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
ABout four years sithence Christian Reader there was brought unto me a Comment or Exposition on the Epistle to the Hebrews written by a Namelesse and unknown Author to the end that having perused and allowed it it might be Printed and published the which I also undertook and finding as â— then conceived that for the most part it was Learned and Judicious plain and profitable I did so passe it with my Approbation Yet there were divers passages against which I took as I thought just exceptions as disagreeing with the Scriptures and the received Doctrine of Our and all other Reformed Churches which I would not let passe before by my Letters I had acquainted the Author with them that I might receive satisfaction in those things which I objected from whom I received a sober modest Answer wherein he did not at all maintain those errors but left me to my liberty to expunge what I misliked the which I also accordingly did as I thought fit But the Work being long and my time but short divers other faults and errours escaped unobserved by me they being comprized in few words and short passages and so the more easily passed over without my observation The which Errors I the rather fell into because the Author was wholly unknown unto me who am naturally of this disposition that I neither am nor desire to be more scrupulous and curious in observing other mens errors and faults then I have evidence of truth for it whereas otherwise if knowing the Persons with whom I have to deal to be Heterod and Erronious in their Doctrine I should be more wary and observe their words and works with a more vigilant eye All which I speak not wholly to clear my self from all blame for I ingeniously acknowledge my inadvertency and want of due and serious consideration in so weighty a matter and therefore being convinced of my errour by divers Letters from men of great Eminency both in respect of Place Learning and Piety and by mine own more serious observation but especially by the Labours of this Learned Author chiefly intended to lay open and confute these dangerous Errors and Heresies I could do no lesse and indeed in respect of my old age and infirmities accompanying it I could not do much more then revoke my Approbation of that otherwise Learned Commentary so far as it maintaineth these pernicâ—ous doctrines that detract any thing from the Lord Christs Divinity and his Supream and Eternal Godhead For far be it from me to derogate any thing from my blessed Saviour and Redeemer by not acknowledging him the Supream God Co-essential Co-equal and Co-eternal with the Father seeing the Evangelical Prophet in the Old Testament calleth him the Mighty God Esay 9. 3 and the blessed Apostle St. Paul affirmeth that Christ who took upon him our flesh is over all not Deus factus but God blessed for ever Rom. 9. 5. and therefore seeing this Learned Book intituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 asserteth and maintaineth this truth and confuteth the opposite errors I do most willingly approve it and allow it to be Printed and published John Downam Θεὸς ' Αâ—θÏωπâ—φόÏος OR God Incarnate SHEWING That JESVS CHRIST Is the Onely and the most HIGH GOD. In Four BOOKS Wherein also are contained a few Animadversions upon a late namelesse and blasphemous Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrewes published under the Capital Letters G M. Anno Dom. 1647. In these Four Books the great mystery of man's Redemption and Salvation and the wayâ—â—â—â—d means thereof used by God are evidently held out to the Capacity of humane reason 〈◊〉 ordinary understandings The Sin against the Holy Ghost is plainly described with the Cases and Reasons of the Vnpardonablenesse or pardonablenesse thereof Anabaptisme is by Scriptur and the Judgment of the Fathers shewed to be an heinous sin and exceedingly injurious to the Passion and blood of Christ There were false Prophets among the people even as there shall be among you who privily shall bring in damnable heresies even denying the Lord that bought them and bring upon themselves swift destruction 2 Pet. 2. 1. Contra rationem nemo Sobrius contra Scripturas nemo Christianus Contra Ecclesiam nemo pacificus 〈◊〉 Aug. de Trinit lib. 4. cap. 6. By EDM. PORTER â— D. sometimes Fellow of St. John's 6. Colledge in Cambridge and Prebend of Norwich London Printed for Humphrey Moseley and are to be sold at his Shop at the Prince's Arms in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1655. TO The Right Honourable THOMAS Lord Coventry Bron of Ailesbury Peace and Truth My Lord I Humbly beg leave to use your honourable name in the dedication of this Book thereby to present the expression of a thankful Soul to my deceased Patron your most Honourable and prudent Father who even from my Childhood continued his manifold favours to me and ceased not untill he had planted me in an imployment and probable subsistence in the Church where I continued peaceably during his life and untill the pressures of these unhappy Times dislocated not onely me though too low God wot to be an object of publick wrath but also the strongest bones and principal joynts and nerves of our once most renowned Church To his memory do I owe the first fruits of my publick Labours nor can I offer them at any other shrine so proper as your self my Lord who are his living Image whose Name and Title you worthily bear whose Honour is revived in you and the pious and thankful memory of him during my life will not be obliterated in me seeing the very Heathens fansied their Sen. de Benef l. â— c. 3. Charites which were but the Emblems of gratitude to be Virgins and alwayes Young to teach us that thankfulnesse should not be Corrupted or decayed by time and age and their great Orator although he was one of the most deadly enemies of Caesar who had been newly murthered in the very Senate-house yet he confessed that he could not find fault with the faithfulnesse of Cic. lib. 11. Epist 240. Matius for honouring him that was dead who whilest he lived had been his Friend and Patron The Church hath tâ—â—ght us further that death it self doth not dissolve Christians Communion Hier. in Proaem l. 18. in Esa Viventium Dormientium eadem Charitas est Aug. de Civit l. 20. c. 9. Animae piorum mortuorum non seperantur ab Ecclesia hâc The Church Triumphant and Militant are but one Church and therefore did the Primitive Christians honourably by name Commemorate their pious and worthy Benefactors at the very time of their Sacred Eucharist although they were long before departed out of this life So seeing I have not any other meanes to commemorate my deceased Lord I have maâ—◠〈◊〉 if this to professe hereby Mihi erit nomen 〈◊〉 benedictionibus but to you my Lord do I present the Book because possibly it may do some good to the Living For the subject
