22. the Prouerbs where this same Word is described by the name of wisdom There first his eternal Being is described Verse 30 The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his waie I was before his works of old I was set-vp from euerlasting c. This description is continued to the end of ver 26. In the 27. the holy Ghost proceeds to shew vs that the same wisdome was with God as a nourisher when hee prepared the heauens when he set the compasse vpon the deep c. Yea it may be somewhat more particularly applyed Salomon sayth when he prepared the heauens I was there To that answereth this of our Euangelist This was in the beginning with God His nourishing as some expound it his creating or ordering of all things the holy Ghost heere expresseth at large in the words following By him were al things made The conference of these two places seemes to warrant this exposition as we haue seene I wil not striue much about it so wee apply this repetition to the strengthening of our fayth Concerning our Sauiour Christs eternall God-head doubtlesse we attaine to the principall thing intended by the holy Ghost And of that point what Christian can doubt though he would neuer so faine Dost thou not perceiue that the holie Euangelist deliuers it with aduise and deliberation It is not a matter that hee hits vpon but a point chosen by him to begin his Gospell withal It slips not from him at vnawares but is repeated vpon good aduisement Certainly this doubling of the point makes it manifest that the holy ghost would haue vs view and consider it throughly on al sides It is neither of small importance that it need not to be learned nor easie to be beleeued that it need not to be taught but once Wherefore is it propounded and repeated but that it might be vnderstood and remembred Vnderstood that no hereticks deceiue vs remembred that our hearts faynt not Hee that is God Almighty hath redeemed vs who shall bee able to hold vs Captiues Let vs not be afraid to defye sin hel death and the deuil himselfe n Rom. 8. 31. God is on our side who can be against vs Hauing thus expounded these two verses and finding in them some poynts which concerne the admirarable Doctrin of the most glorious and holy Trinity so many things also beeing spoken euery where in this gospel of the Father the Son and the holy Spirit I haue thought it necessarie both sor your instruction and the discharge of my dutie to bestow the rest of this hower in opening that blessed mystery Wherein according to the example of our Euangelist the whole course of the scripture I will content my selfe with the Euidence of the word without the curiosity of schoole diuinity It shall be sufficient for vs vnderstand that the scripture affirmeth that there is one God and three persons though we can see no reason how it can be so And farder in shewing that the three persons are indeed distinct one from another and not diuers respects of one and the same I will not stand vpon their nature in themselues so much as vpon those effects which beeing ascrib'd to them in the Scripture cannot as in shall appeare bee performed by anie one person Our Euangelist deliuers the point of our Sauiours diuine nature in a few words here in the beginning of the Gospell Hee proues it at large by many wonderfull works of his through the whole course of his writing This shal be my example and warrant Yet I would not haue any man think that I either condemne their paines and care who haue laboured to explaine these mysteries by the light of reason or affirme that the points themselues cannot stand with reason They are indeed aboue reason but yet not against reason As the light of nature cannot discerne them so it cannot disproue theÌ„ And the chiefe end of them that endeuoured to discusse these maters in some sort by reason was rather to stop their mouths that would not beleeue theÌ„ to inforce theÌ„ to beleeue Now this course in this place and auditorie I trust is needlesse I am sure with the greatest part it would be bootlesse For how many or rather how few are there heere present that are able to examine or conceiue the subtill arguments that haue been deuised and vsed in these questions Neither are wee to settle our faith by the waight of humane reason but to ground it vpon diuine authority Now to the matter Wherein that I may proceede the more orderly and be the more easily vnderstood First I will speake of the vnity of
the godhead that there is but one God Secondly of the Trinity of the persons Where the first poynt must be to proue that there are three persons the second to shew how they are distinguisht one from an other And because there is in our Church seruice a treatise to this purpose knowne in part to all that are present commonly called the Creed of Athanasius who like a valiant champion maintein'd the godhead of Christ against the Assaults of Arius I will referre you from point to point to that discourse That there is but one God the same one God witnesseth himselfe in scripture o Exod. 20. 2. 