other men to beleeve onely implicitly as the Church beleevs which is the thing I lead my parishioners from Three Symbols or Creeds were wont to be proof sufficient of a good Christian and Catholick You here would have but one and that one the word of God as every man shall differently understand it And I do not remember that ever I heard before now the word of God called a Creed Because I named Removers of land-marks that their fore-fathers had set you said I condemned you for such you seem now to acknowledge your self such for certainly no limits there are of the Christian Churches if the Creeds be not The implicite Faith of the Romanists is a Resolution and Profession to be of the Churches belief though in the mean time it be unknown what that is An assent in gross to all that the Church propoundeth to be beleeved and though Faith be in Scripture called Knowledge yet say they it is better defined by Ignorance than by Knowledge This implicite Faith being upon the matter nothing but a good opinion we have of our teachers may be a good disposition or preparation to Faith but Faith it self it cannot be And can your conscience suffer you to make the world beleeve that when a Church shall compose a Confession of Faith taking care the people be taught it and exacting conformitie thereto and imposing penalties upon such as shall depart therefrom that this is onely the implicite Faith of the Romanists Or to tell a good Christian that hath been instructed in the Doctrine of the Church of England who knows it and beleevs it to be the Truth That it is a point of Popery to beleeve as the Church beleevs I hope there are but few that will not soon discern the mischief and the consequence and the fallacy of such instruction Sect. 9. I told you formerly that you used this word all as a helve or handle wherewithall to cut down the trees of the forrest To this say you now Sect. 9. An acute charge like helves or handles that use to cut I thought you might be so acute as to take my meaning without my further rehearsal of the Fable that is so well known A man that wanted a helve for his ax came and begged one of a certain goodly wood or tuft of trees promising to trim and prune them having obtained it did therewithall cut the trees down to the ground He could not cut them down without a helve but with an helve or handle he did it For there is no remedy but you must give us leave to put this particle with to any thing that is an instrument whether conjunct or separate or that is instrumental He that felleth an oak doth it with his arm and with the strength of his arm as well as with his ax You write with your ink and with your hand and with your pen the ploughman will tell you that he turns up the soyl with his oxen and will you tell him again that oxen do not use to turn up the soyl Thus while you hunt after such minutes and minims as these are and miss them too thinking you have caught a flie when it is but the shadow of it you let pass the substance of the accusation which I brought against you and that is this You come to Scripture and thence you take this word all pretending by the help of that to preach the Gospel more sincerely and more profitably than others generally do running without their message But you frame it and stretch and wrench it in such a manner that you corrupt and overturn the chief points of the Covenant of Grace Tertull. de Pudic. cap. 16. Est hoc solenne perversis alicujus capituli ancipitis occasione adversus exercilum sententiarum instrumentitotius armari that is With one place or sentence or point of belief that is of various and doubtfull acception perverse men think themselves sufficiently armed and furnished to oppose the greatest part of the Bible Sect. 10. I said that we may not think that Luke meant contrary to Pauls doctrine That he fraudulently suppressed Your discourse tending to accord the words of Luke with Pauls doctrine because it was somewhat tedious and vain as I thought it and especially because it belonged to another place I did onely note by the way in brief But that you did in seeming-satisfaction to your self at least make them agree well together I did not omit to give notice in these words though he thinketh he can reconcile them And when I said thus much it is most evident that I did not fraudulently suppress what you did though I did not needlesly express how you did it But when you said It is safer to stick to Paul than to Luke it was scandalously spoken of you and an odious comparison if you do indeed beleeve all holy Scripture to be divinely inspired why should you prefer one writer of it before another You appeal to me Whether in case Luke doth disagree with Paul if it be not safer to stick to Paul who says If we or an angel from heaven preach any other Gospel than we have preached let him be accursed But the Apostle doth not make comparison betwixt himself and any other Apostle or pen-man of holy Scripture for he joyns himself with them if we he sets not himself above others but names himself together with others the better to establish that Gospel which he together with others had taught Here is nothing of sticking to Paul more than to Luke but of sticking to the doctrine once delivered against any other doctrine that