called his may appear by these passages Christ saith Matth. 25. I was hungry I was naked I was in prison Act. 9. 4. Saul Saul why persecutest thou me when these things were not meant of his own proper and individual person but only of his servants and members which he calleth himself for so he saith Verily in as much as ye have done it unto one of the least of my brethren ye have done it unto me So the Apostle saith that 2 Cor. 5. 21. Christ was made sin for us when in the same breath it is also affirmed that he knew no sin Both are most true because our sins are his sins by reason of this union as the debt of the principal is also the debt of the Surety So Christ is said to be Rev. 13. 8. slain from the beginning of the world even before he was incarnate because of Abel who was both his member and type Lyranus upon that place saith Lyra. in loc Christus fuit in Abel occisus in prophetis exhonoratus for all the holy Patriarchs and Prophets who dyed before the birth of Christ are his members as well as others who novv live or shall hereafter live untill the end of the world even as we read of that birth Gen. 38. 28. where the hand came out of the Womb before the other parts yet it was a member united to the body as well as the other parts Upon that speech of Christ Matth. 23. How often would I have gathered thee as an hen c Orig. in loc Origen saith Christ in Moses and the Prophets would have gathered them in every age before Upon that passage in Psal 61. 2. From the Aug. in Psal 60. ends of the earth will I cry unto thee Austin asketh this question What one man cryeth from the ends of the Earth And answereth That it is meant of Christ for his Members or Church is that one man And upon that saying of the Psalmist Psal 86. 3. I cry unto thee daily or all the day long that is all the time of the world continuance If question be made how this can be true of any one man Austin Aug. in Ps 85. answereth That it is meant of the body of Christ which groaneth under pressures in all ages this one man is extended unto the end of the world in his Members preceding and succeeding Thus he Finally upon these grounds If it be demanded how any man can be saved seeing man daily transgresseth the Law Our answer is That every true member of Christ doth perfectly perform the Law in that Christ hath done it who is one with his members So if we enquire how Christ could with Justice suffer death who never sinned The answer is That his suffering was just because the sins of his Members or body are his sinnes in that himself and his Members are One for it is as easie to conceive our most innocent Saviour to be justly charged with our sins as to conceive sinful man to be justly discharged of all sin and to be truly called righteous even the righteousnesse of God in him Thus much I have thought fit to premise as an Introduction and a needful Preparative for the reading of these Books All which I humbly submit to the Judgment of Superiors and to the serious consideration of the Christian Reader THE Principal Contents of the four Books following In the first Book THe Authors and spreaders of the Arian or Socinian heresie Why the title Saint was of old withdrawn from Churches That the most high God is the Author of the Gospel That the soules of men and women never dye The article of Christs descent into hell is expounded The Original of Creeds and what hath been added to the most ancient of them and why The meaning of the word Hades or hell A full discourse of Ecstasies Raptures Inspirations Revelations and Enthusiasmes Of the apparitions of dead men Of Angels good and bad which conduct the soules of the dead to their receptacles and mansions in the other world A Summary of the blasphemies contained in the said Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrewes In the second Book THat to deny and renounce the Godhead of Christ is the sin against the holy Ghost The sin against the holy Ghost is fully described The eternall Godhead of Jesus Christ is fully proved The deniers of Christ's Godhead are of no better religion then Jewes Turks or Antichrist Of the Deification of Jesus Christ and how it is to be understood The manner how Christ doth intercede and mediate for us in Heaven The Subjection and Minoration of Christ and the delivering up of his Kingdome at the end of the world expounded out of 1 Cor. 15. A plain discovery of Originall sin On what Object the Christian is to fix his mind in prayer How the most high God became a Priest Why the Church of England required adoration when the Lord Jesus is named That Christ is Jehova and what that word signifieth In the Third Book THat the most high God was incarnate How and when the most high God appeared visibly to the Patriarchs and the mystery thereof unfolded The meaning of the face and backparts of God The everlasting Covenant of Grace made before the Creation and after is plainly set forth How the Son of God was necessitated to be incarnate and to suffer death That the Obedience of Christ is with perfect justice and equity imputed to his mysticall Body the Church for the salvation thereof The Originall of the Soul of Christ and of other mens souls is disputed The Omnipresence of the Spirit of God and the diversities of the graces thereof The curing of the Kings Evill by the Kings of England and the Scripturall warrant for the same In the Fourth Book IN what cases the sinne against the Holy Ghost is unpardonable or pardonable is fully shewed The dangerous sin of Anabaptism is shewed by evidence of Scripture with the History of the ancient Anabaptists The reasons why the ancient Christians did defer Baptism till ripe years or old age shewed to be carnall The reason why St. Paul commanded those to be baptized who had been baptized before with St. John Baptists baptism Acts 19. A plain description what true repentance is The meaning of Sins unto death and sins not unto death 1 John 5. 16. The meaning of sins Mortall and Veniall so oft mentioned in the Fathers In what cases sinners must be prayed for and in what not shewed out of 1 John 5. 16. OBSERVATIONS UPON THE COMMENTARY ON The Epistle to the HEBREWES published under the Capital Letters G. M. Anno Dom. 1646. CHAP. I. The Original and growth of the Arian Heresie THe blasphemous heresie of denying the Godhead of Jesus Christ began early and after 〈◊〉 was first broached by one a Euseb hist l. â— â— 28. 〈◊〉 c. 20. 〈◊〉 as Eusebius and Niâ—eph have written and after him 〈◊〉 seconded by his disâ—â—ple â—â—â—odotus who was an 〈◊〉 of
