still worship toward the Temple and our Saviour tells us which is the true Temple indeed Iohn 2. 19 21. Destroy this Temple in 3 dayes I will raise it up But he spake of the Temple of his body For Iesus est Deus Templum Dei saith Nazianzen i. Naz. Orat. 43. Jeius is both the Temple of God and the God of the Temple And so Saint Austine saith Christus est Sacerdos Aug. de dog Eccl. n. 73. Sacrificium est Deus Temâ—lum i. Christ is the sacrificer and the sacrifice he is the God and the Temple And Origen saith Christus est Templum in Orig. in Josh Hom. 17. utero Virginis formatuâ— i. Christ is the Temple built in the Virgins womb And Athanasius more plainly expresseth this Mystery Digni sunt Ariani qui Atha Or. 5. cont Ar. n. 4. â—aepè percant qui prisci populi reverentiam â—rga Templum laudant sed Dâ—minum in carne ut in Templo suo adorare recusant i. The Arians have well deserved perdition who praise the Iewes for their reverence towards the Temple yet themselves refuse to worship the Lord iâ— the Temple of his Body Solomon saith Proverbs 9. 1. Wisedome hath built her an house Who is wisedome but God and what house is it but as Athanasius often expoundes that saying Corpus Christi Atha ser 3. cont Ar. n. 6. est Domus sapienâ—iae i. The house of Wisedome is the Body of Christ The word building in Scripture is applyed to an humane body as well as to an house Gâ—nesis 2. 22. Deus aedificavit costam in muâ—erem i. God builded the woman of Adams rib and Ruâ—h 4. 1. Rachâ—l and Leah did build the house of Israel and in three dayes I will raise it Iohn 2. As if it were the raysing of an house So the Mysticall Body of Christ which is his Church is called Gods building 1. Cor. 3. 9. In brief Iesus Christ in respect of his divine Nature is our God and the Temple wherein our God dwelleth and that which is truely said to be his rest for ever Psalme 132. 14. Is his glorified Body now in Heaven When we compose our selves to Prayer we lift up our mindes to this God in that Temple God Incarnate is the finall and ultimate Object of our adoration there is no way to approach to our God with any hope of obtaining pardon and remission of sins but through the open doores of the Temple of his wounded body therefore our Prayers are all sealed with Through Iesus Christ our Lord. He that maketh any approach to God otherwise then considered in this Temple must expect to finde him onely as a severe and offended Judge but whâ—n he looketh on us through his Sonne his severity is sweetned Filius est dulâ—edo Dâ—i i. The Sonne is Fulg disc object Arian n. 1. the sweetnesse of God When he beholdeth us through Jesus Christ he is pacified and gâ—acious the clouds and tempests of Gods anger are asswaged by the serenity of the Countenance of Jesus Vulâ—u quo Coelum tempestatesque sâ—renat Virg. Aâ—n 1. Are we not therefore called Christians because we worship God in Christ To him Saint Stephen directed his Prayer Acts 7. 57. Lord Iesus receive my spirit And Saint Paul also Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God even our Father comfort your hearts for so Christ had given direction before Iohn 14. 13. Whatsoever ye shall aske in my Name that will I doe that the Father may be glorified in the Son By what hath been said I trust the danger of this Commentors bold assertion will be discovered who tells us that Christ is not to be believed P. 54. in finally but God in Christ not believing or not considering that the Godhead is in Christ And therefore Christ in respect of this Gohead is to be believed in and prayed to finally and â—erminaâ—ely as the utmost object of our Faith and the Manhood of Christ so endowed with and united to the same Godhead is to be believed in and prayed to Mediately for by the Incarnation of the Godhead in Jesus he became our Advocate and Mediatour and a Priest which is next to be discoursed CHAP. XV. That the most high God became a Mediatour and a Priest and that Christ is prayed unto and yet is a Mediatour Every Person in the Trinitie may be prayed unto THe Commentor tells us That the supream God P. 80. c. 5. v. 5. can no way be a Priest and therefore Christ is not supream God because he is maâ—e a Priest This assertion is most false and blasphemous he that affirmeth it either never was Christian or else must be an Apostate because to say that the most high and onely God cannot be a Priest is all one as to say This God cannot assume flesh or be Incarnate For in the same manner the supreme God became a Priest in which he became a Mediatour and both by assuming humane nature For if it be demanded how we can pray to Christ seeing he is our Mediatour and Priest who interceedeth and prayeth for us and that by him we approach to God so that we may seem rather to pray by him then to him and if Christ be the finall Object of our Prayer who is our Mediatour To this it may be answered that Christ is a Mediatour in the same sense that he is a Priest and in that sense he prayed Now he became a Priest and a Mediatour by assâ—ming Manhood for Saint Chrysostomâ— Chrys Hom. Ant. 32. n. 12. saith truely Christus orabaâ— ut homo nam Deus non â—rat i. Christ prayed in that he was a Man for God doth not pray And Saint Austine saith Christus Aug. de Civit. â— 20. c. 10. est Sacerdo quatenus est Filius hominis i. Christ is not a Priest but by being the Sonne of Man For although it be said Rom. 8. 26. The Spi it maketh intercâ—ssion for us though the Spirit as it signifieth the third Person was not Incarnate the meaning is onely that the Holy Ghost helpeth our infirmities in prayer as is there said and nos intâ—rpellare facit It enableth and stirreth us up to pray as Saint Austine Aug. expos in Ro. n. 96. expounds it not that the Spirit it self prayeth for us When Eudoxius the Arian was newly placed in the Episcopall seat of â—onstanâ—inople the first sentence that he uttered was this blaâ—phemy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soc. l. 2. c. 33. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Father is impious the Sonne is pious at which words when the people began to raise a tumult he appeased them by saying that his meaning was that the Father never prayed but the Son did often pray his intent was hereby to insinuate that because Chrâ—st prayed therefore he was not God but was onely a creature which â—s the Argument which our Commenter useth against the Priesthood of God for indeed the pure Godhead
â—â—tu i. that he was in the light of God and company of Saints and St. Austin prayed thus for his godly Aug. Confes l. 9. c. 13. Mother deceased Pro peccatis matris mea deprecor te Deus demitâ—e illi debita sua c. i. I beseech thee O God for the sins of my Mother that thou wouldst forgive her and yet immediatly he saith Credo jam feceris quod rogo i I beleeve thou hast alreadâ—y done what I now pray for Notwithstanding the Church did so pray and Epiphanius gives this reason why the names of the dead were Epiph. hae 75. mentioned in the Church-prayers Quia hoc magis fuerit utile quid commodius quod credunt praesentes quòd bi qui decesserunt vivunt non sunt nulli i. What can be more profitable to the living then to be assured that the dead persons commemorated do still live and that they are not annihilated So we see the Church had other reasons which moved them so to commemorate the dead though the deceased received no benefit thereby As 1. To commend unto the living and in their mindes to preserve the wholesom doctrine of our Souls immortality 2. Their prayers did challenge the performance of Gods promises to those deceased who had lived and died in the Lord as is declared Rev. 14. 13. Blessed are the dead that dye in the Lord saith the Spirit 3. For the coâ—solation of the living the Priest declared that the sins of such holy men which had lived and died in the faith of Christ were forgiven 4. The Church gave thanks for their departure to rest as acknowledging the mercy of God by which they were saved and not by their own merits Some Divines think that when St. Paul prayed for Onesiphorus The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day 2 Tim. 1. 18. that Onesiphorus was at that time dead because in the end of the Epistle in the salutations there is no mention of Onesiphorus but of his familie only 2 Tim. 4. 19. And because there is no state or condition of men in this life though never so sinful which excludeth them from the benefit of being prayed for therefore some Expositors have thought that when St. John said There is a sin unto death I do not say he shall pray for it 1 Joh 5. 16. his meaning is that such an one who liveth and dieth in a soul-destroying sin such as shall in this book afterwards be discovered without repentance for such a mans prayers are unprofitable and vaine not excluding others that die in the Lord to be commemorated in the prayers of the living as Onesiphorus before mentioned and in that sense as is before said and this is St. Heromes exposition in his objurgatory Hier 10. 9. Epiad Evang. Epistle to Evangius if it be his own and so also saith the interlineal glosse with Lyra. St. Austin being hard put to it to give an account why the Church prayed for the dead and what benefit the dead had by the prayers of the living by the questions of Dulcitius and Paulinus confesseth most inge Aug. lib. de Cur promortâ— c. 1. nuously that the dead can have no benefit at all by our prayers here except by their good life they were capable of good before their death and again he saith Because the Church knoweth not unto what dead men Aug. ib. c. 17. her prayers are profitable therefore she prayeth pro omnibus regeneratis i. for all the regenerate that none may be omitted CHAP. XV. That the Fathers did not beleeve that Souls departed were insensible as if they were dead or asleep because the Saints departed do pray for the Church Militant as the Fathers thought HAving shewed before what the Church Militant did here below for the Triumphant part above it would now be considered what the Triumphant Church above doth for us that are on earth in the judgement of the Fathers The ancient Church were so far from thinking that our souls died with our bodies that they affirme and verily beleeve that the souls of holy men departed and being in rest did pray for the Church on earth for so St. Hierom tels us the Saints deceased pray for the living Hier. Epist 53. n. 17. for they that had so much charity on earth as to pray even for their enemies and persecutors much more will they now in heaven pray for the Church St. Paul is not lesse charitable after his departure then he was before and so he wished Heliodorâ—â— that if he died before Hier. Eipst 1. n. 1. Hierom to pray for him when he was in heaven so likewise he desireth a Id. Epist 27. n. 7. Principia and b Id. Epist exeg 140. n. 30 Paula to remember him when they are in heaven And St. Ambrose professeth c Amb. de fide Resur n. 30. That he expecteth the intercession of his brother Satyrus deceased for the speedier deliverance out of the miseries of this life and that he hoped the godly Emperour d Id. de Obit Theod. n. 47. Theodosius departed did yet pray to God for his surviving Children and that the dead Emperor e Id. de Obit Valent. n. 46. Gratian did pray for his brother Valentinian Of the same Judgment is St. Chrysostom f Chrys ser de uno Legisl to 6. n. 55. for he doubteth not to affirm that the Martyrs and Prophets Apostles deceased do actually pray for the living and before him St. Cyprian in his life-time contracted with Cornelius g Cyp. l. 1. Epist 1. Qui prior è vita discesserit oret pro sratribus i. That which of them should first dye must pray for the survivers and in an Epistle written to some Martyrs who were very speedily to suffer death for Christ he desireth †Cyp. ad Marty n. 98. Naz. Orat. 24. them to be mindful of him when they were in the honour of Martyrs with the Lord. Greg. Naz. tells us that Athanasius though deceased yet as he was perswaded did still help and assist the Church and that his friend St. Basil deceased and now in heaven yet Naz. Orat. 20. even there poured out prayers for the people And of his reverend old father deceased who had been a long time Bishop of Nazianzum he saith That he doubteth Id. Orat. 19. not but though he were in heaven yet the same Pastoral care which he had on earth remaineth still with him and now that he is approached nearer to God he doth more good for that flock by his prayers in heaven then he could do by his doctrine on earth This is enough to shew what the Fathers thought of the Immortality of the soules of men and the same opinion was so generally received of Christian people in those dayes that as St. Chrysostome reporteth they Chrys Ser. 4. de Laz. n. 42. would commonly boast that they should