3. I am the Lord thy God thou shalt haue none other Gods but me Which is not ambitiously spoken as if some one God would haue the honor froÌ„ all the rest but enioyned with authority by him who onely had right to claime such preheminence Els neither had he done done iustly that gaue this charge and how should he be conceiu'd to be God that is knowne to be vniust and the Iewes to whom he gaue it should haue hurt themselues as much by displeasing all the other Gods whom they refused to acknowledge as help themselues by pleasing that one whome they did acknowledge Vnlesle perhaps wee may ridiculously think that for quietnes sake the other Gods were content to put vp this iniury or that they were all agreed to part stakes as the heathen absurdly feyne of their three Gods Whereof Iupiter the eldest took heauen for his share Neptune the second got the gouernment of the Sea and Pluto the yongest rather then he would sit out quite was content to play small game as we say and to take Hell for his part rather then nothing These are liker fancies of men in a dreame then discourses of learned writers And yet neither could these three brothers well agree at all times and to say the truth Iupiter whom the other two aknowledged for their Soueraign was the onely God in the Iudgement of the heathen But whatsoeuer they imagined wee are sure our God doth so speake of himselfe p Deut. 32. 39. Behold now for I am he and there is no Gods with me That appeares by the effects I kill saith he giue life I wound and I make whole Are not these the works of god In whose haÌ„ds are death life but in Gods But hath this God only that power Are there not other that haue it aswell as he No sure as himselfe addeth There is none that can deliuer out of my hands Thus he speaketh of himselfe thus the prophet Moses q Exod. 33. 11. that talked with him face to face speaketh of him Vnto thee it was shew'd r Deut. 435. saith Moses to I srael that thou mightst knowe that the Lord hee is God and that there is none other but hee alone And afterward Vnderstand v. 39. therfore this day and consider in thy heart that the Lord he is God in heauen aboue and vpon the earth beneath there is none other I might recken vp many like testimonies But whom will not these content if enough will content him Will any foolish blasphemer now except against these proofes as if they were to be vnderstood of the general nature of God not of any one who onely is God how fond and absurd must such an exception needs bee seeing all men know by reason that generalls haue not any reall being diuers from the specials or species nor can be said to perform any particular action For example to make the matter as plaine as I can Man as it signifieth that nature which is common or generall to euery seuerall man is not any thing subsisting by itselfe but hath it whole being in the particulars of that kind Therefore also it cannot be said that the generall nature of man doth reason or speake but that this or that man doth so But God saith I kill giue life neither can the general nature which is leudly absurdly conceiv'd say truely of itselfe Behold I am hee and there are no gods with me neither were such a speech to any purpose or of any vse as if it were to bee thought that any man could imagin that there are more then one general nature of any one kinde There is then but one God only For if there were more God could not say there are no more euen as Adam after Caine and Abel were borne could not affirme That he alone was man and that there was none beside him The same trueth is confirmed in the new Testament by the Å¿ 1. Cor. 8 4. Apostle Paule We know saith he that an Idol is nothing in the world and that there is none other God but one As if he should haue said Howsoeuer there are diuers idols of this and that shape men idols and women Idols yet we know there are no such diuine powers in the world as these according to the fancy of men represent yea we are are sure there is but one God The heathen indeed haue many whom they call God and Lord but to vs that vnderstand the truth there is but one Ver. 6. God So doth the Scripture euerie where speake of God as of one t Rom. 1. 21. 23. When they knew God they glorified him not as God The glorie of the incorruptible God What shal I need to heape vp many testimonies in a case that is not doubtfull All the wise and learned both Christians Iewes Heathen agree with one consent that there cannot be any more then one God All this notwithstanding wee finde that in the Scripâ—ure there are more then one that are sayde to bee God First there is one called the Father whom al men acknowledge to be God u Rom. 1. 7. Grace be with you and peace from God our Father x 1 Cor. 8. 6. To vs there is but one God which is the Father y Eph. 1. 3. Blessed bee God euen the Father of our Lord Iesu Christ Secondly as I shewed before Iesus Christ or the Word is also vouched to bee God In the former verse The word was God * Rom. 9. 5. Christ is God ouer all belssed for euer Thirdly it is manifest in the same Scripture that the holy Ghost in like sort is God For although there be noâ— one place wherein hee is so tearmed by name yet the comparing of one text with another puts the matter out of question The Lord saith to the people of Israell that if a Num. 12 6. there be a Prophet amongst them he the Lord wil appear to him in a vision he will talke with him in a dreame It was the Lord therefore that spake in and by the Prophets This Lord saith b 1. Pet. 1. 11. Saint Peter was the spirit The spirit testified before of Christ c 2. Pet. 1. 21. Prophecie came not in olde time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they
