THE Christian Belief Wherein is Asserted and Proved That as there is Nothing in the GOSPEL contrary to REASON yet there are some DOCTRINES in it Above REASON and these being necessarily enjoyn'd us to Believe are properly call'd MYSTERIES IN Answer to a BOOK INTITULED Christianity not Mysterious But we speak the Wisdom of God in a Mystery even the hidden Mystery of God LONDON Printed by W. Onley for Alex. Rosvile at the Dial against St. Dunstan 's Church in Fleet-street MDCXCVI THE CONTENTS BEING ARTICLES Most of 'em advanced In Opposition to the Positions of our Adversary THe Measures and Extent of Human Knowledge in Objects of Sence Page 2. Transubstantiation why to be rejected p. 6. The Knowledge of Spiritual Objects ib. Of Finite and Infinite Objects p. 11. Of Matters of Revelation p. 14. Three Inferences p. 15. A Vindication of the Maxim in Adoring when we cannot Comprehend p. 18. The Vse of Reason in Religion p. 22 23. 41 42. Matters of Revelation not so easily nor clearly comprehended as the Phaenomena of Nature p. 23. 25. His Notion of Things contrary to Reason rejected and disproved p. 33. Two Limitations to be observed before we can pronounce any thing contrary to Reason p. 33 34. Both confirmed and illustrated by the Article of our Saviour's Divinity p. 40. The Difference between a seeming Contradiction and real one asserted p. 46 Contradictions not to be pronounced in Matters of Revelation because they do not comport with common Ideas in Objects of Sence p. 47 48. Revelation a Motive of Assent as well as mean of Information p. 49. Matters of Revelation how far intelligible and possible p. 51. The Difference between Divine and Human Revelation on that account p. 52. The true Notion of a Mystery as applied to Things Incomprehensible p. 56. 61. His Notion of a Mysteryexploded p. 58. Mystery stated with respect to Inadequate Ideas p. 59. 60 62. And proved against him on his own Principles p. 62. The Notion of comprehending Things stated p. 67. The true State of the Controversie with respect to Scripture p. 73 74. Authorities of Scripture where Mystery is applyed to Incomprehensible Truths 1 Cor. 2. 7. p. 81. 1 Tim. 3. 10. p. 84. Doctrines or Divine Truths contained in Scripture that are represented as Mysterious and proved from Scipture to be so p. 89. The first Instance from 1 Cor. 1. 23. 24. second Instance 1 Cor. 13. v. 9. p. 94. And 2 Cor. 12. 4. p. 96. And Col. 2. 23. p. 97. All which are expounded at large and each Exposition ratified by the Iudgment of the Fathers The Opinions of the Fathers for the three first Ages produced against him even of those he has cited p. 105 106. How far the Knowledge of the Object is required in Faith p. 118 119. That Faith is opposed to Knowledge or Science and sometimes in Scripture implys an Assent to revealed Truths as they exceed the Sphere of Human Perception p. 121 122. This proved from Scripture and the Authority of the Fathers p. 123 124. The Belief of the Creation instanced p. 120. Mysteries proved from the Nature of Faith p. 134. Miracles not to be admitted contrary to the Testimony of the Sences and why ib. Miracles an Argument a majore That there are Mysteries in the Christian Religion p. 136 137. His Historical Account of Mysteries exploded p. 138. The Methods of Initiation in the Christian Faith and the Discipline Rites and Sanctions of the Primitive Church cleared from the Imputation of Paganism or Imposture p. 140. These neither the Cause nor Product of Mystery p. 143. The Lawfulness of Ceremonies especially such as the Establish'd Church of England enjoyns p. 145. The Authority of 'em asserted p. 146. Not opposite to Christianity p. 147. The pernicious Design of his Treatise detected p. 149 150. The Conclusion in a Vindication of the present Methods of Answering by Instances p. 151. Editions of the Fathers Clemens Alexandrinus Ed. Par. 1629. Justin Martyr Par. 1615. Irenaeus Ed. Erasmi Basil. 1560. Tertullianus Ed. Par. 1675. Origen contra Cels. Edit Cant. 1677. Dionys. vulgo Areopag Antw. 1634. Johan Chrysost. Par. 1621. Isiodor Pelysiot Par. 1638. Theophilact Lond. 1636. Origen Comment Rothomag 1668. Athanasius ex Officina Commeliana 1601. CERTAIN Christian Doctrines Properly call'd Mysteries And to be Esteem'd Above REASON c. BEFORE I make any Formal Returns to the Positions advanc'd by this Zealous Advocate for REASON I shall endeavour to fix or state the several Measures and Principles of Human Knowledge I mean with respect to the Objects of it as it includes the Knowledge of Objects of Sence of Corporeal and Spiritual Substances of Finite and Infinite and of Revealed Truths And first I can freely grant what has cost our Adversary some Pages to prove viz. That nothing in Nature can come to our Knowledge but by some of these four Means viz. the Experience of the Senses the Experience of the Mind Humane and Divine Revelation Sect. 1. Cap. 3. But yet I think it very absurd to advance