in Cron. as Prosper writeth yet the Manichees did not more deprave the Passion of Christ then you have done and therefore your book cannot expect a better fate then its fore-runners for of all the great Volumes which former hereticks writ there is little or nothing at this day to be found except such fragments as remain in the Fathers who confuted them and a few Creeds and Ep stola fundamenti in St. f Aug. Conâ— Epist fund 10. 6. c. 5. Austin and nothing else of Controversie considerable and yet I must tell you that the books of the Arians were written with far greater art and learning then your loose writings shew and I assure you that many Judicious Divines have said that they find nothing in your book fiâ— to be observed but onely the errours and heresies and yet those are so poorly proved that I may truly say of your book as Austin did of the books of Faustus the Manichee g Aug. Cont. Faust lib. 16. c. 26. Faustus scribit tanquam libellus ejus surdos auditores vel caecos lectores esset habiturus O hominem dictorem alium non cogitantem contradictorem i. Surely you imagined that your Readers and bearer should be deaf or blind and that none would contradict you but all acquiesce in your opinion yet your writings are so blasphemous as if they had been written by him that was the Author of that Libel which Mr. Fox calls h Acts Mon. n. 40. Lucifers Letter and so insipid as if they had been i Erasm f. 359. Suibus Scripti as Erasmus said of such kind of Writers in his time I wish they had been dedicated to Vulcan or strangled with a spunge in their birth because I see that they are like the fry of Serpents and other Vermin and are by you made onely to do mischief untill they be catcht and then the height of their preferment will be as Martial merrily writes of his own Poems k Mart. l. 3. ep 2. Libelle Festina tibi vindicem parare Ne nigram citò raptus in culinam Cordyllas madida â—egas papyro Vel thuris piperisque sis Cucullas Make haste and get a Patron pretty book Before the Black guard or the Master-Cook Snatch thee as waste-paper for his Kitchin To put Spice Sprats Frankincense or Pitch in But if they misse this yet they will not fail of such an end as Arius himself came to or of the fate of Volusius his Annals in Catullus Pleni ruris inficetiarum Catul. car 37. Mart. lib. 12. p. 62. Annales Volusi c. carm 37. So I leave them for present to be put into the Black Bill at Cambridge or the black Catalogue of the late Gangrana CHAP. IV. The Commenters temporizing in unsainting the Apostles in condemning Tombs and in short hair THe next thing to be observed in you and your Comment is your great Compliance with the tender Consciences of these Times which they that formerly observed your very zealous conformity with the then garb must needs judge that you intended this new change onely as a bait to invite the brethren more chearfully to swallow your deadly hook First you will not afford the title of Saint to the holy Apostles but they are plain John Peter Paul only James is beholding to you for Sainting him if not an erratum of the Printer Is not this to shew your conformity with the Plague-bill of London and yet there is the title Allhallowes though not the word Saint and there the word Saint is withdrawn but from places and Churches but you will not allow it to the persons of Apostles the Bill had some colour for it self for it was once ordered in a Council a Concil Constantinop sub Const 5. An. Domini 755. That Churches should not have the appellation of Saint because of the great abuse in Image-worship and because people did then give the title of Saint to those places not because the Churches were so named in their dedications but because the Images of Saints were set up in Churches and the name of the Saint was painted on the Image So that when men said Let us go to St. Peters they meant it of the image when perhaps the Church was not so named but it was never ordered by any Christian Council that the title Saint should be denyed to the persons of the holy Apostles and Evangelists you see the Scriptures give that â—itle to whole Companies of people professing Christ b 1 Cor. 14. 33. who were much inferiour to the high Office and sanctity of the Apostles I think you would be offended with him that should not stile you Doctor and yet the Apostles have a better title to Saint then you to your Doctorship And because some are offended with Images of men lately set upon Tombs as they have as just cause perhaps to find fault with them as to be offended with the memories of Apostles and Martyrs in glasse-windowes if all imagery in Churches be unlawful you more zealously condemn all Tombs built for memory of men departed though they deserved well of us and therein you condemn the practice of holy men in Scripture in preserving the Sepulâ—hâ—â— of David even the accursed Jews did adorn the Tombs of the Prophets whom Matth. 23. 29. their fathers slew yea and all Christian Churches in all ages did allow and with great cost set up Tombs of holy men and Martyrs and called them Memorias Martyrum i. e. the Memories of Martyrs the Sepulcher of Christ was much esteemed by Constantine the Great and a fair Church built over it as we read in Eusebius and that for the memories of twelve Apostles Euseb de vit Const l. 3. lib. 4. Hier. Epist 53. c. 3. n. 17. Aug. de Civ l. 22. c. 8. he built twelve several Tombs in one Church as Constantinople and in St. Hieromes time the Tombs of St. Peter and St. Paul were of great esteem in Rome In St. Austin's time and in his Church at Hippo was the Tomb of St. Stephen set up though far remote from the place of his stoning and we find a Tomb set up or the blessed Virgin Mary in Judaea as some in Diâ—nysius and St. Hierome tell us Nonna the holy woman Vid. Dionys vit Hier. to 9. P. 39. and Mother of Greg. Nazianzen devoted the whole estate which her son Caesarius left to build a costly Monument for his memory as her own son Nazian in his Funeral Oration to her great praise reporteth Naz. Orat. 10. and in the Canons of the Primitive Church recorded by St. Basil The violaters of the Tombs of the dead are Basil ad Amphil c. 64. n. 36. ordered to stand excommunicate the space of eleven yeares even as long as adulterers were This Commenter surely hath an higher conceit of his own wisdome then any other men have discovered to be in him that presumeth to controul the Practice of
afterwards Is not this the Carpenters son Matth. 13. 55. disparaging him for his mean parentage this is the Exposition of St. Ambâ—ose a Ambr. de Spirit l. 1. c. 3. In Filium Hominis pâ—ccare est remissius sentire de carne Christi c. To sin against the Son of Man is to conceive too basely of the flesh of Christ and they that so sin are not utterly excluded from pardon 2. The Jewes blasphemed him now in his Godhead by denying it and ascribing the miracle to confederacy with Beelzebub and of this blasphemy which doth take away the very foundation of remission of sins it is said It shall not be forgiven 5. I may adde hereunto that those unbaptized Pharisees in probability did not intend any obloquy or blasphemy against the Person of the holy Spirit as it is the third Person of which they had never been instructed neither had they so much Christianity as those disciples at Ephesus who though they had been baptized unto Iohns baptisme yet they had not so much as heard whether there be an holy Ghost Act. 19. 2. Thus having shewed that in Scripture and in the writings of the Fathers and later Divines the Godhead of Christ is called a Spirit and holy and also an holy Spirit and that in St. Matthew those words holy Spirit are to be understood of the Godhead of Christ which is for ever united to and residing in the Holy Temple of his most sacrâ—d Body and Soul I now reassume my former Conclusion That the denying Christ to be God is the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost which is there said to be unpardonable Now that in a Doctrine of so great moment and concernment the Reader may understand that I do not obtrude any novell and private opinion of mine own upon him I will heâ—e lay down the judgement of soâ—e of the Fathers in this very question and first of Athanasius one of the most profound and godly Divines that since the Apostles dayes the Church ever had who in his book De Communi essentia Patris c. aith b Arha to 3. p. 625. It is hard to conjecture what our Saviour means by those words He that speaketh against the Sod of Man shall be forgiven but he that speaketh against the holy Ghost shall not be so given So that the Son may seem â—o he infâ—riour to the Spirit and yet the So saith The Father and I are one If he that saith to his brother Thou fool shall be cast into hâ—ll â—n quam gehennà gehennarum conjiriâ—tur is qui â—ssâ—rit Deum creatu am â—sse Into what Hell of Hells will he be cast who calleth him that is God a Creature and a Servant and a Minister onely And a little after he saith Dâ—iâ—atâ—m Vâ—rbi ipse Christus Spiriâ—um Sanctum vocâ—t humanitatem suam Filium Hominis nâ—minavit i. Our Saviour called his own Godhead the holy Ghost and his own Manhood he called the Son of Man and of those that blaspheme his holy Spirit by blaspheming his Godhead is this sentence to be understood It shall not be forgiven him neither in this world nor in the world to come This is the judgement of Athanasius To him I adde the Opinion of St. Hilâ—râ— who was contemporary with Athaâ—asius who in his Exposition of that Text Matth. 12. 32. saith c Hil. in Mat. Can. 12. p. 731. Si negetur Dâ—us in Christo caret omni misâ—ricordia i. If a Man deny God to be in Christ that man shall finde no mercy And again he saith d Hil. ib. Can. 31. p. 426. Blasphemia in Spiritum â—st Christum Deum â—sse negare i The blasphemy against the Spirit is to deny Christ to be God The same Father in the place last quoted speaking of Saint Peters deniall of Christ saith Because to deny Christ to be God is that sinne which shall never be forgiven therefore Peter denied thus I know not the Man because a word spoken against the Son of Man may be forgiven The very same conceit hath Saint Chrysostome also in his Sermon of Peters deniall and upon these words I kâ—ow not the Man e Chrys to 6 p. 631. Non dixit non noâ—i Deum Verbum sic enim peccasset in Spiâ—itum Sanctum i. Peter said not I know him not to be God for so he had sinned against the holy Ghost but I know not the Man Now whether Saint Peter meant so as these two Fathers conjectured I cannot affirm for certain but by this I finde that the judgement of these two great Doctours was that the denying of the Godhead of Christ is indeed that great unpardonable sinne To this I adde the testimony of Saint Basil who deserved to be called the Great He in that excellâ—nt Book De Spiritu Sancto saith f Basil de Spirit c. 7. Testificer omni Homini Christum profiâ—enâ—i sed â—um neganti Deum â—sse quod Christus nihil â—i proderiâ— i. I testifie to every Man who professeth himself to be a Christian and yet deâ—â—ieth Christ to be God Christ shall nothing at all profit that man And if Christ do not profit us in the remission of our sinnes I am sure our sinnes shall never be forgiven in this world or in the world to come CHAP. V. The Opinions of later Divines concerning the unpardonable sin A brief Narration of the life and death of Arius and of Julian the Apostate TO the above-named Ancients I subjoyn the opinions of our later Divines who in their Expositions and Tractats where they inquire what particular sin this is although they do not agree therein yet when they inquire what persons have sinned this sin they do commonly affirm for one that Arius in his Heresie did sâ—n thus and this is the opinion of Polanus and also of Bucanus and others Now the Polan synt p. 340. Bucan Lo. Com. p 174. onely noted heresie of Arius was the denying the Godhead of Jesus Christ saying that he was not from everlasting and that he was but preferred to be a God Just as our Commenter would have him onely exalted and deisied This Arius was born in Africk and was a Presbyter or Priest of the Cathedrall Church of Alexandria in Egypt In that City in the dayes of the Emperour Constantine the Great there were ten Churches besides Epiph. haer 69. the Cathedrall Just such as we now call Paraecial or Parish-Churches wherein ten of the Presbyters of the Cathedrall Church were the incumbents and Preachers of these ten Arius was one and was more esteemed and followed then any of his brethren It fell out that the Bishop of Alexandria died Arius gaped for the place but mist it for one Alexander was elected then Arius raised a faction and revived the former Heresie of Paulus Samosatenus preaching this damnable doctrine that Christ was not God When Bishop Alexander was informed of this he convented Arius and upon examination discovering his