should be taught by any whosoever upon what pretence soever imaginable Sect. 11. May I not stick to his sayings and yet say they be hard to be understood But when you answer the arguments brought against you out of such chapters by saying those chapters are hard to be understood then you do not stick to his sayings so as by them to be concluded or to suffer an end to be put to the Controversie That which is urged out of those places against the Universalists is easie and evident you make use of the difficultie of them for an answer to put off and elude that which is plain and not obscure or difficult The matters of doctrine delivered by S. Paul may be hard to be understood that is hard to be received digested and entertained by loose unsettled persons many difficulties and intricacies there may be not easily cleared shall this render the proof invalid that such doctrines there are If you should out of S. Pauls Epistles defend Justification by Faith against a Papist you would not accept it for an answer if he should say thus That is one of those things the Apostle Peter speaketh of hard to be understood which some hereticks have wrested towards libertie and profaneness as if therefore there were no necessity of godliness or good works The rejection of the Jews and calling of the Gentiles The abolition of
the Law of Moses were matters hard to be understood by the Jews and in which were many perplexities yet were plainly delivered by the Apostle The impossibility of Apostates repentance and renovation was plainly taught yet attended with difficulties and wrested by the Novatians So is the final period of the world foretold in holy Scripture yet are there many obscurities about it and many errours The Resurrection of the dead is fully and manifestly declared and confirmed yet because it was hard to be understood and beleeved it was wrested to this sense as if it were already past whether interpreted of rising from the death of sin or any other way These particular doctrines now by me named are by divers diversly conjectured to be intended by S. Peter as well as that doctrine to which you apply his words Gods gracious and free Election likewise final Perseverance are evidently taught by the Apostle Peter 1 Epist ch 1. ver 2 and 5. as well as by the Apostle Paul Rom. 8.29 30. and in the chief part of the ninth chapter And because these things are hard to be yeelded to and hard to be received and because there be many things belonging thereto that are secret and unfathomable let not therefore that which is plainly taught be either denied or in such a manner interpreted and perverted that it amounts to a denial You and yours have so gone to work that to an ordinarie capacitie the chapter spoken of is made scarce intelligible You say God decreed not to choose particular persons but to choose all such as beleeve the promises of the Gospel and to refuse all such as seek justification by works whereas certainly had there ever been any such decree made then Paul had never been chosen who was a law-worker as you call it So were many of the Jews and Pharisees who yet were brought to life eternal And whereas the Apostle teacheth Election and Salvation to be Not of man that worketh willeth er runneth but of God that sheweth mercy you have so wrested it that now it is Not of man that willeth or worketh but of man that beleeveth and continueth in Faith and Repentance to his lives end And indeed if Election be of such as such who persevere in Faith and Repentance then is Election of workers in respect of their works namely Beleeving and Repenting and Persevering which are works all of them belonging to Gods law And thus have you overthrown your own doctrine which you have devised wherewith to overthrow the doctrine of S. Paul Sect. 12. It is one thing to look boldly another that it may do so Humane frailties hinder not Christian boldness But he that saith I may look boldly doth there-withall and in so saying look boldly indeed Now you made your book look boldly whether it might do so or no when you taught it to say in the Preface that it might look your worst Adversaries boldly in the face And although he that hath humane frailties may look boldly yet his humane frailties may not and if he saith they may he doth then justifie his frailties And thus much for your Preface or first Chapter CHAP. II. The word Creatours I Shall put him in minde where he may read it in Ainsworth upon Psal 149. The Christian Churches never forbad us to read Eccles 12.1 in the Hebrew tongue or to turn it into English according to its proper force or Idiome You have helped me where to finde the word in our language but that it is found in our Church I cannot admit for you know that Ainsworth was a professed Separatist from the Church of England It was somewhat boldly done of him to turn it so who yet in his Title professed to explain the Hebrew words but it was far more boldly done of you to learn the children at the very first to speak so As you have helped me to the notice of one so will I in lieu of him help you to the notice of another whom perhaps you have not yet observed or if you have I dare say you never before took notice of one of his places which he hath added to yours and Ainsworths It is Th. Br. of