the darknesse in the opinion of most men the nature Tatian orat ontra gentes of man corrupted which saye some doth not so comprehend CHRIST but that still in comparison of him it continues darkenesse But the Euangelist speakes not of comparison neither was it or coulde it bee lookt for that men should become equall in knoweledge to the light that shone vpon them If they had acknowledged it and followed the direction of it to saluation they had don as much as reasonably coulde bee required at their handes That is more likely and yet not the Leontius ad hunc locum true meaning of the Text that the Godhead of our Sauiour Christ shineth in the creatures though men in their blindnesse discerne it not But neither can the knowledge of the creatures teach vs the distinction of the persons but only the being power and wisedome of the diuine nature and if it could yet might wee bee in darkenesse concerning salvation for all that knowledge It remaines then that wee take the worde in the ordinary signification thereof and accordingly vnderstand the Euangelist as if hee had said in plaine tearmes that our Sauiour Christ by the doctrine of the Gospell which hee preached and by the miracles which hee daiely wrought shewed himselfe to bee the light of the world and the true meanes of saluation but men being blind in their iudgement and peruerse in their affections would not acknowledge him for their Sauiour that they might come to life by him And for the meaning of the worde let that which hath bin said suffice If any man be desirous to knowe the reason why the holy Ghost changeth his maner of speech and whereas in the next words hee had sayd Shineth and not Shined he now saith Comprehended and not Comprehendeth hee must remember that in the former clause as wee heard the generall nature of the light is exprest and the particular shineing of this supernaturall light implied therein After this manner the Euangelist hauing told vs that our Sauiour was the light of men proceeds to shewe what hee did for the inlighting of them what they refused to doe that they might bee inlightned as if hee should haue said The light naturally shineth in darknesse and so did that light I speake o' but the darkenesse woulde not receiue it to bee inlightned VVee must farder conceiue that it shineth continually and is ordinarily refused of blinde and ignorant men but it seemes most likely that the EuaÌ„gelist had special respect to them that liued in our Sauiors daies while he was conuersant vpon the earth amongst men who notably bewrayed their blindnesse by not descerning and acknowledging so cleere a light whereof if it please GOD â—eereafter in this Chapter more particularly and largely Now to the doctrine There are 2 things that discouer the blindnesse and folly of mankind vnto vs. The former that hauing so great a conceit of our naturall parts and such especiall helpes of education and instruction wee shoulde notwithstanding be vnable to deuise determin how we might attaine to the cheefe point of happinesse that we are capable of the later and more shamefull of the 2 is this that we are so full of darkenesse and peruersenesse that we neither will nor can learne what belongs to our felicity when it is kindely and plainely taught vs. The lesiod Aâ—st Ethic. heathen were wont to make 2 degrees of wisedome the one was for a man to be able to aduise himselfe what was best and fittest for him the other if he could not attaine to that height yet to follow good counsaile when it was giueÌ„ him If there were any man that came short of this later him they wholly condemn'd of extreame folly And can we thinke our selues wife yea bragge of our learning and knowledge when wee are not able to set one foote vpon this first lowest step to wisdome Doe we thinke much to be charg'd so deepely with ignorance He that knowes vs better then wee doe our selues hath long since giuen this testimony of vs The naturall man perceiueth or rather receiueth not the things 1. Cor. 2. 14. of the spirit of God Dost thou marke what he saith Hee findes not fault with the slowenesse of thy imagination that thou canst not of thy selfe by naturall witte or learning finde out what is true happinesse and how to attaine vnto it but he shewes thy dulnesse blindness that thou knowest it not when it is lay'd before thee I would it were not worse then so Yes yes it is a degree lower Thou canst neither direct thy selfe in the way of life nor if thou be set in it perceiue when thou art right nor by any rea on bee perswaded to acknowledge it though a man should shew thee which it is Nay sayth some man you shall neuer make mee haue so all an opinion of my selfe Perhaps indeede I should hardly hit on that waie without a guide because I haue not gone it at any time heeretofore and therefore I grant also that it is possible I should not knowe it when I were in it but I would not haue you thinke me so vnreasonable that I should refuse to learn that whereof I am ignorant Wel sayd I perceiue thou hast a good conceit of thy selfe and I will not presse thee too far in thine owne particular but rather shewe thee thy case in an other mans example And that I may not seeme to disparage thee in thy wit and iudgement by any base comparison let me offer to thy consideration the whole people of the Iewes not as they are now in the state of bondage and miserie but as they were in that time when the light we speake of shone amongst them I will not stand to magnifie their excellent parts of nature and learning I will say nothing of their Scribes and Pharisies I will not mention their Priests and Leuites