is behind of the afflâ—ctions of Christ in my flâ—sh We may not think that Christ in his own particular Person left his Passion insufficient so as if for our redemption the Apostle should need to supply his defect but his meaning is that something was to be suffered in the Mysticall Body of Christ which is his Church by the holy Martyrs for confirmation of Evangelicall Truth as it is there said For his bodies sake that is for the edification of his Members and these Passions of Martyrs are here called the afflictions of Christ though they were acted onely on the Person of this Apostle If it be here objected that there is a great difference between the Sonship of Christ and our sonship because he is the Son of God by Nature and we onely by the Adoption of Grace This cannot be denied but withall we should understand that although Christ in regard of his Divine Nature is very God of very God yet the same Lord Jesus in respect of his assumed Manhood is also the Son of God onely by Grace by Adoption and Election and therefore it is said in regard of this humane Nature All power is given me in Heaven and in Earth Esay 42. 1. 1 Pet. 2. 4. and therefore Christ is called Gods elect Servant and Saint Peter calls him a stone chosen and precious for indeed it was of meer grace that this Man Jesus was chosen and taken into Unity of Person with the Eternal Word and this is the doctrine of the ancient Church Aug. de Verb. Dei ser 8. De Temp. ser 84. delivered by Saint Austine Susceptio hominis per Verbum erat Gratia nam quid meruit ille Homo qui Christus est and again Susceptio hominis ipsius in Deum tota est gratia quid meruit homo ille â—olle gratiam quid est Christus nisi homo quid nisi quod tu and in his disputes against the â—elâ—gians he thus argues Vnde Christus De Praedest cap. 14. homo meruit ut in unitatem personae cum aeterno verbo assumeretur quid â—nte egit and he answereth himself thus ille grat âest tantus â—â gratiâ fiâ— Christianus quâ ille homo fiâ— Christus That is the taking of the manhood into God was meerly of grace for what did that man Christ deserve What did he before by the same grace that a man is made a Christian this man Jesus was made Christ Finally why should we further doubt that holy men are called Christ and the Son of God seeing the Eph. 3. 17. 1 John 4. 13. Matth. 28. 28. Scripture tells us that Christ dwelleth in their hearts and that they dwell in him and that he is with us to the end of the world Hereupon Saint Hierâ—m writes thus to Saint Austin a Hierom. Ep. 80. Habitantem in teâ—dâ—â—exi Dâ—mâ—num Salvatorâ—m And Paulinus thus writes to him b Aug. epist 58. Audiam quâ—d in â—â— mihi loquatnâ— Deus And Austin himself writes thus to Bishop Aurelius c Id. â—e opere Monach. cap. 1. Jussioni â—â—a oporter me obâ—â—mperaâ—e nam Christus in te habitans ex te jussiâ— This union of Christ and his Church is of so great Concernment that the most high and Holy Sacrament was set up by our Saviour purposely not only to signify but also as an Instrumental meanes to effect this most holy Union which cannot be said of common and ordinary food and therefore is called by Saint Austin Thâ— Sacrament of union as out of many grapes one vessell Ad Frâ—â— in Erem ser 28. Sacramentum unitatis of wine is extracted c â—just so saith he of many men one Body of Christ is composed I here present unto the Learned Readers consideration an exposition of those two difficult sayings of Christ but I do not obtrude this conceit Magisterially He saith Iohn 6. 53. Except ye cat the flesh of the Son of man c. and Matth. 26. 26. Take eat this is my Body This he said when he gave not flesh but bread Vide Theophil in â—oâ— 6. 51. This bread may truly besaid to †Vide Theoophil in John 6. 51. be turned into the Flesh of Christ because it is nutrimentally turned into the flesh of every holy Communicant because such are truly called the Body and members of Christ and are called Christ but in prophane persons it is not so turned because they are not the members of Christ neither doth our Saviour say This is my body till he had first said Take Eat my learned friend Dr. Thomas Brown observeth that every Religio â—â—dici man is a kind of Anthropâ—phaâ—e because the main bulk of his body went in at his mouth by nourishment so this holy Eucharisticall nourishment is therefoie turned into the Body of Christ because it is converted into the flesh and blood of us who are his Body for thus Christ and his servants become incorporate and one body In the vision of Saint Peter it was said Arise Acts 10 13. kill and eat the meaning was that Peter should re ceive the Gentiles as well as the Jewes into the Communion of the Church Quasi escam uâ— incorporentur Ecclesiae saith Austin so he expoundeth that of Saint Iohn Aug. Hom. 45. Except ye eat id est nisi incorporentur Christo So also he expoundeth that saying He that cometh to Jo. 6. 37. me I will not cast him out Quiveniâ— ad Christum incorporatur ei And in that exposition of the Apocalyps which goes under his name Rev 20. 9. where it is said that fire came from God and devoured the persecutors he saith Comeduntur ab ecclesia persecutores id est incorporantur the meaning is that by the fire of the Holy Ghost the very persecutors of the Church shall be converted and incorporated into that mysticall Body of Christ this of the first question The second question is What that is which in the Saints Quest 2. Militant is not yet nor ever will be in this life fully subjected to God but shall be hereafter in the next life To this question this is the answer That in the Answer most holy men living there dwelleth a rebellious sin continually unto their death which is the same that by the Apostle is called Concupisence for the law saith Thou shalt not cover and the Apostle saith The Exod 20. 17. Rom. 7. 7. Gal. 5. 17. Psal 94. 20. flesh lusteth against the Spirit this is that which Divines call Originall sin of which the Apostle saith Rom. 7. 23. I see another law in my members warring against the law of my mind Psal 94. 20. he calleth it a law because it hath such power over us as the Edicts of Tyrants have over their Vassals this is that sin which â—weâ—lâ—th in us Rom. 7. 2. of which he saith v. 24. who shall deliâ—er us from this body of death the deliverance mâ—st not be
expâ—cted in this life for against this thorn in the flesh did this Apostle pray â— but it was answered My Gâ—â—ce iâ— sufficient That 2 Cor. 12. 7. is no other deliverance may be had but power by grace to resist this temptation yet not so much power as to annihilate and quite extinguish it in this life If it be here objected that the Holy Scriptures acknowledge Gen. 6. 9. Job 1. 1. Luke 1. 5. some persons just and righteous and perfect ones as Job and Noah and Zecharie the answer is that this perfection doth not imply impeccancie or impeccability for such just men fall seven times Prov. 24. 16. Noah was just but it is said there in his generation such may be called perfect Travellers but not perfect Possessors having not yet finished their course so a child is called perfect which hath all his limbs and lineaments compleat yet is far from a perfect man and a perfect man is yet far short of Angelicall perfection Men are called just who are not Aug. de natura Grat. â— 38. free from sin Justi suâ—runt sine peccato non suerunt That this truth hath been ever acknowledged by the Church may appear in that the Apostle saith â—f we say we havë no sin we deceive our selves civitas 1 Joh. 1. 8. Dei oâ—atâ— dimiâ—te nobis debiâ—a the universall Church in the time of prayer saith Forgive us our trespasses Indeed Aug. de Civit l. 19. c. 22. De peccat merito l. 2. c. 6. S. Austin confesseth That a man may sometime live without acting a sin yet that any mortall man can be without sin he denyeth For when the Pelagians urged that the Virgin Mary was without sin he desired to be excused from all accusation of that Blessed Mother of our Lord God yet he was assured that all Saints on earrh would submit to that speech of Ambr. de Jacob l. 1. c. 6. Hier. ad Ctesiphon cap. 5. Id. Cont Pelag l. 2. cap. 8. Saint Iohn If we say we have no sin c. Sainâ— Ambrose saith Non glâ—riâ—r quia justus sum sâ—d quia redemptus not glorying in Justice but in Justification St. Hierom saith men are called just not because they are without sin but because they are endowed with many vertues as Ezechias was a just man though he sinnâ—d and wept he did not lose the repute of a just man for some sins but he retained it because withall he performed many just and worthy actions besides a man is â—steemed righteous when his unâ—ighteousnesse is forgiven as he is â—steemed with God a performer of the Law whose transgrâ—ssions are pardoned Omnia Aug. Retract 1. c. 19. mandata facta deputanâ—ur quando quiâ—quid non fit ignosciâ—ur Now that the rebellion of flesh and blood or concupiscâ—nce doth contâ—nually dwell in all mankind during this life may clearly appear in the Holy Person of Saint Paul by his own words for thus he writes Rom. 7. 19. The goâ—d that I would I do not but the evil which I would not that I do f we inquire what evill it is which the Apostle would not do and yet did it it must needs be answered that evill concupiscences or carnall lusts did arise in him which he desired to be quit of and free from that they might not all be in him but because evill concupiscences will ever be in mortal men therefore his next care is that such desires may be râ—sisted so that they proceed not into action as he saith Rom. 6. 12. Let not sin reign in your mortall body that ye should obey iâ— in the lusts thereof he doth not say let it not be for it will alwaies be in us but let it not rule and pâ—evail over Grace So Gala. 5 16. wâ—lk in the Spirit and ye shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh he doth say ye shall not have those lusts but not fulfill and peâ—form them and ver 17. Ye cannot do the thing that ye would that is because ye cannot as you desire be free and quit from evill desires so as no evill desires at all should arise in you yet resist them do not obey them Tene Aug. de Verb. Dei ser 43. manus pedes ocuâ—oâ— c. withhold your members from acting those carnal suggestions Where he saith What I hate that I do We are not Rom. 7. 15. to imagine that the Apostle meaneth that although he hated fornication adultery rapine c. yet he did act these things but he meaneth that he hated evill lusts which yet did continually arise in him he desired they might not all be in him Nolo concupiscere tamen conâ—upisco O â—i tamen Aug. de verbis Apost ser 5. ago quamvis membraâ—â—eneo arma nego So himself adviseth Rom. 6. 13 Yâ—â—ld not your members as iâ—st â—ments of unrighteousness Although sinfull desires arise in Id de Temp. Ser. 45. your carnall heart Rebellant râ—bella pugnant pugna This is the strife betwen the flesh and the spirit he did continually resist those temptations Luctabatur noâ— Id. ibid. subjugâ—baâ—ur alwayes strâ—ving with them but not overcome by them Rom 8. 8. They that are in the flesh cannot please God Though holy men are in the flesh yet because they are not over-ruled by the flesh they do please Id. de verbis Apost Ser. 6. God Carnem portant sed non pâ—rtantur ab â—a Where he saith Rom. 7. 25. With the mind I my self serve the Law of God but with the flesh the Law of sin We are not to think that the naturall mind or intellective faculty of this Apostle was free from carnall concupiscence for by nature our whole man body and soul is carnall but the mind here signifieth his understanding reformed and renued by the Spirit of God for the very naturall spirit or mind of man needeth â— renuing by the Spirit of Grace as himself saith Ephes 4. 23. Bâ— râ—nued in the Spirit of your mind When he saith Rom. 7. 17. It is no more I that do it but sin that dwelleth in me His meaning is not to excuse himself so as if he were without sin and blameless But that his Spirituall part or in ward man did detest that which his carnall part or outward man did suggest Just so doth this Apostle ascribe his holy and spirituall actions not to himself but to the Grace of the Spirit as 1 Cor. 15. 10. I laboured more then they all yet not I but the Grace of God which was with me So 1 Cor. 7. 10. I command yet not I but the Lord. So again Gal. 2. 20. The conclusion is that The Son himself that is to say Christ as he is considered with the plenitude of his Mysticall Body and so is the Whole Christ cannot be perfectly subject and obedient to the Godhead untill this mortall hath put on immortality and our naturall body be raised a Spirituall body when