vigilant now at all the ports of thy soul and take some antidote of thy precious Christian faith to corroborate thy heart against the danger of most deadly poyson for now the Serpents nest and Pandora's box are to be opened containing multitudes of evils and deadly blasphemies against the Divine Person of thy dear Saviour and his precious death all which I must now present to thy view and for thy more easie discovery I will draw them out in two files The first containeth such blasphemies which deny the Godhead and Divine nature of Jesus Christ The second containeth such blasphemies as deny the Incarnation of God and the Redemption of man by the Passion bloodshed and death of thy Saviour when he offered himself a full sufficient expiatory sacrifice on the altar of the Crosse and also such as deny the merit of his active obedience in fulfilling the Whole Law and performing the Covenant of God in our stead on our behalf and to our benefit and now they advance Blasphemies against the Godhead of Jesus Christ 1. That Christ was by his Resurrection consequently deiâ—ied Chap. 1 vers 2. pag. 3. it seemes the Commenter doth not believe that Christ was God before his death 2. That the Creation of the world cannot be referred to Christ Chap. 1. vers 10 p. 10. That his making of the world was but the restoring of mankind to a new state pag. 3. yet all things were made by him that were made Joh. 1. 3. 3. That Christ had an immense measure of the Holy Ghost Cap. 1. 9. p. 9. If it were immense how is it a measure and if by measure how is it immenâ—e is not this illogical blasphemy the Scripture saith of him God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him Joh. 3. 34. 4. That Christ had a beginning Cap. 1. 12. p. 13. Yet of Christ it is said His goings forth have been from everlasting Mich. 5. 2. 5. That if the Author of this Epistle to the Hebrewes had taken Christ to be the supream God he had discouâ—sed impertinently C. 1. 10. p. 10. That it is manifest that Christ is not the Supream God C. 5. 5. p. 80. That Christ was a divine man C. 7. 22. p. 136. That Christ was opposed to God Cap. 5. 5. p. 80. That Christ carried himself as a person diverse from God and that he was so the thing it self declares C. 12. 25. p. 320. p 54. 6. That Christ doth not forgive sins of his own authority Cap. 4. 14. pag. 70. That Christ hath not power of himself to save us C. 9. 24. p. 192. Yet Christ saith The Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins Matth 9. 6. and Thou shalt call his Name Jesus for he shall save his people from their sins Mâ—â— 1. 21 7. That the Angels are equal to Christ for duration C. 1. 10. p. 10. The â—ngel are creatures Christ is their Creator and therefore before them and of longer duration à parte anâ—e but if he mean that Angels are equal to him for duration à parte â—â—st onely he hath said nothing to his own purpose for so soules of men yea and devils â—â— all endure for ever but the Son of God is from everlasting to everlasting as is shewed out of Mich. 5. 2. 8. That the Lord Christ was not the first Author of the Gospel but God was the first C. 2. 3. p. 19. If the Law had been published by God himself it had been mâ—re excellent then the Gospel c. C. 2. 2. p. 16. This blasphemy is particularly answered before Cap. 7 9. That the Saints in heaven shall noâ—â—e under Christ but besides him C. 2. 6. p. 23. What! Check by soul yet Philip. 2. 1â— God hath puâ— all things under his feet and gave him to be head over all things to the Church and this Supremacy is there said to be in heavenly places verse 20. and The four and twenty Elders fall down and worship the Lamb Rev. 4. 10. 10. That it appears that faith in Christ is not contained in all faith in God Cap. 11 6. p. 251. That he that believes in Christ doth not believe in him finally but in God by him C. 3. 12. p. 54. He would have you believe there is something greater and better then Christ to believe in Ultimatè Terminativè 11. That Christ must not be compared with that Angel who represented God C. 12. 25. p. 321. Yet Christ even in his humane nature exalted is set far above all Principalities and powers and might and dominion and every name that is named not onely in this world but in that which is to come Ephe. 1. 21. Indeed he is said to be made lower then the Angels to suffer death Heb. 2. 9. lower in the humiliation of his humane nature but of his Divine nature alone and of his humane exalted and so of his whole Person as he is Emmanuel it is said Heb. 1. 6. Let all the Angels of God worship him The total summe of all these is Onely this blasphemy That Christ is not God Blasphemies against the Incarnation of the Son of God and his Work of Redemption 1. That Christ the Son of God cannot be said to be Incarnate more then the Saints are Heb. 2. 14. pag. 31. 2. That the Supream God can no way be a Priest C. 5. 5. p. 80. True if you had added this Except he be Incarnate and assume humane nature 3. The expiatory Offering of Christ for our sins was not performed on earth but in heaven C. 7. 1. p. 116. c. 8. 4. p. 146. c. 9. 12. p. 168. That his offering did not consist in his death but by his entrance into heaven after death C. 9. 7. p. 160. his Priesthood began there C. 9. 14. p. 171. 4. That Christ was not the Author of the New Testament but is called the Testator only because he was the main witnesse C. 9 19. p. 182 183 184. 5. That when it is said Jesus made a surety of a better Testament Heb. 7. 22. it is not meant that Christ became our surety to God and took upon him the payment of our debts But was a surety of Gods promise and dyed to assert the truth of the Covenant C. 7. 22. p. 136 319 348 357. 6. That Eusebius would not have the Son of God who appeared to Abraham to be the most high God Cap. 13. 2. p. 331. 7. That the Nicene Fathers hâ—ld not that the Son is that one most high God who is the Father These are the Articles of Infidelity which are affirmed by this Commenteâ— against which consisting of two Heads as is said I will Gods assistance addresse two Books following in the former whereof The Godhead of Christ shall be declared and in the later the Incarnation of the same Jesus who is the true onely and supream God shall be manifested and thereby the Great and gracious Mystery of man's Redemption by our God so Incarnate