what they were for their imagination and vnderstanding the learned know the vnlearned may ghesse by the report of them that haue trade and trafficke with them daily euen now when their wits are dulled and their hearts as it were broken with the continuall sense of their bondage and misery Surely there is no great reason why any man shoulde thinke so highly of himselfe or so meanely of them as to presume of his owne skill where their iudgement hath fayled them Especially in a matter of this nature concerning God and euerlasting life wherein they were extraodinarily instructed by him that only could teach them Match thy selfe with them for sufficiencie of naturall gifts equall them in helps of learning yet certainly thou must needes come â—ehinde them in that supernaturall knowledge which is gotten by reuelatioÌ„ from God bevond the reach of art and nature Let vs then make one labour of two and in shewing the truth of that which our Euangelist sayth particularly touching the Iewes that they acknowledged not the light proue withall the generall
ignoraunce and insufficiency of all men to comprehend that secret mysterie First that wee may knowe what to looke for afterwarde the Prophets foretell vs how the matter would fall out Lord sayeth Isay who hath beleeued our report or to whome is the Arme of the Lorde reuealed Isay 53. 1. And in another place he brings in our Sauiour himselfe complaying of the ill successe of his ministery I haue laboured in vaine I haue spent my strength in vaine 494. and for nothing Yea the builders the great learned men among the Iewes refused the headstone of the corner saith Psal 118. 22. another Prophet As it was prohesied so it came to passe Let themselues giue euidence When the Messiah was come and had prooued his calling by many admirable and glorious miracles and had offred them saluation with all kindness and authoritie what insued Heare them speaking in a Councill Doth any of the Rulers or the Pharises beleeue in him Some of the Ioh. 7. 48. common sort flockt after him but the great men and Rabbins regarded him not or if any of them had any better conceite of him then the rest hee durst not be knowne of it but as it appeared by Nicodemus was 3. 1. 2. glad to steale into his company in the darke night Nay it was not enoughe for them to reiect him but they persecuted him and all that fauoured him accounting 7. 49. 9. 34. 12. 10. 11. 19. 12. of them as of men accrsed casting them out of their Synagogues seeking to make them away and accusing them as enemies to Caesar as they beganne to charge Pilat himselfe for speaking in his behalfe Neither stayed their malice here but proceeded without ende or rest till they had murdered the Lorde of life Aâ—â— 3 14. 15. with all the disgrace that possibly they could do him I doe now but point at these thinges which if it please God shall hereafter bee handled at large This may suffice especially the time being past and occasion of the like discourse offring it selfe often times in this Gospell to shewe with what obstinate blindnesse our Sauiour was withstood and reiected by the Iewes and to teach vs what intertainement wee are like to giue him if wee bee not other wise taught and inclined by his holy spirit To whome with the Father and the Sonne one God bee all glorie c THE SIXT SERmon vpon the first Chapter of IOHN Verse 6. 7. 8. There was a man sent from God whose name was Iohn c. IF there were as much vnderstanding and iudgement in men to conceiue and discerne matters of religion and saluation as euery one of vs would bee thought to haue it were inough for vs to haue the doctrine of euerlasting life by any meanes whatsoeuer propounded vnto vs. For no sooner should any point thereof bee deliuered but wee should be readie to acknowledge and embrace it But alas wee are wonderfully deceiued in this conceit of our naturall capacity Which is so slowe and dull in things of this nature that we can neither find them out of our selues by any discourse of reason nor giue aslent to the truth of them when they are reuealed and manifested by especiall order from God himselfe For proofe of that I say whither should I appeale rather then ro euery mans experience touching the former points both in himselfe and in the whole nation of the Iewes Which of vs would euer haue thought of any one of those mysteries if hee had not read or heard of them extraordinarily Now they are discouered vnto vs where is there any man to bee found that by any naturall skill or help of learning can discerne and yeeld to them as ture and certaine The reasons of this impossibilitie to beleeue shall be shewed if it please God hereafter for the present I doe but giue a touch that wee may all consider of it at better leasure The darknesse did not Ioh. 1. 5. comprehend the light when it shone most brightly Our Sauiour taught them with authoritie not like the Scribes Mat. 7. 