N. in a small tract published last year His fourth instance is in these words Eph. 2.12 And ye were without Gods in the world so it is in the Greek plurally but it is falsty tran slated God singularly as if there were but one God in the Trinity I hope there is a mean on this side the Tridentine Restraint without such libertie as many men affect who are afraid that they shall not be known but pass in obscurity and not be counted more learned and judicious than others are if they do not mend and alter something or other though it be without exception generally received and of long continuance AEneas Sylvius before he was Pope or Cardinal or Bishop was Secretary to Frederick the Emperour and having indited some letters at his first coming to the employment he sent the copy to a Bishop then living at the Court who procured him that preferment desiring him to examine it and alter what he should finde needed alteration who soon after returned him again his copie in sundry places blotted but no way bettered having put out divers words here one and there another placing such in their stead as were no way so fit and proper and when the Secretarie asked him the reason and what he misliked in those words that he thus corrected Atqui said the Bishop non vidisse me scripta tua suspectare poteras si nihil immutatum reperisses you would have thought I never read or perused your writing had you received it again just such as you sent it to me I could wish that those men who are forward to show their diligence and their skill in the learned languages or perhaps their ignorance as it hapned in the instance I now gave you by mending the vulgar version would innovate in matters of less moment for these be indeed above any profanae vocum novitates I know it is one thing to teach that such a point of Faith is implyed in such an Hebrew Idiom another thing to teach children and common people to use the plural number upon pretence of drawing the Church to the Scripture Christian Churches forbid not to read Eccles 12.1 in Hebrew but they are against rendring every word just as it is in that language as their practice doth plainly witness And would you indeed that the English Bible should begin in the same manner and with the same pretence that you began your Catechisme withall The Gods created heaven and earth I hope you would not and yet you are in the way to it And though you teach your scholars at your fourth Question to answer There is but one God yet if they be wonted to read or hear that word in the plural and be used so to speak will they not go near to forget your Answer in your Catechisme and
to think that there are more than one Bara Elohim is the sacred Text good Hebrew and sound Doctrine But Creavit Dii is scandalous no true Latine nor good Divinitie And because you think good to joyn with those that hold it not to be a bare Hebraism but an intimation of the Sacred Trinitie I pray you to remember on the other side 1. that the plural number implyeth two or four as wel as three so wholly it is but a matter of uncertaintie 2. because you say here it is a scandal for Christians to Judaize for so you are pleased to Lutheranize if indeed you beleeve that God is called Elohim because of the pluralitie of persons then wheresoever that word be found though ascribed to one several person it must signifie the whole Trinitie and then in stead or Judaism you are in peril to fall into Sabellianism or the errour of the Patropassians And for the common people I hope they will be warie how they walk and how they speak in such points of Faith as this is And because it is a matter of consequence and because the ground is slipperie let them in Gods name lay fast hold upon the Athanasian Creed beginning thus Whosoever will be saved for their guide and conduct let them read it often and hear it with their best attention and prefer it before all Catechismes much more before any new-fangled one There shall they soon learn by plain Analogie according to the Doctrine of the Scripture and the Doctrine of the Catholick Church That the Father is Creatour The Son Creatour The holy Ghost Creatour yet are there not three Creatours but one Creatour And this may suffice for your second chapter CHAP. III. Sinfull lusts THe Question is Whether in those words of the English Catechisme Sinfull lusts of the Flesh the word Flesh signifieth created nature as you taught or the corruption of nature as I said making the epithet sinfull serve onely to amplifie and not as you make it to distinguish Here you say Be it so the matter is not material it is to trifle about a toy Yet I gave some reason why it was requisite that Christians young and old should understand the meaning of that term Matter of words is so far material as to preserve what is material Verba quasi vasa as the shell preserveth the kernel and the vessel keepeth what is put into it But though you say Be it so yet presently after it must not be so Sinfull may be an epithet to distinguish withall Why so Because we are taught to renounce not the works of the Devil onely but the Devil also why not also the other two enemies the world and the flesh Those words of the Catechisme refer to Baptisme In the form of Baptisme these three enemies are twice named