one Rule or Standard for every Part or Branch of Humane Knowledge and thereupon form Arguments and charge Contradictions and Absurdities without making the least allowance or distinction with respect to the nature of the Object or the methods of knowing it Here is the Source of all our Adversary's Mistakes and Miscarriages whereby as will anon more fully appear he has cast a Cloud upon Reason rather than improv'd its Native Lustre and Glory And First as for the Knowledge of Objects of Sense it 's certain the Mind of Man the proper Seat as well as Principle of Humane Knowledge is here entertain'd by the Objects of the Material World for Nothing but Matter in the ordinary course of Natural Knowledge make an Impression upon the outward Senses so as to transmit and fix an Idea in the Mind suitable to the nature of the Object And certainly here is the great original Stock of Humane Knowledge for the Senses are not only the standing Vehicles to all those Ideas that are lodg'd in the Mind since even Faith and Revelation come by Hearing but these very Ideas if positive and formed on Things and Substances are little else but the Resemblances of material Sensations or the Ideas of some Object of Sense However exalted and refined may be the Ideas of Angels and glorified Spirits that have things presented to the view of the Mind by an immediate Intuition it 's manifest we that are cloath'd with Senses and Matter and those of a very coarse allay must have all our Ideas tinged with material Adumbrations These are that Glass upon the Mind through which we see darkly and that wonderfully incrassates and disguises the Images of Things It 's true in Objects of Sense our Ideas must be comparatively clear and exact because we are seated in the very heart or center of the material World where its Objects perpetually crowd in upon our Senses and are continually presented to
evident and infallible The Consequence in plain terms is no other than this Because the Evidence of the Ideas of one particular Object is infallible therefore the Evidence of the Ideas of every Object is so And certainly this is a Position that must pronounce all our Ideas equally clear and perfect and the Means of Information infallible and consequently there can be no Objects falsly represented to the Mind nor no Ideas false or imperfect This is Mystery with a witness or rather Positions that in his own Language are The Primary and Vniterical Origin of all his Errors Ib. But I think he sufficiently confutes himself in the following Paragraphs when he pronounces some things dubious and obscure and allows false Ideas may be contracted by Precipitancy or Inattention by Affection and Prepossession N. 18. And now for the Second where he introduces us with a Description of what is contrary to Reason viz. What is evidently repugnant to clear and distinct Ideas or to our common Notions is contrary to Reason Now truly this I think is a very lame imperfect or at least fallacious Description unless it be ballanced with some Limitations and Restrictions As first It can only hold in Objects of the same Species or Nature Thus we can only argue from Objects of Sence against Objects of Sence from Finite against finite and from Matters of Revelation against pretended Matters of Revelation For it s the greatest Absurdity in Nature to conclude any thing against any revealed Truth or Doctrine whose Object is purely Spiritual and absolutely Infinite because it doth not accord with our Ideas in Objects of Sence I 'm sure the Holy Ghost instructs us better in obliging us to compare Spiritual Things with Spiritual A sufficient Inhibition truly against discarding reveal'd Truths by any other Ideas then what are formed from antecedent Notices of Revelation Thus for our Saviour's Divinity before we yield an Assent to it it 's requisite the Characters and Properties of the Godhead which are in the Books of Revelation ascrib'd to the Father with respect to the Godhead shou'd be ascrib'd to the Son But then when this is done it 's absurd to reject this great Truth as contrary to Reason upon the force of an unreasonable Consequence formed by comparing the incomprehensible Godhead with Objects of Sence Thus the Son cannot be God because it must destroy the Unity of the Godhead for the Unity of the Godhead must be destroy'd Why Because such Unity and Plurality can never be admitted in Objects of Sence and consequently not in the sublimest Matters of Revelation But what is this but to prostitute the Glory and Majesty of the Invisible and Incomprehensible Godhead by the vilest Representations What is it but a making him like Gold Wood or Stone or Things graven by Man's Art Certain I am such Maxims as these are the highest Contradictions to Reason for if they might take place it must shake the Foundation of all Revelation even those lively Characters which the Word of God hath given of the Godhead If they must be scann'd or measured by