29. Pharises Yet did they not regard his doctrine Hee wrought many admirable miracles among them Yet would they not acknowledge that hee came from God At the least they should haue respected the testimonie of Iohn a man of such account worth in their owne iudgement But all was one with them and nothing of force sufficient to bring them to an acknowledgement of the light What remedy then but to leaue them in their blindnes and in theirs to see our owne that we may be so much the more carefull to heed and learne what the Euangelist doth teach vs in this Gospell Where hauing in the fiue former verses described the Messiah of whom hee writes by his diuine nature and his office of mediation hee proceeds to second that hee hath deliuered with the testimonie of Iohn and there vpon takes occasion to inlarge some of the points that before hee had propounded and to amplifie the benifits wee receiue by our Sauiour more fully and plainely In the former part concerning the witnesse of Iohn first wee are to consider the partie as hee is described to vs in the three verses I read Secondly to waigh his testimony which is implyed rather then exprest in the two later Hee came to beare witnesse of the light The description is partly of his person verse 6 partly of his office ver 7. 8. To the knowledge of his person there belong these two thinges his nature and his name By nature hee was a man but yet not after the ordinarie course of mankinde but after an extraordinary sort by a special work of God who sent him as well in reguard of his person as of his office Which office of his is first plainely declared verse 7 then some what amplified verse 7. 8. The declaration is general He came for a witnesse Particular To beare witnesse of the light In the description of the person touching his nature I note two points that He was a man that He was sent from God In the former wee are to examine the wordes whether the former of the two was imply any especial matter or no why the Euangelist mentions that He was a man Then must wee say somewhat of the sense intended by Saint Iohn For the later point of his being sent we will in quire who sent him God the diuine nature or some one of the persons How he was sent by an extraordinarie conception by an especiall appointment either by some vision or by reuelation Touching his name wee are to learne what the signification of it is why the Euangelist doth mention it Other reasons whereby wee proue any matter in question haue their force and power to argue such as it is more or lesse from their owne nature onely a Testimonie fetcheth all the waight it hath from the credite or authoritie of him that giues it So that
the worde in common speech where the patterne or a thing it selfe that is inutated or counterfetted is called the Truth The truth Vritas vincit iantationem excelleth the imitation So the Lord is named the true God This is euerlasting life to know thee the onely true God Ioh 17. 3. Some thinke that by this truth or trueness the light is signified to bee such by nature and of it selfe not by Ciril in Ioa. lib. 1. cap. 9. grace or participation And so may the Lord bee called the true beeing because he is so naturally and imparts to all things such being as they haue But of this signification I thinke there is no example to bee found in Scripâ—ure The two former agree very well to our Sauiour who is indeede the true light without any darkness of error or falshood in him Hee whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God for God giueth him not the spirit by measure Ioh. 3. 34. And of him were all the ceremonies of the lawe shadowes and figures as the Apostle hath shewed at large in the Epistle to the Hebrewes especially in the ninth and tenth Chapters But the best way to vnderstand the true sense of the worde is to compare it with other of the same kinde in the Scripture For which purpose what shall wee neede to goe any farder then this Gospell Wherein wee haue two like speeches vttered by our Sauiour of himselfe My father saith hee giueth you the true Ioh. 6. 32. bread from Heauen What true bread was this It is euident that hee speaketh it of himselfe whom a little before hee had called the meate that indureth to euerlasting Verse 27. life Heere he compares himselfe with that Manna whereof the Iewes boasted and wherewith they say Moses fed them euen with bread from Heauen To this our Sauiour answereth that Moses gaue them not bread from heauen but my father giueth you saith he the true bread from Heauen They had bread from heauen by the ministerie of Moses as they proued by the place Psal 78. 24. of the Psalme He gaue them bread from heauen How then saith our Sauiour that Moses gaue them not bread from heauen and that his father giues them the true bread Surely that bread which they had by the meanes of Moses was true bread and did truely the office of bread to feed their bodies What then Doth he meane that it was but a figure of the heauenly bread which God was to giue and now in and by him did giue them This was true indeede but not so much to purpose as our Sauiours speech was beeing rightly vnderstood Hee Ver. 27. had perswaded them before to labour for the meat that endureth to euerlasting life They would needes haue Ver. 30. Ver. 31. him shew them some signe that is worke some miracle whereby they might be occasioned to beleeue him that there was better bread then such as their fathers had eaten in the Wildernes To this our Lord answeres that Moses gaue them not bread from heauen namely no such Ver. 32. bread as could endure to life eternall That bread that could so feede them was the true bread and was giuen by his father in comparison whereof the other was not worthy the name of bread The vse of the bread is to nourisn and continue life and that bread which can not worke such an effect in him that eates it is not true bread Your fathers saith he afterward dideate Manna in the Wildernes and are dead How Ver. 49. Ver. 50. then was that true bread This is the bread that came downe from heauen that hee which eateth of it should not die Loe heere we haue the true bread which performes that in truth to the soule that the other doth but as it were offer to the body Therefore also he tells them a little after that his flesh is truely meate and his bloud truly Ver 55. drink A like place we haue in the same Gospell where he tearmes himselfe the true Vine I am the true Vine Why is Ioh. 15. 