Christ hath put down all carnall and sinfull rule authority and power for where the Apostle saith 1 John 3. 9. Hâ— that is bâ—rn of God sinâ—eth not He meaneth that the seed and fountain of sinning is not in his regenerating and Spirituall part by which he is born of God but he is also born of flesh and by that onely he sinneth CHAP. XI Why the unpardonable sinne is rather fastened on the deniers of the Godhead of the Sonne then on them that deny the Godhead of the other Persons BUt why should the denying of the Godhead of the Son be so especially said to be a blasphemy unpardonable when as the denying of the Godhead of the other Persons is also damnable for first Saint Basil saith expresly more then once Qut Spiritum sanctum Crâ—â—turam vocant incidunt inblasphâ—miam Basil epist 387. n. 17. 43. illam irremissiâ—item He that calleth the Holy Ghost a creature falleth â—nto the unpardonable sinne so that Eunomius the Heretâ—cke who said the Spirit was the Creature of the Son was involved in Basil cont Euno n. 20. this blasphemy as well as Arius who said the Son was but a Creature of the Faâ—herâ— and therefore called him Mâ—ttendarium onely an Emissarie of the Father as Ruffinus reporteth and Saint Cyprian calâ—eth the Devill Ruff. in symb apud Cyp. n. 91. who is under the pressure of eternall unpardonableness both Antichristum Antispiritum an Antichrist and an Antispirit intimating as much danger in the one as in the other For we â—earn in Scripture that without holyness no man shall see God Heb 12 14. Therefore how can that man expect the gift of Holyness who denieth the Author of Holyness which iâ— the Holy Ghost Secondly He that denieth the Godhead of the Father is an Atheist for all sorts of Religions which confess 2. a God do also confess a Fatherhood in that God even the Heathens called their Jupiter a Father but how can an Atheist expect salvation from God who denieth that there is any God For answer hereunto it may be said that although the denying of the Godhead of any Person in the Trinity be destructive to salvation yet this sin is rather fastned on the deniers of Christ then the deniers of the other Persons First because the confession of the Father and the holy Spirit is not salvificall without the Confession of Christ for even Heathens confessed both a Fatherhood and a Divine Spirit of God as appeareth by the confession of Neâ—u hadnezar Dan. 4. 9. but the Confession of Christ is alone salvificall because he is not alone as himselfe saith John 8. 16. I am not alone but I and the Father which sent me for the confession of Christ includeth Basil de 〈◊〉 c. 12. the whole Trinity as Saint Basil affirmeth Christi appâ—llatio est professio totius trinitatis deâ—larans Deum Patrem qui unâ—it Filium qui unctus est Spiâ—itum qui est unctio and Saint mbâ—oâ—e affirmeth the same Amb. de 〈◊〉 c. 3. Christus implicat Paâ—rem unguentem Filium unctum Spiritum unctionem i. The appellation of Christ is the profession of the whole Trinity declaring the Father anointing the Son anointed and the Spirit who is the ointment and therefore albeit the form of Baptisme was precisely set down to be in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost yet because the Name Jesus Christ implyeth all these Saint Peter mentioneth onely this name Acts 2. 38. Be baptized everyone of you in the Name of Iesus Christ for remission of sins so doth Saint Paul also Rom. 6. 3. Galatians 3. 27 Secondly the unpardonable sin is fastned on the deniers of the second Person rather then on the deniers of the other Persons because the work of redemption was immediately wrought by the second Person For it was the Person of the Son onely that became a Surety for us and not onely a bare Witness or Testifier as the Commenter affirmeth the Son onely took upon him our nature and therein fulfilled the Law for us and suffered death in our stead for our transgressions he onely was our Surety and Mediatour and he onely was incarnate and died and rose again and carried our flesh into Heaven with him and there still continueth a Mediatour for us not by any verball pleading or intreating for our salvation but by presenting there in the glorious Sanctuary of Heaven that humane body and soul which had actually and perfectly performed the whole Covenant of God and therefore even in the most strict Justice of God shewing that Heaven is due by the said Covenant to all his mysticall Body for which his naturall Body was sacrificed on the Crosse for the expiation of all their sinnes which was prefigured by the High Priests entering into the Sanctum Sanctorum All these dispensations and actions which conduced to our salvation must be ascribed onely to the Person of the Sonne but cannot be said of the Father or of the Holy Ghost For that was the Heresie of the â—oc l. 2. c. 15. Sabellians who were therefore called Patripassiani for these workes are proper to the Sonne alone Filius natus passus resurrâ—xisse ascendâ—sse dicitur non Aug. de Trin. l. 1. c. 5. n. 60. Pater As Augustine saith i. The Father cannot be said to be born or suffer or to rise again or to ascend but onely the Sone Therefore Kisse the Son lest he be angry and ye perish Psalme 2. 12. For the denying of him is the renouncing of salvation CHAP. XII The Godhead of Jesus Christ shewed by Scripture and by the type of the Tabernacle BEcause the apprehension and believing of this great Mystery of God Incarnate is a wonderfull consolation to the Christian and the denying thereof pertinaciously a certain note of eternall perdition therefore the Scripture hath very evidently and frequently declared this weighty truth both by express words and otherwise for the child to be born of a Virgin must be called Emmanuel Esay 7. 14. that is God with us or God incarnate and the same Prophet Esay 9. 6. giveth that childe such Titles as cannot be attributed to any meer creature as The mighty God the everlasting Father the Prince of Peace This Prophets words do so agree with the Evangelicall and Apostolicall Doctrine as the Word was made flâ—sh and the Word was God John 1. and God manifest in the flesh 1 Tim. 3. 16 and of whom as concerning the flâ—sh Christ came who is over all God blessed for evermore Rom. 9. 5. that Saint Jerome called this Prophet Hier. proaem in Isai n. 33. Esay Non solum Prophetam sed Evangelistam Apostolum Not onely a Prophet but an Evangelist and an Apostle for as the Prophet before the incarnation bringeth in God saying I have sworn by my self to me every knee shall bow Esay 45. 23. So the Apostle applieth that saying to Christ being the same
cannot be said to pray because there is none greater to be prayed unto therefore God must be incarnate before he can be a Priest or pray but as he was a perfect Man so might he pray for us and as he was perfect God so we may and must pray to him For all Prayer is directed to God onely but not to the Father onely and because the Godhead is in every Person so that every Person is God therefore Prayer may be made to any Person and Christ will yet still continue our Mediatour both to the Father and to the Holy Ghost and to himself also for he that prayeth to one Person prayeth to all three Persons for they are all inseparately involvd one in another The Father is in me I am in him Joh. 14. 11. and the Father and I are one Joh. 10. 30. But this is warily thus to be understood That the Godhead or Essence of the Father is in the Son whereby the Son is called God but the Pâ—rsonality or Propriety of the Father is not in the Son for the Father cannot be called the Son nor the Son the Father otherwise then as is shewed before that the Godhead in any Person is the Eternall Father Divines have observ'd upon that place Io. 16. 23 Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my Name He saith the Father not my Father for if he had said My Father then the asking had been confined to one Person for onely one is the Father of the Son of God but in that he saith The Father he doth not debar us from praying to the other Persons because as hath been shewed out of Esay 9. 6. every Person is the eternall Father because every one is one God There is but one God in the three Persons and that one God the second Person being God Incarnate is our Mediatour and though he be Mediatour because Incarnate yet neither his Mediatourship nor his Incarnation do nullifie his Godhead so that our Saviour is Mediatour for us to himself to his own Godhead so that we may pray to the Son to hear us for his own sake For Iohn 14. 14. Where it is said If ye aske any thing in my Name The old reading was as may be yet seen in Sâ— Hieromâ— If you aske me any thing in my Name and Beza confesseth as much though he imagined that it was taken out of the Margin into the Text. So Christ is prayed to as he is God and he is Mediatour as he is Emmanuel Every Person is God therefore every Person is to be prayed unto and he that nameth but one Person in Prayer doth not exclude the rest because all are but one God This was the Doctrine of the Primitive Church delivered singularly and profoundly by Saint Ambrose and Saint Augustine Vnus Deus in tribus haec tria Amb. in symb n. 20. unus Dâ—us One God is in three Persons and three Persons are but one God And Vnus est Ommipotens Tripotens Deus Paâ—er Filius Spiritus There is but one Omnipotent and Tripotent God the Father Son and Holy Ghost And again Singulus horum Deus simul Id. de Doct. Chr. l. 1. c. 5. omnes unus Deus singulus horum plena substantia simul omnes una substantia Every Person is God and all are one God Every one is perfect God and all together are but one God And again Singula sunt in singulis omnia in singulis singula in omnibus Id. de Trin. lib. 6. c. 10. omnia in omnibus unum omnia Every one is in every one and all in every one and every one in all and all in all and One is all Hence it is that every Person may be prayed unto and glorified as in Scripture the Seraphims crie Holy Holy Holy Esay 6. 3. Rev. 4. 8. and the Christian Church both ancient and modern in her Doxologies used to glorifie the three Persons alike Gloria Patri Filio Spiritui and in her prayers invoked all and in her Creeds confessed all CHAP. XVI The Godhead of Christ shewed from the adoration of his Person and how God is to be worshipped being incarnate IF it be again demanded how we can perform Divine adoration to Jesus in the Temple of his Body being now God Incarnate except at the same time we adore a creature because his Body still is a creature for though it be indeed the Body of God yet nevertheless it is a body and therefore a creature Or shall we therefore adore his Body because it is the Temple wherein God dwelleth If so then as Athanasius Ath. de incar n. 22. objecteth Adora quoque Sanctos ob Deum inhabitantem By that reason you may worship the Saints on earth because their Bodies are the Temple of God and God is in them and then why should we not worship the Sun and Moon and other creatures as well for God is in them because he is every where The Manichees worshipped the Sun because they thought the Aug. Cont. Faust l 20. c. 2. Son of God was there For answer hereunto we are to understand that God is in another manner existent in holy men and other creatures then he is existent in the humane nature of Christ as is shewed before chap 8 For the Godhead and Manhood in Christ are one Person but not so in other creatures God dwelleth in a Saint 1 Iohn 4. 16. yet you cannot say that God and the Saint are one person for if so then that Saint must be called God and should be worshipped as God but we profess Hier. cont Vigil n. 17. with Saint Hierome that we are so far from worshipping a Saint or a martyr that we will not worship an Angell or an archangel nor Cherubim nor Seraphim but neither do we refuse to worship God though he be invested with his humane nature his humiliation by taking the form of a servant upon him doth not ungod him neither can we separate his Godhead from his manhood that so we might worship the pure Godhead alone Fidelis veneratur Domiâ—um in corpore latentem saith Athanasius the faithfull worship Ath. 26. n. Theod dial in conf n. 12. God though veiled in his body as we may perform civil worship to our King though he be clad in vulgar apparell yet not worship his apparel and No man will say to the King First put off thy Robe and Crown Epiph. in Anc. n. 27. o King and then I will do obeysance to thee and if the King should put off his Robe yet none would worship the Robe So no man can say to Christ Lay aside thy Body and then I will adore thee but we adore God in Christ although God be there united unseparably with his body and if we could separate his body really from his Godhead we should not worship it alone because it is a creature and this also is the determination of Athanasius Quis