open Market-place cured diseases raised spirits presented to their view Magical banquets and seemed to release those that were possessed by devils therefore Celsus said that Jesus performed his miracles by art Orig. Cont. Cels lib. 1. n. 32. magick I say seemed onely for we learn from our Saviour that one devil is not cast out by another and Satan is not divided against himself and although when ignorant people imploy one Witch to help them against another some present ease may seem to be procured yet indeed as Austin observeth Non exit Aug. l. 83. quaest qu. 79 n. 88. Satanas per infimas potestates sed in intima regreditur regnat in voluntale corpori parcens i. Satan is not dispossessed by any infernal power but retireth himself into the more inward parts of the possessed and though he spare the body yet he â—yrannizeth more in the soul and maketh his possession stronger Because this is a dangerous apostasie to seek to or to attribute the work of God to him therefore Christ used divers arguments against it and so did the Ancient Fathers Origen Athan. Euseb Austin and others which having but touched I omit to avoid digressions The greatest difficulty in this question is what our Saviour meant by the words holy Spirit or holy Ghost when he said The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven for the understanding whereof I will lay down a few Considerations to the Reader that from them he may gather the true meaning of that hard saying First That in Christ there are two natures 1. His Godhead or Divine nature by which he is called God over all blessed for ever Rom. 9. 5. 2. His humane nature or manhood made of the seed of David according to the flesh Rom. 1. 3. The first of these is called Forma Dei the second is called forma Servi both are Philip. 2. 6 7. mentioned Philip. 2. 6. Who being in the form of God thought it no robbery to be equal to God but made himself of no reputation and took upon him the form of a Servant Secondly Consider that there are two spirits in Christ 1. His soul or humane spirit of which he saith Father into thy hands I commend my spirit Luk. 23. 46. Secondly his Divine Spirit of which it is said If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is noni of his Rom. 8. 9. Thirdly that according to his two natures there are two filiations in Christ for 1. He is called the Son of man the son of David 2. He is called the Son of God Fourthly That according to those two natures two spirits and two sonships the Scripture mentioneth two kinds of blasphemies against Christ thâ— one against him as he is the Son of man and this is pardonable Whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man it shall be forgiven him Matth. 12. 32. The other unpardonable But Whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost â—t shall not be forgiven him Ibid. Fifthly That the appellation Holy Spirit in Scripture is taken two wayes 1. Pro deitate essentiae omnium personarum Paâ—ris Filii Spiritûs i. For the Godhead or divinity of all the Persons Father Son and Holy Ghost because all are one God as Matth. 12. 28. John 4. 24. 2. It is taken Personaliter i. properly for the third Person alone as Baptizing them in the Nâ—me of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Matth. 28. 19. and this distinction is acknowledged by divers late Divines of the Reformed Churches a Polan l. 3. c 6 Polanus b Bucan l. 3. p â—â— Bucan c Tilen p. 141. Tilenus and d Melan. in loc Com. de Spirit Ph. Melanthon From these plain and confessed Considerations I extract these two Propositions 1. That it is no inconvenience to affirm That those words hoâ—y Spirit or Holy Ghost in that place do signifie the Godhead of the second Person Jesus Christ 2. That to deny the Godhead of Jesus Christ is that blasphemy which in the Gospel is said to be unpardonable And this is my Conclusion which hereafter I hope I shall evidently demonstrate to the Readers satisfaction CHAP. III. That the Godhead of the Son is called Spirit and holy Spirit that the words Ghost and Spirit are of the same signification LEt it not seem strange that the appellation of one person is given to another for as in this place the Godhead of the Son is called the holy Spirit so in another place the Godhead of the Son is called the Everlasting Father Esa 9. 6. For unto us a child is born his Name shall be called wonderfull counsâ—llour the mighty God the everlasting Fâ—ther In that he saith a child is born it must needs be meant of the Son of God and the Son is called the everlasting Father because he is God for the Godhead of every person being but one in all is may be called the everlasting Father and so the holy Ghost is the everlasting Father also because the holy Ghost is God and yet this doth not confound the three persons or their severall and distinct prâ—prieties and personalities for albeit every Person is the everlasting Father in respect of men and of creatures because all concurred in the creation yet onely the first Person hath this Personall proprietie to be the Father of the sâ—cond Person and so the Father of God as the Son is the Father respectu Creaturarum i. in respect of the creatures so the first Person is Father of God and of Man as that in the Poet if it were in the singular number might illustrate Hominum sator atque deorum a Virg. Aene. l. 1. so God the Father is the Father of God the Son that is the Father of the Person of the Son but not the Father of the Godhead of the Son b Pater Personae non essentiae Pater Filii non deitatis We in our Creed confess the Son to be God of God that is God the Son of God the Father but we do not say Deitas de deitate Godhead of Godhead Neither could the Son of God call God the Father his Lord and his God but onely because the Person of the Son assumed the humane nature and form of a servant as St. Augustino hath observed upon that saying Ps 22. 10 Thou art my God from my mothers belly c Pater est Deus Dominus Filio quia in eo est forma servi De ventre matris Deus meus es tu Ps 22. 10. Sed antâ— omnia secula Pater est i. The Father is the Lord and God of the Son because the Son assumed the form af a servant therefore it is said in the Psalme Thou art my God from my mothers belly but the Father may be said to be his Father from eternitie As every Person is called a Father so as is said so also every Person is called Holy because the Godhead is holy