1. he the true Vine Because hee doth indeede truely and effectually nourish comfort susteine those that cleaue to him by faith whereas the best Vine in the world hath somtimes dead branches and at the last dieth it selfe Now then if any man demaund in what sense Christ is the true light in the very same say I in which hee doth affirme that he is the true bread and the true Vine The Sonne which is the fountaine of this visible light doth not so truely shine and giue light to the eyes of the body as Iesus Christ doth inlighten the vnderstanding which is the eye of the Soule Iesus Christ may Ambros de fide contra Arian cap. 3. some man say Why not rather God the Father or at least the whole Trinitie whose ioint action it is to inlighten and not the Sonnes alone These obiections are easily answered For it is more then plame that our Euangelist speakes only of the Sonne in this whole description What reason is there then to vnderstand this one verse of any other but of him alone How should this point applied either to the Father or to the Trinitie haue any due place in this discourse Is it not also apparent that the light here spoken of is the same whereof Iohn bare witness and which is said in the verses following to haue come vnto his owne and to haue giuen the priuiledge to men of becomming the sonnes of God Consider yet farder how vnfit it had bin for Saint Iohn hauing called the Worde by the name of the light in the former verses here vpon a sodaine to giue the same title to any other of the persons or the Godhead Will any man take the worde in such diuers sort if hee bee not constrained to doe so by cleere euidence of the Text But so to vnderstand it were to couer the place with darknesse not to make the sense of it cleere and euident But the action of inlightening is common to all three Persons So are all actions of any person of the three which concerne any other beside the Persons themselues To choose to iustifie to sanctifie to redeeme to instruct to inspire to comfort c. are all common workes of the Diuine nature Yet are they appropriated in the Scripture seuerally to the seuerall persons as all men know and as I must shew particularly when I come to the 33. verse In the meane while let vs goe forward with the exposition of this verse wherein we are next to consider what the doubling of the article may teach vs. The light the true light was it not enough to haue said The light For surely that implies an especiall excellencie of the light wee meane There bee perhaps many candles torches starres and moones but the sunne onely is the light They are lights but not the light If that would not serue the turne
their worldly cares or some other such respects from the due consideration of that whereof there is offer made them But the Hebrewes as Saint Paul there writes had receiued the light that is had giuen assent to the truth of that which was taught them and for the maintaining of it had indured as it is there witnesses greate fight in afflictions If we take the word in the former sense only for shining vpon the things that are needfull to bee seene that they may shew themselues vnto vs it is out of doubt that in respect thereof euery man is inlightned for so much as concernes the office of the light which is to make manifest those things that were not without it to be seene For so our Lord hath revealed the will of his Father concerning the meanes of saluation which Ioh. 1. 18. but by him had neuer beene publisht and proclaimed to al the world But this is rather lightning thē inlightning as he that carries a candle or torch with him inlightens not the party before whom he goes or to whō he comes but only lights him and in this sense our Sauiour doth but shewe men what is to bee beleeued Whereon there growes more question how it may be said that euery man is thus lighted For it is very manifest that there were many thousands in the world euen then when our Sauiour himselfe shone so brightly by his glorious workes and powerfull preaching who neuer heard or saw the one or other nor in any likelyhood of reason possibly could do What say I There were many thousandes I may truly say the thousand man then liuing neuer had nor could haue any sight of the light that then shined among the Iewes Yet I confesse that the light stretcht and spread his beames to the vttermost of his nature and strength Take example of the Sunne which in the height of summer riseth early mounts highe shines gloriously sets late and yet there are diuers nations in the worlde which haue not the least glimse of his light all the while he shewes himselfe to vs in these parts of the Hemisphere most apparant and bright Therefore when we read or heare That our Sauiour the true light lighteth euery man as much as in him lies we must not consider him as God but as the mediator of mankind become man As he was God he could haue giuen euery one then liuing in the worlde certaine knowledge that himselfe was