Basil cont Eunom l. 4. n. 20. hath given him a name In humoniâ—aâ— non in divinitate the gift was given to the humane Nature of Christ which it had not of it self but not given to the divine nature that honour was naturally due to it that is to the Godhead of Christ So that the meaning of the Church and the intent and purpose for which she appointed reverence to be done to Jesus was onely the acknowledgment and confession of his Godhead in detestation of â—ewes Turks end Arians which deny the saâ—e therefore it will seem strange to any learned or intelligent Christian if this adoâ—ation shall be by any Christian authority forbidden or Jesu-worshâ—p as some have in derision called it shall be made an aâ—ticle of accusation and obloquie seeing it hath been practised in the Primitive Church long before there was any direction for it by any Ecclesiastical Canon except only the Canon of Scripture But if it be said that the bowing of the knee mentioned Rom. 14. â—1 be cleaâ—ly said and meant of the time when Christ shall sit in judgment I say so too and it is true but therefore not before for then Heathens Atheists Apostates Persecutors Tyrants yea and devills and all the damned shall be compelled by the rod of iron to confesse and acknowledge and submit to his Almighty Power and Godhead when the Saints both then and before have and shall with willing and cheaâ—full submission acknowledge Hier. in Ruff. inâ—ect â—n 42 him as Ruffinus in Saint Hierome writeth upon these words Evâ—ry knâ—e shall bow â—l qui voluntate alii necessitate the blessed ones will submit willingly and the very damned shall be thereunto compelled good Christian wilt thou not worship thy God without force CHAP. XVIII More of the adoration of our Saviour of his names Jesus Christ Emmanuel Jehova and other names of God IF it be demanded why this adoration is required rather under this name Jesus then under his other names seâ—ing Jesus is also a name given to meer creatures as to â—oshua Act. 7. 45. Hâ—brewes 4. 8. and others I answer if the adoration were intended to the bare name I think the exception were jâ—st but because we prosâ—sse to worship onely the person Jesus and yet not every person so named but onely the person of our Lord Jesus Christ in whom the Godhead for ever resideth who can blame us for worshipping our onely Lord God and that in time of publick worship for if we should therefore for bear to worship lesus because some meer creatures are so named then by the like reason we should forbear to worship God because some creatures are called gods as Moses Exo. 7. 1. and Magistrates Psa 82. 6. and 1. Cor. 8. 5. but we worship God onely and no creature and to God all possible adoâ—ation is due Basil hom 14. n. 14. whether by genuflection or otherwise Saâ—nt Basil saith Ad cultum â—ei Domini Iâ—su flectâ—reoportet genua id est in the worship of Iesus our Lord God it is meet we should bow our knees But yet if we must worship our God upon the naming of him it would be inquired why this name Iesus is so especially insisted upon why not at the name Iehâ—va or Emmanuel or Christ and why not in the naming of the Father or the Holy Ghost To this I say if none other answer could be given it might satisfie any humble Christian that the great Apostle Philip. 2. 10. hath insisted onely in that name yet for the Readers further satisfaction let him consider that no Person in the Trinity hath any pâ—opâ—r Name but onâ—ly the second Person and the second Peâ—son hath no proper Name but onely the Name Iesus For who can tell me what is the proper Name of the Person of God the Father or of God the Holy Ghost For every Person is God and Lord every one is Iehova every one is Iâ—h and Eheih and Adonai for these names signifie but Lord and I am and which was Every Person is El Potent and Hâ—â—ion most High and Schaddai Omnip otâ—nt and all the Pâ—rsons together are Eâ—o im that is Potâ—nt Gen. 1. 1. in the plurall number And all these names are mostly represented by Interpreters in the words God and Loâ—d and therefore these names are not proper names of any one Person in the Trinity but common to all the three Persons yet there are other appellations that are severally peculiar to each severall Peâ—son as the woâ—d Father Sonne or Word and Holy Ghost in some places of Scripture though the word Father and Holy Ghost or Spirit in other places is said of all Persons as is shewed before The rule of Saint Austine is Omnia noâ—ina naturae seu essâ—ntiae Dei de Aug. to 3. n. 76. singulis Personis dici possunt sed non nomina reâ—aâ—iva ut Pater Veâ—bum Fiâ—ius id est Every name which signifieth the Essence and Nature of God may be said of every Person but the Names which import a relation of one Person to another are not so said â—o P. 332. c. 13. v. 2. our very Commenter could not deny that Iesus Châ—ill is callâ—d Iâ—hova For it is a Name of Essence or Godhead And for the word Christ it is not to be taken as a proper name but as Cognomen a sirname i. a superadded name as added to his proper name and signifieth Annointed for we cannot imagine that those Kings and other Holy Persons which in Scripture are called Christi i. Gods anoâ—nted were so called as by a proper Name so here our Saviours prâ—per Name was Jesus his surname Christ this Title Christ being added as for other reasons so for this to distinguish him from other men who had the same proper Name Iesus as you reade Coloss 4. 11. of another that being named â—esus is also sirnamed Justus for distinction and of Bar-Iâ—sus Acts 13. 6. Now for the word Emmanuel we are to understand that it is not the proper Name of our Saviour no more then the word Christ is for where it is said Esay 7. 14. Thou shalt call his Name Emmanuel The Prophers meaning was not to set forth the proper Name of the Messiah But to set forth the wonderfull and reall property of his Person to be by the hypostaticall union of two natures in one Person Theanthropos id â—st God Incarnate for so the word Emmanuel signifieth God with us Therefore Tertullian writing both against the Jews and also against Marcion the Heretick severally when it was objected that our Jesus was not that Messiah which was foretold by Esaias because he was not named Emmanuel He answereth Non solum sonum nominis expâ—ctes sed Tert. cont Judaeos l. 3. contr Mar. sensum quia quâ—d significat Emmanuel venit id est we were not to expect a meere sound and name onely but the thing signified by that word Emmanuel for though his Name was not named
Generation from Adam but our better and spiritual regeneration is derived from Christ and as there are no Sons of Men but such as are so from Adam so ther are no Sons of God but those that are so from Christ Now if it be demanded how Christ and wee can be accounted one and what it is which came from Christ and is in man that so he may be said to be in us and so that what he did or suffered should be really accounted as done or suffered by us for although wee know why Adam's sin is imputed to us viz. because wee are of the same Lump propagated carnallie from him but yet why Christs righteousnes oâ— his sufferings should be imputed to us seeing wee are not propagated from Christ nor ever were in his loines as wee were in Adams is now the question To which this is the arswer that as Christ received his flesh and blood from man so man hath received the divine Spirit from Christ and as the natural bodie of Christ is made of the same lump of Adam that our's is so man hath in him the self same spirit that is in Christ though he be in heaven and wee on earth by which spirit wee are called the Sons of God just as Christ by taking our flesh is called the Son of Man Nos homines vocamur filii dei quia filius dei Atha in decret Nic. Conc n. 13. nostrum gestavit corpus quia Spiritus filii in nobis est i Men are called the Son of God because the Sons of God took his bodie of man and put his owne Spirit into man and therfore Christ doth fitly sustaine an Universal person of mankind That the Spirit of Christ is given and put into man the Scriptures doe manifestlie declare First it appeareth evidently in the regenerate Man of sueh S. Paul speaketh when he prayeth Ephe. 3. 17. That Christ may dwell in their harts And how Christ may be sayd to dwell in Man Saint John sheweth 1 John 4. 13. Hereby we know that we dwell â—in him and â—e in us because he hath given us of his Spirit and hence it is that Saint Chrysostome saith Anima sancta est Tabernaculum Chrys ho 2. Antioch Christi id est The soul of an holy Man is Christs Tabernacle For indeed though Christ had not at all assumed flesh from Man yet because the same Spirit which is in Christ is also so put into and communicated to man it is sufficient to make Christ the head of the Saints his Members to be but one mysticall Body with him And this is intimated by Saint Paul when he saith Ephesians 4. 4. There is one body and one Spiriâ— which is as much as if he should say though the Saints on earth are many yet because all are endued with one and the same Spirit of Christ therefore all are but one body with Christ even as in man there are many parts and members yet because all parts have the same soul in them therefore all together are but one body Hence it is that Origen saith Omnes salvandi sunt Orig. in Eze. ho. 9. unum Corpus id est All those which shall be saved are but one body and Saint â—asill giveth this reason of their vnitie Quia unus est Deus si in singulis Bas Epist 141. sit omnes coadunat id est Because there is but one God if this one God be in all he doth thereby Tert. de Trin. n. 28 Christus est ecclesia De Paenit n. 16 unite all and this unitie is also expressed by these odd words in Tertullian Spi itus nos Christo confibulat id est It is the Spirit that doth button us or joyn us to Christ For this reason the Scripture saith Romans 12. 5. We being many are one body in Christ And again 1 Corinthians 6. 17. He that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit And again Galathians 3. 28. Ye are all one in Christ Jesus yea such is our conjunction and union with Christ and his with us by reason that his Spirit is in us that Theodoret doubted not to say Si pati possit Theod. in Dâ—alog impatib n. 13. divina natura supervacanea fuisset corporis assumptio id est If the pure Godhead were of a nature passible so that it could have suffered for man God should not have needed to be Incarnate And Saint Augustine puts the case a little plainer and nearer thus Si Christus non assumpta carne à Virgine sed vera tamen apparens nos vera morte redimeret quis eum non potuisse audet dicere Suppose Christ had not taken his flesh from the Virgine and so not from Adam but yet had really taken a body upon him some other way and in that assumed body had really died to redeem man who dares say that he could not and no doubt such a suffering had been sufficient for our redemption if as I said before God had not otherwise determined and limited himself by his sentence of the curse and death upon the seed of Adam And thus we have seen how Christ and the Saints are united and become one body SECT II. More of the same That Jesus Christ was a Person every way fitly qualified to be Man's Redeemer both for that he was free from all sin Originall and Actuall although he took flesh from the loynes of Adam and also in regard of the infinite worth and excellencie of his Person THe qualities required to a redeeming high Priest are set down Heb. 7. 26. For such an high Priest became us who is holy harmless 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 undefiled seperate from sinners For if Christ were not absolutely without sin in his own Person he could not be a fit sacrifice for our sins the Lamb of God must be answerable to the paschall Lamb his Type A Lambe without blemish and so the Scripture describeth Christ 1 Pet. 1. 19. as a Lambe without blemish or spot and that he knew no sin that he did no sin and that in him 1 John 3. 5. is no sin As for any actuall sinne there will be no question among Christians but the difficulty is in shewing Christ to be without Origâ—â—â—l◠〈◊〉 because he was in the loins of Adam when he fell and is the Son of David of Abraham and of Adam and the Church hath ever acknowledged that the whole lump of Adam is a Prosper Resp ad Genu. Massa corruptionis as Prosper saith and b Aug. Epist 105 157. De Civit. l. 15. c. 1. alibi Massa damnationis Vâ—nculnm damnationis Apostatica radâ—x Massa originaliter tota damnata as S. Austin often confesseth in all these words and many more id est a corrupt lump a lump of damnation an Apostate root totally condemned from the the very Originall The Apostle also seemeth to lay this to the charge of Christ 2 Cor. 5. 21. He hath made him to