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
whence either Levi or Châ—â—st had their humane souls and so it was to St. Austine himself as I have shewed before The surer answer therefore is this that it being granted that the humane nature of Châ—ist was every way in the loins of Abraham as well as Levi was yet this grand difference is between them That Christs Divine nature or eternall Godhead was not derived from Abrahams loins Although as Christ was in the form of a servant so he came from Abraham and so he paid tithes in Abraham to his type Mâ—lchisedech just as he paid tribute to Caesar or to the Temple because he was a man and a subject to Caesar as S. Ambrose truely saith Christus est servus quatenus incarnatus i. Ambr. in Epist con Aquil. n. 49. When Christ is called a Subject or Servant it is understood of his Incarnation But as he was in the form of God he neither came from Abraham nor was tithed in him nor owed any tribute to Caesar or the Temple Of this nature it is said John 8. 58 Before Abraham was I am Yet in respect of his humane nature I may truly say that Christ before his birth in the loins of Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedech which is all one as to say Christ paid to Christ Christus homo Christo Deo i. The Man Christ to Christ our God This Scripture thus expounded doth clearly set forth the Incarnation of God in the Person of Jesus Christ who for his assumed flesh is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas de Spir. sanct c. 5. by St. Basil i. flesh-bearing God and in Greg. Nazian and Athanasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God Incarnate Thus was he every way as hath been shewed a Person fitted to stand in steed of mankind as an undertaker and surety for performance of the Bond Law and Covenant which was laid upon us Blessed be the Lord God of Israel for he hath visited and redeemed his people and hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David Laus Deo FINIS THE FOURTH BOOK Of the Vnpardonable SINNE OR The sinne against the Holy Ghost wherein this question is discussed Whether the sinne against the Holy Ghost be absolutely unpardonable Together with a plain Exposition of those places in Scripture which concern that sin viz. wherein the question of Anabaptisme is clearly discussed Matth. 12. 31. Heb. 6. 4. Heb. 10. 26. Epist 1 John 5. 16. Qui legit haec ubi certus est paritêr pergat mecum ubi haesitat quaerat mecum ubi errorem suum cognoscit redeat ad me Aug. de Trinit l. 1. c. 3. LONDON Printed for Humphrey Moseley and are to be sold at his Shop at the Princes Armes in St. Paul's Church-yard 1655. THE PREFACE IN my second Book I propounded two questions to be discussed First what sin that 1. is which three of the Evangelists call the sinne against the Holy Ghost and to me it appeared to be the blasphemous denying the Godhead of Jesus Christ For albeit some other sin may be so called yet that this also is that sinne there meant I nothing doubt Secondly Why the denying the Godhead 2. of Christ is said especially to be unpardonable and to me it seemed that the reason is because he that so sinneth doth thereby renounce the sole and onely means of redemption and pardon for Jesus Christ by vertue of his Godhead inseparably united with his Manhood is the onely All-sufficient Expiatory Sacrifice for sinne There is yet a third Question to be discoursed 3. which is very needfull to be rightly understood lest the former Doctrines should lead such men into desperation who have fallen into this sinne and for the comfort of those particularly who have been misled into this most dangerous blasphemy by reading This new Commentary on the Hebrewes I do thus state this third Question Of THE UNPARDONABLE SINNE CHAP. I. Whether those who have once fallen into the blasphemy 3. Question of denying the Godhead of Jesus Christ are absolutely unpardonable and left without all hope of assoilment or remedie and forgiveness so that they must be certainly and eternally damned THe reason which moved me to attempt this question is because I find in many Writers that the sin against the Holy Ghost is discoursed as being absolutely unpardonable and their perswasion thereof is grounded on the words of Christ which seem to be so peremptory and absolute as if they could not admit any limitation or exception or more favourable Exposition For it is said Matth. 12. 31 32. It shall not be forgiven unto mâ—n neither in this 〈◊〉 nor in the world to come and Mar. 3. 29. He hath never forgivenesse but is in danger of eternall damnation And in St. Luke it is said He that denieth me before men shall be denied before the Angels of God unto him that blesphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall no be forgive Of this sin or blasphemie against the Holy Ghost our later Expositors understand that saying Heb â— 4. It is impossible for those who were once enlightned if they fal away to renew them again unto 〈◊〉 So do they expound that place also Heb 10. 26. If we sin wilfully after we have received the knowledge of the Truth there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin but a certain 〈◊〉 looking for of judgement And that which to some men seemeth to prove the absolute unpardonableness of this sin and to put it out of all doubt is that saying 1 John 5. 16. There is a sin unto death I do not say â—◠〈◊〉 for it For if he that once sinneth this sin be not all to be prayed for it will be a great inducement to perswade us that it is altogether unpardonable There is yet another reason alledged by Expositors why this sin is absolutely unpardonable and that is because as they say this blasphemy being one committed it is ever after accompanied with finall 〈◊〉 according to that saying before alledged out of Heb. 6. 6. If this prove true then such blasphemers must certainly perish according to our Saviours words in another case Luke 13. 3. Except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish and so this sinne may fitly be called a sinne unto death But yet to say any sin is so great that in any case it cannot be pardoned will be most harsh and derogatory to the infinite mercy of God in Christ for the sacrifice for sin the Lamb of God is of infinite value and an all-sufficient sacrifice but no sins of the sons of men are infinite either in measure or number but onely in respect of the Object that is God a most mercifull God against whom they are committed Pecca a numerari possunt sed misericordia Dâ—â— nulla mensura comprehendi potest i. Our sins are not numberless but the mercy Basil in Ascet Reg. n. 31. of God is immense and infinite and the Scripture tells us Rom