singly or solely without any epithet or addition namely Grant they may triumph against the Devil the World and the Flesh also To fight under his banner against Sin the World and the Devil By which two places compared together any one that will may plainly see what Flesh in the form of Baptisme and in the form of the Catechisme doth signifie namely Sin for what is called Flesh in one place is called Sin in the other And every one that will may plainly see also that you are resolved to uphold whatsoever you have said yea though it be an evident absurditie This Question with the answer you left out wholly in your later Edition which when I perceived I made some doubt whether or no I should take notice of it in my Review because I did interpret the omission to be a kinde of confession of your mistake yet did I note it for the reason given in my Postscript But here you declare your self to be for confused signification rather than a nice distinction and what you threw out of your second edition you call home for your relief in defence of your first Neither are you well contented as it seems that every one should interpose or meddle and mislike that which haply may deserve to be misliked Nemo sibi extrane us est sicut in vulnerum tract atione saith Julius Scaliger Ossa mihi extraxi egomet minimo dolore No Chirurgeon can so inoffensively touch or handle a wound or sore or fracture as the Patient can And more than this I shall not say to your third Chapter CHAP. IV. The tree of knowledge VVHen upon the marginal note of your fourtieth Question and Answer I mentioned that horrible errour as you well call it The Denial of Divine Prescience I did it so fairly and softly that I thought I had not given any just cause of distaste or anger I gave you account of my intention in making stay at it It was because the Socinians had gone that way verie far and some of the Remonstrants were following I had some other reasons which I then kept to my self but now my expectation thus failing me you shall have them One was because there was a pestilent Sectarie who to prove that God doth not know free actions before they come to pass produced those words Gen. 2.19 God brought the beasts and fowls to Adam to see what he would call them and because I thought your gloss upon the ninth verse of that chapter might unhappily help that errour forward namely that it was called the tree of knowledge of good and evil because God would trie whether man would do good or evil I therefore endeavoured to give the true reason why it was called the Tree of knowledge And Socinus disproves Divine prescience from those words Gen. 22.12 Now I know thou fearest God seeing thou hast not withheld thine onely son and your explication of a place of the same kinde with these two was likely to promote that pernicious errour Another reason was this I did observe of you in your writings that you do in a manner wholly symbolize with the Remonstrants and in some things with the Socinians as in these for instance 1. In neglecting the authoritie custome and manner of the Church upon pretence of walking onely by the Scripture-rule witness the verie first Question of your Catechisme and Open door Preface § of this You bid the people prefer the Apostles expressions before mens glosses as here pag. 44. you contented your self with the Scripture phrase and used not that of the Church 2. In your opinion that Christs death was onely a Preparation to his Sacrifice 3. Ut fideles panem frangant are the words of their Catechisme and Professours to break bread are the words of yours 4. You hold with them that Faith is wrought by no immediate power but onely the word preached 5. You would have the Names written in the book of life to be Qualities and Socinus Praelect 13. pag. 72. Satìs est eorum qualitatem quandam certam esse quae in hac metaphora proprio nomini planè respondet It is sufficient that those who are said to be elected
children of the Resurrection shall be equal to the Angels Luke 20.36 and the bodie raised shall be not a natural but a spiritual bodie 1 Cor. 15.44 and therefore shall not need natural but spiritual refection and delight Sixthly Whereas the Church of God is either militant or triumphant either subject to temptations and exercised with crosses on earth or else crowned with victory and glory in heaven By this opinion the Church for so many years shall be neither or betwixt both out of heaven but reigning on earth without sin without ordinances And whereas the Church of God upon earth is a mixt societie of good and bad and is to continue such till the last the tares must grow with the wheat till the harvest which is the end of the world by this opinion the wheat shall grow alone without the tares the just reign without the unjust long before final consummation And Lastly According to the Millenarians new Creed the joy of the Saints in Gods presence and the pleasures at his right hand shall not be for evermore or perpetually continued but be broken asunder intermitted not with absolute misery but with happiness so far inferiour to that of heaven in degree and in kinde that it may well be interpreted and taken for a degree of unhappiness When Peter saw but a figure or glimpse of the celestial light he forgat