and therefore they thought that true baptisme could not their be ministred whereupon such Seperatists as departed from the Catholicks and joyned with those Hereticks were entertained by receiving a new baptisme which yet those Hereticks would not confess to be a second baptisme but a baptisme accounting the baptisme formerly received in the Church Catholick to be void and null And in this very case it was that the religious Bishop and holy Martyr Saint Cyprian erred and his African Councell with him For because the Novatians rebaptized the Catholicks therefore Cyprian caused the Novatians which forsook the schisme and joyned with the Church to be received by a new baptisme when they had been before baptized by the Novatians Excepting onely such who had formerly been baptized in the Church Catholick For he also thought that the Novatians being Hereticks and divided from the Church had not power to confer baptisme and that such baptismes as were by them conferred were but pseudobapbaptismes and therefore void and null although they had used the same form of Baptisme which Christ prescribed And this was much pressed by Cyprian not onely upon the reason before alledged but also in a prudentiall consideration for saith he If the Catholick Cyp. de haer bapt n. 85 Church should admit of and acknowledge the baptisme administred by Hereticks to be a true baptisme then none of those Hereticks would be perswaded to return to the Church But this Allegation hath more of policy then of Christianitie And indeed it appeared that the Novatians also did therefore rebaptize the Apostate Catholicks not because they did seriously think their former baptisme void but craftily they so pretended that thereby they might gain Proselytes and to magnifie their own congregations For we find that Novatus himself or Novatianus as Saint Cyprian calls him Novatianus ipse Cyp. de haer bapt p 323. qui alios transfugas ab Ecclesia rebaptizabat tamen ipse non eraâ— rebaptizatus i. Novatian who rebaptized others who had revolted from the Church yet himself a revolter also was not rebaptized Eusebius relateth Eus hist l. 6. â— 33. the Story more largely thus Novatus in his youth was possessed by an unclean spirit and so committed to the Exorcists then falling into a dangerous sicknesse when he dispaired of recovery he was baptized in his sick bed where all the rites of baptisme use not to be administred yet after his recovery his baptisme was never compleated yet this hypocrite whose own baptisme was hardly perfect though he forsook the Church and forced others to be rebaptized himself never was so rebaptized Upon the like reasons the Anabaptists at this day will not acknowledge themselves to be Anabaptists or rebaptized or take upon them professedly to administer a second Baptisme But they say that Infants are not capable of Baptisme and therefore such as were so sprinkled by the Church before they had the use of reason their Baptismes are to be accounted void and null although those Infants were baptized In the Name of the Father c. as Christ commanded So in outward profession neither the Novations nor Donatist nor our Anabaptists do require or maintain any second Baptisme but they say their own Baptisme is the onely Baptisme The Ecclesiasticall History reporteth the like case in a differing matter which fell in a passage of discourse between two Bishops who were both at the same time Bishops of Constantinople the one was Iohn Chrysostome who was Bishop of the Catholick Church the other was Sisinnius a very learned in ingenicus Bishop of the Novatian Congregations For in those dayes all Catharists whether Novatians or Donatists liked well of Bishops these two met and Chrysostoms first said It is against the Canon of the Church that one Citie should Ruff. in can 10 l. 1. c 6. Soc. l. 6. c. 20. have two Bishops Sisinnius answered that it was true but withall that he knew but one Bishop in the City of Constantenople His meaning was that the Catharists did not acknowledge Chrysostome to be a Bishop nor did the Catholicks acknowledge Sisinnius to be one so in effect neither partie could say there were two Bishops In like manner Saint Cyprian and his partie accounted the Baptismes of Hereticks to be void and the Hereticks accounted theirs to be void so neither party would acknowledge more then one Baptisme and yet both sides erred for the Baptisme administred by the Church was a true Baptisme and so was that which the Novatians ministred as was confessed by other Church-men then living as namely by Corneleus the famous Bishop of Rome a learned man and a glorious Martyr who at that very time signified his dissent Euseb hist l. 6. c 36. from Cyprian in that opinion of rebaptizing the Novatians as Eusebius testifieth The principall reasons besides policy which on both sides were pretended for rebaptization were these two First they said that baptisme was void and null which had been administred by a person who was not fitly qualified or that had no authoritie to baptize So Saint Cyprian alleadgeth in defence of rebaptization Nemo rite baptizatur nisi ab â—o qui licentiam baptizand Cyp. lib. 1. â—pist 6. n. 67. habet i None can be said to be rightly baptized except they were baptized by one who had a licence and faculty to Baptize And addeth further that Schismaticks who have seperated themselves from the communion of the Church can have no authority to administer that Sacrament which belongeth to the Church to confer neither may the members of the Church receive baptisme from Hereticks with whom it was not lawfull so much as to eat and drink Thus he on the other side the Seperatists confessed that baptisme might not be renewed if it had once been administred Bene well but they would not grant that the Catholicks could administer it well The second Allegation was that the Baptisme which 2. had been administred to a person who was not qualified so as to be a subject capable of Baptisme was to be accounted void This is the reason which at this day is urged by our Anabaptists against praedobaptisme because Infants cannot be taught therefore they may not be baptized To these Allegations the answers in brief are First 1. Resp the unworthinesse or unfitnesse of the Baptizer cannot nullifie the baptisme because as Optatus answereth Opt. lib. 5. the Donatists i Caeleste munus credenti non ab homiste sed à Trinitate consertur i. The Heavenly gift of baptismall grace is not conferred by the person baptizing but by the Trinitie and of the water of Opt. ib. Baptisme he saith Aquâ— vera illa est quae non de loco non de persona sed de Trinitate condita est That is true baptizmall water which is sanctified by the Trinity and not by any unworthinesse either of the place or of the person baptizing And whereas the Donatists confessed that when baptisme was administred well
3. therefore any sinne which is perceived to be a sinne not unto death may be prayed for and so pardoned Fourthly let it be observed that the Apostle doâ—h 4. in the next verse set down what he means in this place by sinne for verse 17. All unrighteousness is sinne John 3. 4. and he had said before chap. 3. verse 4. Sinne is the transgression of the Law From whence it may be reasonably collected that any unrighteonsnesse or transgression of the Law or any sinne if it be discerned to be not unto death may be prayed for and possibly pardoned A sinne not unto death How any sinne can be said to Beza in loc be a sinne and yet not unto death is hard to be understood seeing we reade Rom. 6. 23. The wages of sinne is death for any sinne ever so little rendereth us liable to death and is affirmed so by Beza Omtria peccata per se lethaliâ— id est All sinnes in their own nature are deadly Our very lapst nature in Adams mass Originall sinne and our minima peccata there is no sinne so small or unconsiderable but draweth after it the weight of eternall wrath and a thousand times meriteth eternall death Thus he and Calvin very truely saith Omne peccatum per se mortale Calv. instit 2. 8. 59. id est Every sinne in it self is deadly but when the sins of holy men are said to be not unto death and veniall it is because by Gods mercy they obtain pardon and not because the sinnes are of themselves veniall for who doubteth but that in the reprobate all sinnes are sinnes unto death but in the Elect no sinne is unto death Saint Chrysostome observeth upon those words Matthew Chrys de compunct n. 18. 5. 22. Whosoever shall say to his brother Thou fool c. De levioribus dat sententiam ut de gravioribus non dubitare debeas id est Christ pronounced sentence of Hell fire against so small a sinne that no man should doubt what greater sinnes deserve Again there are very grand and capitall sinnes which yet in some persons are sinnes not unto death as Galathians 5. 19. Adultery Murther Drunkennesse Seditions Heresies Idolatrie c. of which it is there said They that do such things shall not inherit the Kingdome of God and yet we know that some of the Patriarks and many converted from Heathenisme hath committed these sinnes but obtained pardon and shall inherit the Kingdome of Heaven Noahs excesse Davids adultery the Corinthians incest Peters deniall and the Iewes denying and crucifying the holy One and Pauls persecuting the Church all and every of these sinnes in those penitent and Elect vessels were sinnes not unto death This I think will not be denied Not unto death But why are some mens sinnes called not unto death when the very same speciall sins in other men are indeed sinnes unto death The Poet murmured at such a thing Committunt eadem diverso Crimina fato Juven sat 13. Ille crucem sceleris precium tulit hic Diadema For many sins and very capitall ones are common both to the Reprobates and to the Elect and yet in the Elect and the same sin is not unto death which in the Reprobate is unto death The answer is that our Apostle calls that sin a sin not unto death which is confessed repented forsaken and amended before our death or departure out of this life when a man doth not obdurately continue and persevere in his sin untill his death but forsaketh it in his life-time so that the leaving of his sin and amendment of life may be seen by his brother for how else shall a brother see that the sin is not unto death but by the sinners leaving it desisting from and amending it as by ceasing from adultery rebellion oppression and the like for so the Apostle telleth the Corinthians such as these were some of yee but yee are washed but yee are sanctified 1 Cor. 6. 11. So that sinnes not unto death are not so called from the nature or merit of sin but from the circumstance of the time or person sinning and desisting Fot as is said Every sin is mortall deadly and unto death eternall if we look onely on the merit of sin but every sin though the most grand and capitall sin is not unto death if it be repeated of and left before the departure of the soul from the body So the gloss expoundeth this place Non ad mortem Id est non usque ad mortem i. A sin not unto death is when the sin is not continued in untill the time of death and of David it saith David sinned not unto death for he repented and obtained pardon so that the same sin in one man not repenting produceth damnation when in another it is pardoned upon repentance Neither do we hereby assert any Stoicall f Amb. n. 33. Novatian or g Aug. n. to 6. habes Sardos venales alium alio nequiorem â—ul Epist 125 Iovinian equalitie of sinnes For although no sinne may well be called bettet then another because all are naught yet one is worse then another Of two ill painted pieces one asked uter detâ—rior est i. which is worst and of two evill things in the Comedy it is said h Plaut in Aulular Act. 2. sce â— Alia aliâ pejor est optima nulla est i. one is worse then another neither can be called best i. i Aug. cont mendac c. 8. n. 77. Furum non est ideâ— quisquam bonus quia pejor est unus i One thief is worse then another yet no thief is therefore good Sin in generall is k Bafil n. 5. Proles Diaâ—osi and l Theod. n. 13. mater mortis m Chrys n. 59. grandis Damon peccatum i. the braâ— of the Devil the mother of death and it self is a Devil and so is called in the Gospel yet sins are of severall growths and degrees For therefore are there severall degrees of torments in hell apportioned to the degrees of sins There is a sin as a moâ—e and as a beam and a Camel so there are stripes many stripes weeping wailing gnashing of teeth worm fire and brimstone the damned shall be bound up in bundles according to the likenesse and degrees of their sins and every bundle shall have its just portion as we read of that particular portion of Hypocrites It is a memorable and a terrible observation which Origen makes upon that saying Numb 14. 34. where for one sin in one day a whole year of punishment is apportioned If for every sinne of ours a whole year of Orig. in loc hom 8. punishment shall be allotted I fear that neither the duration of this world nor the eternitie of the next world will be long enough to end ouâ— torments Let us not therefore flatter our selves wâ—th the conceit of a little or a veniall sinne as if such deserved not death for