the very least sin is liable to eternall death except it be confessed and in this life in some measure repented But I proceed CHAP. XVII Whas is meant by a sin unto death the judgment of the Fathers and the Ancient expositdrs therein and the discipline of the primitive Church therunto correspondent that the greatest sins both have bin actuallie and so may be pardoned in what sence the Fathers called some sins venial and some Mortal THere is a sinne unto death I do not say he shall pray for it If any words in the whole sacred Scripture will bear this exposition and make good this Doctrine That there is any sinne at all which once committed cannot possibly upon any terms or condition whatsoever be remitted not upon confession or repentance and forsaking and renouncing it and after it adhering to Gods Truth and his Precepts and that even to death and martyrdome nor upon all these together This saying is most likely to bear it A sinne unto death and not to be prayed for which words require a very diligent Explication being of so great weight and concernment Lord Jesus send thy Light and thy Truth A sinne unto death This sin unto death I conceive not to be intended of any particular sin whether it be absolute Atheisme or the blasphemy of Arâ—us denying the Godhead of Christ or of Eunâ—mius denying the Holy Ghost or totall Apostacie from Christianity or Adultery Idolatry witchcraft murther sedition or any of these grand sins mentioned Gal. 5. 19. such as the Fathers do usually â—in som sence call sins Mortall Mortiferous and Capitall My reason is because it may be made apparant by Scriptures and the Records of the Church that particular men who have sinned these sins severally have bin by Gods mercy and his castigations reduced to renounce their errours and to forsake their sins For many of those sins were seen in King Manasses 2 Chron 33. Who yet was converted and humbled himself greatly and God was intreated and we know that many Heathens Atheists Apostates and â—rrians have Paulinus in vita Ambrosii n. 3. Athan. to 2 page 448. n. 17. bin reduced to Confession of their sins and to repentance of their Arrianismâ— and those who have not bin actually reduced yet during their naturall lives were in a condition reducible if grace sufficient and prevalent had bin given so that their conversion was not absolutely impossible Beza finding fault with distinction of sinnes into Beza in loâ— veâ—iall and mortall as the Schoolmen sometimes use it for which he had good reason affirmeth that it is absurd to say that mortall sins are utterly left without all hope of pardon and yet he thinketh the sinnâ— unto death here meâ—tioned to be that sinne against the holy Ghost and that it is lethiferous and that the commitrers thereof cannot possibly repent which I dare not assent unto but yet he most truly affirmeth that if those who have once committed that sinne against the Holy Ghost would and could repent Certè veniam consequerentur i. certainly they would and might obtain pardon Thus he Vnto death The old Exposition of the Fathers and ancient Expositors surely is the truest and plainest and being received will quit us of many unnecessary doubts and anxiâ—tics and is most agreeable with the Analogie of Faith particularly with the Article of forgivâ—nâ—sse of sinnes and coâ—respondeth best with the justice and mercifulnesse of God for thus they write A sinne unto death is any grand or capitall sinne such as is before mentioned out of Gal. 5. 19. in which a man liveth continueth and dieth impenitently And that it is therefore onely so called a sinne unto death because it is obdurately and impenitently continued and persevered in unto the end of our life and expiration of our souls So Oâ—cumâ—nius saith Solum hoc peccatum ad mortem Oâ—â—um in loc est quod ad paeâ—tentiam non respicit id est Onely that sinne is a sinne unto death which never is repented Beda â—n loc And Beda saith Peccaâ—um ad morâ—em peccatum usque ad tempora mortis protractum diximus râ—cte posse intelligi est de tali magno peccato quale David commisit si proâ—ractum sit usque ad mortem id est A sinne unto death may truely be understood of a sinne continued in untill the time of our death such a great sinne as David committed if we persevere in it till death So doth Saint Hierome understand it Peccâ—tum ad Hier. in Evag. objurg n. 41. moâ—tem est cum tempus râ—â—â—ssionis in vitio inueniâ— id est A sinne unto death is when death cometh and findeth us continuing in sin So doth Saint Austine expound this very Text Peccatum Aug. Retract l. 1. c. 19. ad morâ—â—m est si in hac perversitate finierit â—anc uiâ—â—m id est The sinne unto death is when a man continueth in sinne obstinately and therein endeth his life and in another place he just so expounds the sin against the holy Ghost which shall never be forgiven Non absurde intelligunt â—um peccare in Spiritum â—sse sine Aug. de fide oper c. 16. n. 79. venia reum aeterni peccati qui usque ad finem vitae â— oluerit credere in Christum id est It is no inconvenience â—o understand it thus that he sinneth against the Holy Spirit and shall not be forgiven for ever who will not at all believe in Christ as long as he liveth Just so Lyra and both glossâ—s expound it Ad mortalem i. usque ad morâ—em vitae quod in hac vitâ— non corrigitur est finalâ—s impaenitentia si quis perseveret in eo usque ad finem vitae inclusivè i. unto death signifies to the end of our life natural that sin which is not amended in this life it is finall impenitencie when a man persevereth in sin unto the end of his life inclusively not repenting at the time of his departure but dieth impenitent By all which it appeareth that in the judgement of these Expositors the sin unto death is some of those grand sins in which a man liveth and dieth impenitently and that it is not called the sin unto death in respect of the sin it self but for the sinneâ—s continuance therein unto his death for the same sin which in one man is a sin unto death and shall never be forgiven in another man proves a sin not unto death but is repented of and so is pardoned that this is the judgment of St. Austin I have divers times shewed before and especially in that place alleaged by me before pag. 201. cap. 14. whâ—reafter after a long discourse concerning the sin called the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit he concludeth That no sin against Vide supra â— 14. the Holy Ghost is unpardonable but only in case a man doth obstinately persevere in it without any hope or desire of pardon or care of