common Notions or Ideas that result from Objects of Sence Secondly Before we pronounce any thing contrary to Reason we must be sure that we have a clear and perfect Comprehension of the Thing for tho' our Ideas that are seemingly repugnant to it be never so clear how shall we judge of the Repugnancy as long as we cannot pretend to a perfect Idea on both sides This I'm sure is a very reasonable Injunction between Objects of Sence and Matters of Revelation so that if God hath delivered any revealed Truth and by comparing it with the Ideas and Characters of other reveal'd Truths we must conclude he intended such a particular thing and at the same time discern the Incomprehensibleness of it insomuch that we cannot form an adequate Idea it 's absurd to reject it because this imperfect Idea will not comport with certain clear Ideas in Objects of Sence Here if any Difficulties Absurdities or Contradictions arise Reason will direct us to place 'em upon the Weakness of our Vnderstandings or our imperfect way of comprehending such unfathomable Objects and with St. Paul engage us to cry out Who is sufficient for these things And now if my Adversary will add these Limitations to his Definition as I 'm perswaded he 'll be forced to do I do not question but I can wipe off all the Absurdities produced in the following Chapter at least by shewing their Impertinence to the Case before us And on this account I pass by 'em as well as because there 's nothing in 'em that affects any thing already delivered but either confirms or may be fairly solved by it I therefore proceed to his Argument Sect. 2. Cap. 1. N. 4. The first thing I shall insist upon is That if any Doctrine of the New Testament be contrary to Reason we have no manner of Idea of it To say for instance that a Ball is White and Black at once Here he sufficiently discovers himself he tells us before That whatever is repugnant to common Notions is contrary to Reason and what his common Notions are the Instance before us sufficiently informs that is in plain English whatever does not comport with the most trite Ideas of Objects of Sence is contrary to Reason and therefore the most sublime revealed Truths whose Objects are Spirits and Infinite Spirits and consequently the Ideas we can pretend to must be highly imperfect because we cannot adjust them with the most common Ideas of Sence are contrary to Reason But the Absurdity of this Assertion I hope I have sufficiently exploded But to deliver my own Sentiments of matters of this nature once for all I do believe there 's an eternal and universal Harmony in Reason as well as things both created and uncreated The Reason of Mankind is certainly an immediate Transcript of Infinite Reason and all the Councels Decrees and Declarations of Heaven are the Dictates of Infinite Reason and the Reason of Mankind must be establish'd upon the unalterable Rules or Measures of Infinite Reason and therefore there can be no Ideas of Infinite Truths or Objects provided they are compleat and perfect such as GOD can conceive of Himself which really contradict the Rules and Measures of Humane Reason if she were enabl'd to comprehend 'em as clearly as her Maker But yet I think I have made it appear that after all the Researches of Reason there are reveal'd Objects of which we can form but very imperfect Ideas both with respect to their Nature Existence and Modus and yet we may form such an Idea as instructs us what GOD intends we should believe From hence we may conclude That as their nature is peculiarly distinguisht from all other Beings so is the Modus of their Existence So that it 's highly absurd to deny our Assent to the Truth of it because we can form no Idea that will comport with those we have form'd
our view and observation But yet in Objects of Sense which we daily see and converse with we can by no means pretend an adequate Knowledge for we cannot comprehend or penetrate into their proper Essences or radical Substances no we can go no further than Properties Powers or Faculties that discover themselves in their Effects strike the Senses and leave an Impression whence a distinct Idea is form'd Again We cannot pretend to discover the true Modes of these Properties Powers or Faculties so as to discern wherein the precise Nature of 'em consists for at least we can only resemble it by some Ideas that are form'd by the noblest of Senses that of Seeing thus of Smells and Tasts and the like So that we see the highest Philosophical Exercitations even in matters of Sense are at last wrap'd up in that we can justly call a MYSTERY It s true Objects of Sense tho' form'd from Effects and Properties create a very certain and indisputable Knowledge because confirm'd by daily and continued Observation and because the proper Objects of that part which as before concluded is not only the Vehicle but first Elaboratory of all Ideas I mean the outward Senses And therefore in Objects of Sense we