not see sin in such pretty black Saints Now albeit in the prayers of our Saviour and the Protomartyr S. Stephen the words run Forgive them Father Luc. 23. 34. Act. 7. 60. and Lord â—ay not this sin to their Charg without any explicit and overt mention of their Conversion and repentance yet we are not so to understand them that those grand sins should absolutly be pardoned without any conversion or repentance but that the prayers for forgivenes must presuppose and implie an inclusive prayer for the meanes leading to forgiveness which are faith conversion repentance and amendment as if our Saviour had said Father Open their eyes that they may know and confess me and adhere to me and repent and so that their sin may be forgiven and never laid to their charg So S. Chrysostome understandeth Chry n. 48. Fulg. n. 14. the words of Christ for saith he upon these words hinc tria quinque millia conversa and so Fulgentius noteth upon S. Stephens prayer Paulus converticur per orationem Stephani i. That these prayers did implie the conversion of these sinners for by vertue of them 3. and 5. thowsands yea and S. Paule was converted and this is cleerly expressed in S. Peters sermon Act. 3. 17. 19. as an exposition of our Saviours words And now brethren I wot that through ignorance ye did it repent ye therfore and be converted that your sins may be blotted out to signifie that the blotting out of sins ever presupposeth repentance Finally wheras some object that we may nor pray for the Conversion of the malicious enemies of the Church because they say S. Paule did not pray for Alexander the Copper smith mentioned 1 Tim. 4. 14. but said The Lord reward him according to his work To this we say First It doth non appear that S. Paul did not at all pray for his conversion Secondly S. Paul did not hereby forbid prayer for him Thirdly That as those words are no prayer for his conversion so neither are they accounted by the best expositors any imprecation but an Apostolical commination and a leaving of him to the judgment of Theoph. in Loc. Theod. in Loc. Anselm in Loc. God Theophilact expounds it thus Reddat pro reddet verbum pronunciantis est non imprecantis and so saith Theodoret and Anselm i. He saith the Lord reward him for the Lord shall or will reward him it is not the wish but the forewarning of the Apostle and therfore S. Ierome to express rather the meaning then the letter of those words for reddat reades Reddet ei Deus i. God will reward him which is no more then is said of other sinners Heb. 13. 4. Whâ—remongeâ—s and adulterers God will judg CHAP. XXI A recapitulation of the former Expositions of the foure places That finall Impenitencie cannot properly be called the grand sinne The difference of Repentance required to the grand sinne and to other inferiour and unknown sinnes The danger of misunderstanding the solifidian doctrine Of the misbeliefe of the Incarnation of Christ censured with Charitie The Conclusion IT is now high time to ease the Reader and to release him from my tediousnesse and to draw to a conclusion by summing up what hath been delivered concerning this grand sinne against the Holy Ghost in the Expositions of all those difficult places of Scripture the breviate whereof I do here represent in a few conclusions First To that saying Matthew 12. 31. It shall not be 1. forgiven The meaning is that it shal not be forgiven to that man who liveth and dieth in that blasphemie impenitently Secondly to that saying Heb. 6. 4 6. It is impossible 2. to Repentance The meaning is that they cannot be restored to newnesse of life and remission of sinnes after Baptisme by any new or second Baptisme but yet Repentance is not impossible as a second remedy to them that have fallen after Baptisme neither is it during life absolutely denied Thirdly To that saying Heb. 10. 26. If we sinne wilfully after we have received the knowledge of the 3. truth there remaineth no more sacrifice for sinne The meaning is he that wilfully rejecteth Christs onely and all-sufficient sacrifice for sinne by accounting his blood Commoâ— that is by esteeming it to be but the blood of a meer man a meer creature and therefore to be no better nor of more worth then the blood of another man and in this blasphemous conceit and infidelitie liveth and dieth that man must look for nothing but judgement of condemnation and fiery indignation because there is none other sacrifice for sinne possibly to be found but Christ crucified who then was and is and ever will be Emmanuel Fourthly to that saying 1 John 5. 16. There is a sinne 4. unto death I do not say that he shall pray for it The meaning is that whosoever shall commit the grand sinne and in that sinne shall persist continue and persevere obdurately stubbornly and impenitently his whole life time and die therein without repentance and without speciall revocation recantation or retraction therof that man must needs perish everlastingly All prayers for that man so living dying will be unprofitable for his souls health For though whilest he liveth we may pray for his conversion and perhaps beheard for ought we know yet to pray for his pardon and salvation immediately without praying for and desiring his conversion as being necessary in order to his pardon and salvation is a foul abuse of Gods Truth and righteousness Fifthly That if all these Expositions prove true and 5. be so found and approved by the Christian Reader then my former conclusion will necessarily follow that neither this sinne which is called the sinne against the holy Spirit nor any other sinne how great soever is absolutely unpardonable but upon speciall and particular repentance thereof the sinner may finde mercy and forgivenesse From this doctrine of the necessity of repentance to go before forgivnesse some divines suspect that the grand and onely unpardonable sin is final impenitence because it is true that this grand in is pardonable if it be timely repented and as true that when it is accompanied with final impenitence it shall never be forgiven and indeed such a conceit did fall from the pen of Saint Hierom Impenitentiae crimen solum est quod Hier. Epist 4. 8. n. 9. veniam consequi nou potest i. impenitence is the only fault which cannot obtain pardon To this conceit the answer is that impenitencie cannot be called properly the sin unpardonable because of it self it is not alwaies to be called a sin for impenitency is blamlesse where no sin is the holy and unspotted quire of heavenly Angels as they are impeccant so are they not penitent and yet offend not thereby But impenitency in grand and capital offenders is a weighty and an aggravating circumstance then when it is the perpetual concomitant of sin and a consequent finally it makes the
Christ is the Authour or Testator of the Evangelicall Testament and not onely a Witnesse or Martyr as the Commenter would have him Chapter VIII The Immortalitie of the Soules of Men asserted against this Commenter from our Saviours Page 23 words Matthew 22. 32. Luke 23. 43. That the Article of Resurrection is therefore expressed to be said of the body onely because the Soul dieth not which is shewed in Saint Pauls Rapture and Saint Stephens Prayer from Church Writers Philosophers and Physicians observations in Anatomie the Souls mortalitie was the old Arabick Heresie Of the immortalitie of Christs humane Soul and consequently of ours That the Doctrine of the Souls immortalitie is now an Article of the Creed and why this Article was then newly added to the old Creed Chapter IX That the Article of Christs descent was added to Page 26 the old Creed principally to set forth the Immortalitie of the Soul of Christ and so of our souls An examination of the tradition oral and the writing of Creeds The summe of the ancient Doctrine of Faith briefly delivered by Irenaeus and the most Ancient Creed thereunto agreeing recorded by Tertullian Chapter X. That divers additions were made to the old Creed Page 29 occasioned by divers Heresies What the Heresies were and what Articles they occasioned and particularly that the Arabick Heresie denying the Souls immortalitie occasioned the Article of Descent is probably shewed for that it was not any Creed generally received before the death of Saint Austine the Nicene hath it not yet the Athanasian at first had it not nor is it in the symbolicall Hymne called Te Deum A modest censure of the Athanasian symbol and an Observation concerning the multitude of Creeds Chapter XI Of the word Hades which is translated Hell Page 32 that it proves the soules immortalitie in that it signifies a being subsistence or permanencie of the souls of dead men separated from their bodies and residing in a Mansion and Condition invisible to us Mortals That the place and state of souls separated is kept secret from us though the knowledge thereof hath been and is much desired Of Saint Hierom's and Curina's visions and the apparition of Irene deceased Chapter XII A censure of those visions of Saint Hierome and Page 35 Curina by comparing them with the Ecstasies of Saint Peter and Saint Paul mentioned Acts 10. 10. and Acts 22. 17. What an Ecstacie Traunce or Vision is In what manner God spake to the Prophets in visions Of Saint Johns Revelation The difference between Divine Inspirations and prophane Enthusiasmes That the one illuminates the other obtenebrates mens understanding and how such raptures or exstacies do argue and prove the Soules seperabilitie and immortalitie Chapter XIII That the Apparitions of the dead do not prove the Page 39 Souls immortalitie For that they are not really the Soules of men deceased but possibly may be the delusions of Satan assuming the shapes of men Why Necromancy is forbidden Deuteronomie 18. 11. Albeit the dead cannot appear to the living at their desire That the state of Soules seperated is concealed Chapter XIV That the Soules immortalitie is confessed by the Page 41 Church Catholick That the Commemoration of the dead in the Church Litnrgies was principally to set forth the Churches belief of the immortalitie of their Soules For that the dead receive no benefit by the prayers of the living The Opinion of some Divines concerning Saint Pauls prayer for Onesiphorus 2 Timothy 1. 18. and of that saying 1 John 5. 16. of which see a full Exposition in my fourth Book Chapter XV. That the Father's did not believe as the Commenter Page 43 doth that Soules departed are insensible as if they were dead or asleep because the Saints departed do pray for the Church Militant as the Fathers thought Chapter XVI Of the departures of mens soules That their conductors Page 48 and leaders to the other World are Angels good or bad That soules seperated are setled in certain Mansions is shewed by Scriptures and Fathers whereby the permanencie and immortalitie of the soul is clearby proved That all those severall mansions go under the generall appellations of Heaven and Hell Chapter XVII A particular detection of the blasphemies contained Page 51 in the Commentarie which are reduced to these two heads The first shewing the blasphemies against the Godhead of Jesus Christ The second shewing the blasphemies against the Incarnation of God and his gracious work of Redemption CHAP. XVIII The dreadfull consequences of the Commenters Page 51 blasphemies in denying the Godhead of Christ and his great works both of Creation and Redemption That it is much better never to have been born or by death to be annihilated or to perish as the beasts doe then to live and die in these sinnes and to rise to judgement The conclusion of the first Book The Table THE SECOND BOOK Containing an assertion of the Godhead of Jesus Christ against the Commentarie Chapter I. AN introductorie discourse concerning Page 1 the sinne against the Holy Spirit as it is described Matth. 12. 31. Mark 3. 29. Luke 12. 10. Divers doubts difficulties and opinions thereof Chapter II. What the word Blasphemie signifies That this Page 4 sinne was the blasphemous denying the Godhead of Christ The spreading of that Pharisaicall blasphemie amongst Jewes and Heathens Of Apollonius of Tyana the Magician compared by Heathens with Christ for miracles Certain considerations premised for clearing doubts concerning this sinne and two conclusions extracted from those consisiderations Chapter III. That the Godhead of the Sonne is called Spirit 7 and Holy Spirit that every Person in the Trinitie is and may be called the Everlasting Father in respect of Creatures and yet how the appellation Father is proper to the first Person That every Person is holy and an Holy Spirit and yet how the appellation Holy Spirit is proper to the third Person That the words Spirit and Ghost signifie the same thing Chapter IV. Diverse Observations of the words of Christ Matthew Page 20 12. The result is that the Pharisee's blasphemie consisted in the deniall of Christ's Godhead The difference between a sinne against the Sonne of Man and against the Holy Spirit The judgement of the Fathers herein Chapter V. The Opinion of later Divines concerning this Page 14 sinne that they affirm Arius and the Emperor Julian the Apostate to have sinned this sinne An examination of the particular sinne of the said Arius and Julian and a breif narration of their lives and deaths Chapter VI. Why the Blasphemy of denying Christs Godhead Page 33 is called the unpardonable Sinne that the Commenters Doctrine in this grand Heresie is no better then Judaisme or Turcisme that it is by the Fathers esteemed and called Antichristianisme To deny Christs Godhead is to renounce redemption and salvation by him wherein the worth and preciousness of the blood of Christ consisteth Chapter VII That the Commenter in Logick sheweth himself Page 37 to be a