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
The everlasting Covenant and Rev. 14. 6. The Eternal Gospel and must needs be meant in those places of Scripture where mention is made of Eph. 1. 4. Electing us in Christ before the foundation of the World and of 2 Tim. 1. 9. Calling us according to his own purpose and grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the World began and of 1 Pet. 1. 20. Christ ordained for our Redemption before the foundation of the World Of which there is a full discourse in my Third Book and eighth Chapter This Covenant doth necessarily imply a plurality of persons in the Godhead One to require and injoyn another to restipulate and which is requisite in all Covenants a third Person distinct from the Contractors as a stander-by and Witnesse thereof So in this Covenant First God the Father requireth obedience upon pain of death Secondly God the Son undertaketh for man's performance or penalty or both Thirdly God the holy-Holy-Ghost is witnesse between the Father and the Son for oftentimes in Scripture we read of the Spirit bearing witnesse For though the Father the Son and the Spirit are all said to bear witnesse for our assurance as Joh. 8. 18. I am one that bear witnesse of my self and my Father that sent me and 1 Joh. 5. 7. There are three that bear witnesse in heaven and Rom. 8. 16. The Spirit beareth witnesse with our Spirit But before the Creation who could be a witnesse between the Father and the Son save onely the Eternal Spirit of the Father and the Son Nor can it be imagined that this Covenant and restipulation could be enacted by One single Person for the Law-giver must be considered as a Soveraign onely and the persons upon whom the Law is imposed are as subjects so it will be dissonant from right reason to fasten the Legislation and subjection upon the self-same person Now supposing the Law made and the penalty determined and set down it cannot be denyed that the Supream Law-giver hath naturally and absolutely a power of relaxation and dispensation so that he may remit the punishment for breach of his own Law and of meer grace without any satisfaction forgive the offender but if the said Law-giver do decree and by his Word bind himself to punish the offender as he did when he said Gen. 2. 17. In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye hereby he doth confine and restrain himself from using the Imperial prerogative of free pardon which otherwise he might have granted and hence it is that a Satisfaction must needs be exacted necessitate hypothetica as Divines say upon supposal of the said decree and upon this reason Jesus Christ our Surety becomes liable to his dreadfull Passion and death Touching the Passion of Christ in Satisfaction of Gods Justice for the sins of men the Socinian Writers do utterly deny it as being unjust to punish one for another and especially an innocent for a malefactor and they call this doctrine of Christ's satisfaction as Vossius reporteth Ger. Joh. Vossii Defens Grotii c. 13. Dogma nugatorium frigidum falsum injustum et horribilitèr blasphemum Their reasons are very considerable for they say that God hath by his Prophets and Apostles declared the contrary as Deut. 24. 1◠Every man shall be put to death for his own sin Jer. 31. 30. Every one shall dye for his own sin he that eateth sower grapes his teeth shall be set on edge Eze. 18. 4. The soul that sinneth it shall dye Gal. 6. 5. Every man shall bear his own burthen 1 Pet. 1. 17. God judgeth according to every mans work The Answer hereunto usually given is That because God doth actually punish one for another it must needs be just because God doth it but this answer doth not satisfie the Adversary neither doth it I confesse satisfie me for God doth not so Therefore for the better satisfaction of my self in this weighty question and perhaps of others also I offer to the consideration of the Learned Reader these two Propositions following First The Passion of Christ neither is nor ought to be accounted the punishment of one for another but the same that offended the same is punished Secondly The sins of the elect Members of Christ are not to be accounted onely the sins of the Elect but are justly charged on the score of Jesus Christ being their Surety and Redeemer These two Propositions may perhaps seem at first Paradoxical but I trust I shall prove them to be truly Catholick and Orthodox For the first That Christ's Sufferings are 1. Proposition not the punishment of one for another I have learned from St. Bernard Bernard Epist 190. Omnium peccata unus portavit nec alter jam inveniatur qui forefecit alter qui satisfecit quia caput corpus unus est Christus satisfecit caput pro membris i. One bare the sins of all so that we cannot say One forfeited and another satisfied because the head and body are but one Christ the head satisfied for the members So the Husband and Wife are but one person in Law an action of debt is not brought against the wife but the husband so the principal debtor and the Surety are in Law but one person and either of them are liable to payment or penalty This first Proposition is grounded on the doctrine of Christ's Vnion and conjunction with his members which Vnion is of such weighty concernment that without it it is impossible to salve or unfold the mysterious riddles of Gods operations and words in the businesse of man's Salvation and therefore the holy Scriptures and ancient Doctors have with very great abundance of testimonies asserted this necessary truth See first what the Scriptures say Rom. 12. 5. We being many are one body in Christ Eph. 5. 30. We are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones Gal. 3. 28. Ye are all one in Christ Jesus 1 Cor. 6. 17. He that is joyned to the Lord is one spirit 1 Cor. 12. 2. By one Spirit ye are all baptized into one body Eph. 4. 4. There is one body and one Spirit This is because the same Spirit that is in Christ is also in his members and because there is but one Spirit uniting the head and members therefore the head and members are but one body having the same Spirit residing in both for so it is said Eph. 3. 17. Christ dwelleth in your hearts and 2 Cor. 13. 5. Jesus Christ is in you 1 Cor. 6. 19. Your body is the Temple of the Holy Ghost Joh. 15. 1. I am the vine ye are the branches This Union of the members with Christ the Head is called by the Apostle a recapitulation Eph. 1. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as Bishop Andrews observeth Andr. de Nativ Serm. 16. A gathering of all to the head for as God is one with Christ as Christ is God so we are one with Christ as Christ is man who is therefore called