all things would never by his good will have come down from the mount And can we think that the glorified Saints who are perfectly blessed with the sight of Gods face shall be rewarded with leaving heaven and coming down to enjoy the tastless pleasures of an earthly Paradise Had you observed your own rule you gave us before page 11. Contrary to things plain and fundamentall no difficult saying is to be enterpreted because it would be against the Analogie of Faith you would never have suffered your self to be carryed away with such a dream as this is A very learned Commentatour who telleth us he hestowed above thirtie years studie upon the book of the Revelation after all this saith he found it an easier matter to say what the thousand years are not than to say what they are or what is meant by them and yet there lyes your greatest strength of Chiliasm Saint Pauls Epistles are hard to be understood you could once alledge it to weaken the testimonie taken thence Is not S. Johns Revelation especially the twentieth Chapter much more hard In your first chapter you could spy a mote of Judaism where there was none but behold a beam here which you would not see while you interpret spiritual promises by a temporal kingdome which is the main and blinding errour of the Jews to this day Now I come to consider the Texts of Scripture upon which you ground this opinion 1 Cor. 15. 23. Every man shall rise in his own order and is that onely the just are they every man they that are Christs at his coming he says not then all men at his coming as men commonly say Elsewhere it is said All men good and bad shall rise at his coiming I named before joh 5.28 I name now Maith 25.31 When the Son of man cometh he shall separate one from another as the shepherd divideth the sheep from the goats must they not both be raised before they be separated 2 Thess 1. It is righteous to recompence rest to you who are troubled when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven taking vengeance of them that know not God 2 Tim. 4.1 Jesus Christ shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing if the quick and dead then the unjust and if they be judged they must be raised first And secondly whereas it is said Every man shall rise in his own order Unusquisque Every one extendeth no further than to Christ and his bodie mystical first Christ the Head and then those that beleeve in him not denoting any orderin beleevers as if one should rise before another much less doth it extend to unbeleevers or shew how they shall rise which is proved further because ver 22. To be made alive as I take it is never understood but of resurrection to life to which standeth in opposition resurrection to condemnation Why says Christ he that doth good shall be rewarded Luke 14.14 at the resurrection of the just if the just and unjust shall both rise together why speaks he of that as a distinct period He doth not speak of it as a distinct period of time but as of a distinct state Many things may differ very much which yet may come to pass together The prisoners that are innocent or that have obtained a pardon may call the Assizes the time of enlargement and delivery and yet upon the very judgement-day when they are acquitted and sent home other malefactours may be sent back to prison and execution 1 Cor. 15. 24. Then cometh the end when he shall have delivered up the kingdome to God the Father Now plain it is that he shall not deliver up the kingdome then when the just shall rise for they shall reign with him wherefore also it is said He shall judge the quick and the dead at his coming and in his kingdome 2 Tim. 4.1 that implyes that he shall not deliver up the kingdome at his coming but when he hath reigned with his Saints that here suffered with him If Death be put down at his coming where is his reign till that be put down You loose your self and all that follow you in your confusions while you choose rather to lead the ignorant than to tread in the steps of the learned that have gone before you There is a twofold kingdome of our Saviour Jesus Christ The first Natural Absolute and Essential to him as he is God equal with the Father with whom he reigneth from everlasting to everlasting of this kingdome shall be no end and as he never received it of any so shall he never surrender it The other is a Ministerial or Oeconomical Kingdome belonging to him as he is Mediatour having all power given him in heaven and earth for the good and salvation of his Church whereof he is the Head This kingdome consisteth in dispensing his gifts diversly for the edification of his people by his Spirit Word Ministerie and Ordinance and in subduing Sin Satan Death and all enemies of what kinde soever This kingdome he hath received of his Father and shall at last deliver it up As if a king should give authority and commission to his eldest son to go and reduce to due obedience a rebellious countrey lying at some distance which work being done the son returneth renders up his Commission delivers to his Father the possssion of a peaceable kingdome yet ceaseth not to be his Fathers son as he was before The text you bring out of 2 Tim. 4.1 and that of Rom. 8.17 and 2 Tim. 2.11 12. do speak of the first kinde of kingdome But that of