Baptisme That the principal scope of that place is against the presumption of Anabaptisme or a second Baptisme Chapter V. That the word Renue is to be understood onely of Page 16 renovation by a new Baptisme That sinners after Baptisme may have the remedy of repentance but not by a new Baptisme The distinction of renuing 1 Baptismall 2 Morall or penitentiall Four Propositons by which the meaning of these words is collected In what sense sinnes originall or actuall are said to be taken away in Baptisme Chapter VI. How a second Baptisme is said to be a new crucifying Page 19 of Christ That it is ignominious to the All-sufficient sacrifice of Christ That a second Baptisme doth no good but much harm it aggravates sins even as rain maketh weeds to grow that these words do not prove an impossibilitie of repentance but onely an impossiblitie of renewing by a new Baptisme Chapter VII A review of those words Heb. 6. 4. and some Page 25 doubts cleared That none were anciently called illuminate but onely the Baptized That Catechising was not then called illumination What moved the Apostle to handle the Doctrine of Baptisme and so strictly to forbid Anabaptisme in the Epistle to the Hebrews rather then in other Epistles Chapter VIII The distinction of Baptismes into true and false Page 30 The formes of Pseudobaptismes among Hereticks That after their dipping a true Baptisme may be administred and yet cannot be accounted Anabaptisme The Novatian Baptisme was a true Baptisme Saint Cyprian is in part excused Chapter IX That the Disciples of Ephesus Acts 19. who Page 34 said they had been baptized to Johns Baptisme were notwithstanding then Baptized by Saint Pauls appointment yet that this example doth not warrant Anabaptisme because Johns Baptisme was then out of date and Null Johns too late Baptisme compared with the now Jewish Circumcision and both found unlawfull Chapter X. Of true Christian Baptisme that it may not Page 38 be twice ministred No Heretick maintained two Baptismes but onely Marcion What Marcion was the reason why he multiplied Baptisme The reasons why Novatians Donatists and the late Anabaptists rebaptized answers to their reasons Of baptizing Infants of Saint Cyprians error and Athanasius his ludicrous Baptisme Chapter XI That the ancient Church allowed but one Baptisme Page 46 is shewed by the then frequent deferring it till ripe years or old age That their delaying was mostly for carnall respects The danger of delaying Baptisme The Story of a Jew Anabaptist An example upon an Arian Pseudobaptisme The summarie meaning of that Scripture and the Exposition concluded Chapter XII A full Exposition of Heb. 10. 26. The particular Page 52 sinne against the Holy Spirit is shewed to be the blasphemous denying Christ to be God What is meant by accounting his blood common or unholy The unsufficiencie of legall sacrifices and the sufficiencie of Christs sacrifice Chapter XIII Of severall degrees of this sin of denying and rejecting Page 57 Christ and salvation by him First some deny him outwardly onely by compulsion and terror of torments Secondly Others wilfully uncompelled Thirdly Others both willfully and also after-knowledge as Arius Julian and this Commenter The concurrence of Theophilact and Saint Anselm in the sence of this place Chapter XIV That the remedy of repentance is not absolutely Page 61 taken away from them who have sinned the grand sin of denying and renouncing Christ That such possibly may repent That this sin is then onely unpardonable when it is accompanied with small impenitencie The Conclusion of this Exposition Chapter XV. Whether such blasphemers if they repent may Page 64 possibly find mercy The difference of repentance Legall and Evangelicall The repentance of Judas The difference of Repentance and Rescipiscence The Conclusion that true repentance is never totally rejected Objections out of the Old Testament answered Why temporall pressures are not alwayes removed upon true repentance Chapter XVI A full and large Exposition of 1 John 5. 16. Page 70 That the Fathers called some sins Veniall and some Mortall albeit every sinne in its own nature and merit is mortall or deadly What is meant by a sinne unto death and a sinne not unto death That sins are not equall Chapter XVII The judgement of the Fathers and ancient Expositors Page 74 concerning sinne unto death The Discipline of the Primitive Church correspondent to their judgement That the greatest sinnes may be and actually have been pardoned The true sence of the Fathers in calling some sinnes veniall and some mortall Chapter XVIII The meaning of those words I do not say he shall pray for it That the praying or not Page 79 praying mentioned is to be understood of the living and not of the dead The practice of the Church in praying for penitents The manner of Ecclesiasticall or outward pennance shewed in the pennance of the Lady Fabiola In what case God forbad praying for sinners in the Old Testament Chapter XIX That no condition of any grand sinner is so desperate Pag 83 during life but that he may be prayed for in this sence that he may have the grace of conversion Certain Propositions of Divines concerning the matter now in hand are examined The practice of the Synagogue and Church in praying for all Mankind the concurrence of the Church of England therein praying even for Heathens Idolaters Persecutors and Hereticks Chapter XX. The meaning of those words I do not say he Page 89 shall pray for it set down positively and conclusively The difference between praying for the Person and praying for the sin The different prayers for a sinner penitent and a sinner not yet penitent The practice of this Church in praying for persecutors and yet against them The prayers of Christ and Saint Stephen explained The case of Alexander the Copper-smith Chapter XXI A Recapitulation of the former Expositions of Page 94 those foure places That finall impenitency cannot be called the Grand sinne The difference of repentance required for the inferiour and unknown sins Of the Solifidian doctrine The particular sin of misbelieving the Incarnation of God censured with Charitie The conclusion of this fourth Book FINIS Errors of the Press In the Title page line 12 for 1647 read 1646. In the advertisement to the reader p. 3. l. the last to Joh. Hen. Bistersâ—ldius add and published An. 1639. In the preface p. 12. l. 29 r. only In the 1. Book p. 18 l. 10 r your word is p. 28. l. 7. r. mortuos p. 29 l. 18 r. one Lord p. 30 l. 38 r. Nicetas p. 33 l. 41 r. a dead p. 34 l. 32 r. Sentence p. 47 l. 19 soul r. joul p. 51 l. 29 pro r. per in the margin In the 2 Book p. 3 l. 8 fur r for p. 6 l. 27 Lucan r. Bucan p 8 l. 33 Ehat r. That p. 12 l. 16 aith r. saith l. 18 sod r. Son l 23 conjicietur r. conjicietur p. 17 l. 19 r. how can p 18 l. 37 Olympus r.
no more pray for them then for the devil CHAP. XX. The meaning of those words I doe not say that he shall pray for it the difference between praying for the person and praying for the sin the different prayers for a sinner penitent and a sinner impenitent the practise of the Church in praying for her persecutors and against them the prayers ef Christ and S. Stephen explained the case of Alexander the Copper-smith HAving shewed that the Charitie of Christian prayer is so largly extended unto all sinners of what height-soever I am now to set downe positively what I conceive to be the meaning of the Apostle in these words I doe not say he shall pray for it Surelie here is somthing forbidden to be prayed for or at least somthing that we have no warrant to pray for For the understanding hereof I desire the reader to observe that S. Iohn doth not forbid that the sinner unto death should be prayed for but that the sin must not be prayed for and this observation may very easily be discerned in the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answereth to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And so our English translation taketh notice of this meaning this I do not say he shall pray for it for it that is not for the sin but S. John doth not say he shall not pray for him that is for the person sinning so for all that is here said the person may be prayed for only the sin must not be prayed for According to this exposition the reader may observe that in the words going before the Apostle directeth us to pray for the brother that sinneth not unto death but not for the sin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he shall give him â—â—se the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answereth to the person either of him that prayeth or of him that sinneth not unto death but it can not be meant of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sin for so he had written incongâ—uously All difficultie will be taken away if we doe but distinguish the act from the person and the sin from the sinner thus The person may be prayed for but the sin may not be prayed for But then If the person sinning unto death may be prayed for as well as the person sinning not unto death where is the difference which the Apostle here intendeth to shew between the prayer for a penitent and the prayer for an impenitent sinner To this I answere that the difference is very great and very evident for we pray for the penitent that he may be forgiven and this we pray absolutlie but for the impenitent sinner we doe not pray that he and his sin may be forgiven absolutelyâ— but conditionally that he may be converted and may have the grace of repentance and amendment and so may be forgiven and live we pray for the persons conversion and forgivenes but we pray not that his sin may be forgiven without conversion and therfore the Apostle directeth not to pray for it For if we should pray that the sin may be remitted without any consideration or pre supposition of repentance then we should also with prayer for remission pray for the permission of sin and therby we should imply that we would have God to give leave and allowance and libertie to sin nay to give tolleration commission countenance and approbation to sin as if we would desire that God would grant to man a licence to sin impune the very imagination wherof would be an high impietie and therfore the Church in her prayers for sinners not yet penitent prayed for them with mention of her desire their conversion as hath bin fully shewed and may to this day appeare The Church of England upon this very reason prayeth for Turks and infidels that they may be saved but for their salvation she doth not pray immediatlie and unconditionally as if she desired their salvation together with their continuance in living and dying in their infidelitie but thus she prayeth Take from them Collect. ut Super on Good Friday ignoâ—ance hardnes of hart contempt of the word and fetch them home to thy flock then after these conditions comes in That they may be saved This is to pray for the persons of sinners but not for their sin pray not for it The true Church never prayeth against the persons of the greatest sinner on earth or her greatest enemies Only the prayeth against their sins without breach of charitie toward their persons S. Austin thus prayeth Aug. Epist 16â— Idem to 6. n. 8. against the Donatist's heresies Deus errorem vestrum occidat in vobis and of the Manichees he saith Non vos sed errores odimus and S. Ierome said the like of the Pelagians Hier. proaem in Jere. p. 270. Non hominum sed errorum â—imicus sum i. That God would kill their errors that their persons are not hated but their heresies only Now to hate and detest and indeavour the extirpation of sin and to pray against it without hatred of the person is just bona persecutio quae non hominem sed peccatum ejus Prosp in Psal 100. insectatur i. It is a good persecution when the sin only and not the person is oppressed just so did our Church pray against her enemies Abate their pride asswage their malice and confound their devices This may well stand with Christian charitie without any hinderance of our prayers for the amendment conversion and salvation of their persons For it we pray fot our enemies but it is ut Convertantur Aug. n. 28. idem n. 31. for their conversion and for infidels but ut Credant i. That they may become beleevers but we doe not pray that they may be saved in their sins they living and dying in their infidâ—litie S. Austin writing upon those words Joh. 17. 9. I pray not for the world Aug. n. 102. saith Pro non credentibus non postulatur ut illis diffidentibus ignoscantur peccata sed ut bonitas patâ—entia dei expectet si sorte vellent corrigi ut dilationem longâ—m accipiant i. We pray not for unbeleevers that their sins may be pardoned whilest they continue in their unbelief but that the goodnes and patience of God would for beare them a long time that so happilie they might amend For to pray absolutely for the salvation of a grand scandalous sinner without respect had to his conversion were to abuse the truth and righteousnes of our most righteous judg Beza saith Profaâ— sunt qui Beza in 1. Joh. 5. 16. hoc peccatum petunt remitti non resipiscentibus i. They are profane who desire pardon to impenitents I have heard of some hypocrites who made their silly proselites beleeve that God was so far from being angrie that he took pleasure in seeing such of Saints sinning as Fathers smile when they see their young children playing or els that God winketh and can