Emmanuel as being one with us Let us next see what the Ancient Doctors conceived of this Union to avoid prolixity I will instance onely in St. Austin who saith Aug. in Psal 17. Christus Ecclesia est totum Christi caput corpus And upon those words My God my God why hast thou forsaken me and I cry in the day time and thou hearest not and Let this Cup passe from me and Not my will but thy will be done he saith In Psal 21. Christus dicit de te de me de illo corpus suum gerebat scilicet Ecclesiam membrorum vox erat non timebat mori sed pro his dixit qui mortem timent And again he saith in Ps 26. Omnes in illo Christi Christus sumus totus Christus caput corpus And upon those words Saul Saul why persecutest thou me he saith in Ps 30. Sic vâ—cem pedis suscipit lingua clamat calcas me in membris Christi Christus est Christus est multa membra unum corpus And in Ps 100. Christum induti Christus sumus cum capite nostro cum Christo capite unus homo sumus And in Ps 103. Omnes nos in Christo credentes unus homo sumue And in Ps 127. Multi Christiani unus Christus unus homo Christus caput corpus And in Ps 119. Omnes Sancti sunt unus homo in Christo The summe of all is That Christ and his Members are united so that they are one body and as one person for as the head and inferiour parts in one man are but one body so Christ and his members are but one Christ which the same Father calleth in Ps 36. Ser. 2. Ps 37. Christum plenum And Corpus Christi diffusnm Neither is the Church of England silent in this great mystery of our union with Christ for to shew that the grand reason and the intent and purpose for which Christ ordained the holy Supper was especially to set forth this Union of himself and members to be such as our food is to and with our bodies bread and wine unite themselves to us they grow into one body with us So she saith to faithful Communicants The Exhortat at the Commun That we dwell in Christ and Christ in us We be one with Christ and Christ with us And this also was the reason of instituting Baptisme as St. Paul expresseth it to be baptized Rom. 6. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into Christ and 1 Cor. 12. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into one body Baptisme is the mysterious sign of our entrance into Christ But the Eucharist is the mystery of Christs entring into us for so St. John maketh the like distinction 1 Joh. 4. 13. Hereby we know that we dwell in him and he in us and after him St. Austin Aug. in Joh. Tract 48. Si benè cogitemus Deus in nobis est Si benè vivamus nos in Deo sumus and indeed this union is principally meant in the Article of the Communion of Saints which in our Creed we professe to believe This Union in Scripture is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. Communion The great Sacrament thereof is therefore called by St. Paul 1 Cor. 10. 16. The Communion of the body and blood of Christ and because our union with Christ doth unite us with the whole Trinity the Apostle tells us 1 Joh. 1. 3. 1 Cor. 1. 9. Our fellowship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ and this is also called 2 Cor. 13. 13. Philip. 2. 1. The fellowship of the Holy Ghost the fellowship of the Spirit But there is a great difference between our common or general union with the whole Trinity and our speciall and particular union with Christ alone for with all the three Persons we are united only by the Spirit because to us is given the Holy Ghost which is the Spirit of the Father and the Son But with the Son we are joyned and united in a threefold bond 1. Spiritu 2. Carne 3. Vadimonio Not onely by his Spirit in us but also in Nature for he assumed flesh with us from the self-same lump of the first man and moreover he is joyned to us in the strong bond of Vadimonie or Suretiship in that everlasting Covenant of Grace before mentioned Concerning the manner of our union with Christ one scruple is to be removed for if we say that we are really and substantially one body with him this doctrine may seem to affirm a personal or hypostatical union of us men with God such as is the union of the Godhead and manhood in Christ so we should make our body the body of God as Christs natural body is and so we make our selves God as Christ is God but this must be confessed to be intolerable blasphemy Our answer is That though Christ and his Church are indeed one body yet they are not one body natural and consubstantial but a body mystically Political as a Corporation a Society a Fraternity not Corpus continuum but Collectivum or aggregativum thus thousands of Souldiers are One Army many graines of corn are but One heap Unae quinque Minae Plaut in Pseud many pieces of money are One summe many letters and lines in one Epistle we call Vnas literas Tully calls one suit of apparel consisting of many parcels Cic. Orat. pro L. Flacco Vna vestimenta and we read Plaut in Trinum Vnos sex dies in Plautus Just so St. Austin expresseth this mystery of Christs body upon those words Psal 11. 1. Salvum me fac Domine Aug. de Unitate Eccles Cap. 13. To. 7. Sic est unus homo qui ait salvum me fac ut ex multis constet for though Christ and his members are many Ones and many Severals which are not united by any internal or natural form yet because they all have one and the same Spirit of Christ in them they are united and made one body or mystical corporation by that one Spirit of Christ of which it is said 1 Cor. 12. 13. By one Spirit ye are all baptized into one body and of these many severals it is said Ro. 12. 5. We being many are one body in Christ So a body Politick consisting of a multitude of individuals is made one Corporation by the Charter of the Prince and their own agreement but if upon dissension they be tumultuously gathered we rather call them a tumult then a Corporation Aug. De verb. Domini Ser. 26. Da unum populus est tolle unum turba est Touching the last clause of this first Proposition That the same that offended the same is punished whereby our sins seem to be charged upon Christ as if Christ himself had committed sin in whom we are assured no sin was either original or actual as is fully declared in my third Book Chap. 11. Sect. 2. Yet that this is true I am to shew in the explication of