ordained for the Sauiour of the world But he was heere to demeane him selfe as a person who by the diuine power of his Godhead could do al things but by the conditiō of his mediatorship was to doe no more then his humane nature might be known to be imployed in some way or other He taught the admirable secrets of God by his voice he wrought wōderful miracles by his almighty power but still it appeared to all men that by the word and wil of him whom they saw to be a man all those wonders weredon So then if we take this lightning of euery man for affording them the meanes of knowledge to saluation we must thus conceiue the matter that our Sauiour preacht and shew'd his miracles by himselfe and his Apostles and doth daily vouchsafe the knowledge of the truth to euery man without exception not forbidding his ministers to teach any man nor barring any from learning of them Let vs now see how we are to vnderstand the Euangelist that the true light inlightneth euery man Inlightning causeth him to discerne the truth of that which is deliuered so that the doctrine of the Gospell is alwaies effectuall to him that is inlightned The Lord opened the heart of Lydia that shee attended to the things that Paul Act. 16. 14. spake All that heard him were lighted but they only inlightned which beleeued the things hee spake How then may Christ be said to inlighten euery man since it is apparant many yea the greatest part beleeue not Surely the former answer satisfies this doubt very sufficiently Whosoeuer is inlightned hath this inlightning from the true light And this interpretation as I shewed before agreeth very well with the Euangelists words and meaning But let vs apply the common distinction to this purpose Christ inlightneth euery man as much as lies in him If wee vnderstand this of his absolute power wherby he is able as God to do al things it is manifestly false Else should euery man vndoubtedly beleeue For he is able to beget faith in the heart of euery man Therfore the most that can bee truly avoucht in this matter is this that hee is ready to inlightē euery man But this interpretation as far as I can conceiue doth not fully expresse the sense of the place if wee expound it of inlightning For it is one thing to inlighten an other thing to bee ready to inlighten What could the Euangelist say more of them that are actually inlightned I acknowledge the truth of the doctrine that our Lord is ready to refresh all that come vnto him to teach all that vse the meanes to learne but Mat. 11. 28. me thinkes this is not all that the holy Ghost in this place affirmes Therefore I had rather interpret the text either of lightning that the true light shines to all without exception no man being shut out from the hearing and reading of the Scriptures by any commaundement or restraint of the light it selfe or of inlightning that all which are made partakers thereof attaine to it only by this true light and both these expositions are true and may agree with the words meaning of the Euangelist to commend our Sauiour Christ as the true light of all men Now whereas some men herevpon would conclude that because the true light inlightens euery man therefore God hath not made choise of any man more then of all men to be heires of his glory in heauen they gather that which growes not of the text I will make it plaine by a short examination of the matter according to the former interpretations No man is barr'd the ministery of the worde Therefore saluation is intended alike to all If you adde in regard of the ministery thereof yet that you say will hardly proue true For though no man be abbridg'd of liberty to heare by any charge to the contrary from God yet many are not vouchsaf't the possibility of hearing How shall wee affirme then that in respect of the ministery of the worde saluation was intended alike to all I graunt that the meanes is affoorded in generall but I deny that therefore there is no difference in Gods purpose touching lightning of one nation more then of an other It is as free for any restraint made by God for the Turkes to haue the Gospell as for vs For they are Gentiles as well as wee But yet it were too greate vnthankfulnesse and absurdity to say that concerning the ministery of the worde God meant to light them to
signifies the earth the place where men ordinarily liue abide so that by Christs being in the world as I sayd his conuersing and liuing vpon the earth among men was noted In the second part The worlde was made by him that I may dispatch this point at once the worde is taken in the most generall sense for all thinges created heauen and earth and whatsoeuer is contained in them This last clause affordes vs a third signification of the worde more particularly then either of the other The world knewe him not It was not required nor could bee lookt for that the frame of the heauens or the Globe of the earth that the Sunne Moone or Starres that the beasts of the fielde the foules of the ayre or the fishes of the Sea shuld take knowledge of the Messiah None but such creatures as were indued with reason could bee capable thereof The Angells it concerned not neither are they at any time called the world It remaines then that by the world men onely are signified And of them it is sayd that They knew not Christ In what respecft did they not knowe him As hee is God Almightie the Creator and preseruer of all things he was generally acknowledged through the world For there neuer was any people so rude or barbarous but they had a perswasion that there was a God and that hee was to bee worshipt But herein as the Apostle sayth They are without excuse because knowing God they Rom. 1. 21. do not glorifie him as God neither are thankefull yea as it followeth afterwards they turne the truth of God into Ver. 25. a lye and worshippe and serue the creature rather then the Creator By which it is manifest that the Euangelist doth not speake heere of our Lords being in the world by his continuall prouidence and gouernment as I noted before Neither may wee vnderstand it of the Person which by no light of nature either bred in the soule or receiued from the creatures could possibly be descryed Therefore wee must needes interpret this knowledge of acknowledging our Sauiour for the Messiah and resting vpō him accordingly for spiritual deliuerance frō sinne death and damnation It is further to bee obserued in this part of the verse that the Euangelist chaungeth his speech and whereas before hee had spoken the light to which It should aunswere now in steede of that hee sayth him The worlde knewe him not Whome did not the worlde knowe In the next verse before hee mentioned the light Therefore he should now haue sayde The worlde knewe it not The Greeke expresseth neither It nor him in the two former clauses but because in this last the Euangelist expoundes himselfe saying him and not it therefore wee supply that worde in both the other As for the reason why Saint Iohn vseth the vseth the worde him wee must remember that hee speakes of the person of the Messiah howsoeuer hee describe him by calling him the life and the light Now to the person Hee and Him agree verie fitly In the Originall The Word is of the same gender that hee is of yet might wee not so speake of it in English but that wee haue respect in our speech rather to the person then to any titles by which he is described to vs. Thus then wee are to conceiue the Euangelists meaning that to amplifie the kindnesse of our Sauiour in offering saluation to the worlde hee sets foorth the great and incredible vnkindenesse of men who would not or at the least did not acknowledge him that they might bee saued But you will say This complaint is too generall against the world seeing it is well knowne euen by record in the Gospell it self that from time to time many beleeued in him This some men discerning restraine the worlde to the wicked of the Chrysost hom 7. in Ioan. world who refused to beleeue But the accusation in the Euangelist is all one though wee so expound it The worlde sayeth hee knewe him not And I thinke wee shall hardly finde the worlde anye where in Scripture taken for the wicked but where there is some opposition exprest or signified betwixt them and the godly I pray not for the world but for them that thou hast giuen mee out of the world Ioh 17 9 Who sees not that in this sentence the world or wicked are opposed to the godly whome the Lord hath chosen out of the world And yet euen in this and the like examples we may very well by the world vnderstand men in generall The worlde cannot hate Chap 7 7. you but mee it doth hate What is that else but as if our Lord should haue sayde men cannot hate you but they hate me It is true indeede that the reason of this hatred is the wickednesse of men but this wickednesse is so generall that it may truly be affirmed of the world in such generall tearmes The fore although some few whose hearts it pleased God extraordinarily to inlighten and incline did confesse him to bee the Messiah yet generally the world did not know him as Saint Iohn not without cause complaynes For to whome may it not worthily seeme strange that a personage of such worth excellency should make himselfe knowne to men in such a wonderfull sort and yet not bee acknowledged to bee such an one as apparantly he was The fame of his doctrine spred it selfe abroade in all places in so much that it was knowne in Rome The light of his glorious miracles shone farre and neere to all the Countries that bordered vpon Iewrie or had any ordinarie traffick with the Iewes in those parts Paul and Barnabas hauing wrought a miracle vpon a poore Cripple at Listra the people lifted vp their voyces saying in the Lycaonian tongue Gods are Act. 14. 11. come downe to vs in the likenesse of men Yea this opinion rested not among the common sort but stretched to the wise and learned in so much that Iupiters Priest Ver. 13. brought Bulles with Garlands and would haue sacrificed with the people Behold I pray you what effect one miracle was able to worke in the hearts of so great a multitude The workers of it were taken for Gods and those none of the meanest They called Barnabas Iupiter Ver. 12. and Paul Mercurie Iupiter was the chiefe of the Heathen Gods and Mercurie his sonne of especiall imployment in all matters of importance Neither stayed they here but prepared their sacrifices in the best manner Bulles with Garlands and brought them to bee offered vp Compare our Lords manie and admirable miracles with this one worke of the Apostles supposing it had beene done by their owne power and vertue Looke not that I should stand to reckon vppe the particulars take a viewe of them in grosse as they are reheaised to Iohns Disciples The blind receiued sight the halt were made able to goe the lepers Mat. 11 5. were cleansed the deafe had their hearing the