must receive and embrace a Thing as it presents itself to the view of our Senses since we are assur'd that GOD has appointed no other way of communicating matters of this nature to Mankind And to receive an Object of Sense contrary to the Testimony of all our Senses tho' upon the pretended Authority of Revelation must overturn all the Measures and Principles of Humane Knowledge obliterate the Notices and Distinctions of Truth and Error raze the prime Faculties and Motrements of Reason and reduce Man the Glory of the Creation and GOD's Image and Representative infinitely below the level of Brutes that perish For this reason we may reject the Doctrine of Transubstantiation notwithstanding the highest Pretences to Miracle or Mystery since it implies a Contradiction of the Testimony of all our Senses in matters of Sense But Secondly let us consider Humane Knowledge as engag'd about the Objects of the Spiritual World or Spiritual or Immaterial Beings for this must very much alter the Scene of Knowledges and fix it upon new Measures and Principles And 1st It 's indisputably evident that our Knowledge of Spirits is of a mix'd nature since it takes its rise partly from the Powers of Natural Reason and partly from Revelation The Knowledge of God and our own Souls may in some measure be traced from the Powers of Natural Reason The Frame of our own Beings as well as that of the Universe will instruct us That there must be an Eternal All-wise and All-powerful Mover agreeable to the Sacred Language The invisible things of Him from the Creation of the World are clearly seen being understood by the things that are made even His Eternal Power and Godhead Rom. i. 20. but as for the Existence of other Beings we call Spirits or their Orders and Societies we must wholly receive it from Revelation Again As for the Nature and Ideas of a Spirit this must certainly rest on the Instructions of Reason and Revelation and after the best that can be given God knows our Attainments are very lame and imperfect the excellency of our own Faculties and Operations tell us That we are acted by a Principle within that must be highly distinct from Matter or least that we see and handle much more from that Great GOD whose Workmanship is this very Reason that thus dictates This very Argument sufficiently instructs us We ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto Gold or Silver or Stone graven by Art and Man's Device Acts xvii 29. But now tho' from good Arguments we may conclude That a Spirit is a Being somewhat distinct from Matter yet our most exalted Idea will be but a meer Negative or if Positive a Resemblance of a refined Aerial kind of Matter so that our Ideas of a Spirit is much more abstruse imperfect and conjectural than that of a Body notwithstanding the utmost assistances of Revelation And here I 'm oblig'd to make some Returns to what this Infallible Reasoner with the Authority of a Great Man on his side as he calls him has deliver'd on the Subject it amounts to this We have as clear an Idea of Spirits as Bodies since both are only to be known by their Properties and the Properties of a Spirit are as clear as those of a Body See Sect. 3. Cap. 2. N. 16 17 19. But with Submission to the Infallible Chair though some Properties which belong to those Beings we call Spirits are clearly known and agreed upon yet they are not so many nor yet so distinguishing as those of Bodies for besides the Properties of particular Bodies that distinguish each other there are Properties certainly known that belong to a Body as a Body and distinguish it from Spirit and every Being that can be imagined such are extension of Parts and a Faculty of possessing a Place in proportion to ' em These are for the most part Objects of Sense and Self-evident but we cannot decipher or determine any peculiar Properties that belong to a Spirit as a Spirit and distinguish it from Body or Matter and every thing else We may indeed conceive Spirits as Finite Beings by the resemblance of Bodies and consequently make 'em exist in a place and possess sometimes one place and sometimes another but we can form no Idea how they exist in places as we do of Bodies As for Thinking Reasoning and Willing these seem to be too remote to be the distinguishing Properties of a Spiritual Substance as such being Faculties that seem to slow after its Radical or Original Properties are given I am sure they cannot be so in the Opinion of my Author 's Great Man since in one place he tells us It 's impossible without Revelation to discover whether Omnipotency has not given to some Systems of matter fitly dispos'd a Power to perceive or think And again I see no Contradiction in it That the first Eternal Thinking Being or Omnipotent Spirit should if he pleas'd give to certain Systems of created sensless Matter put together as he thinks fit some degrees of Sense Perception and Thought Lock 's Human Vnderstanding Lib. 4. Cap. 3. N. 6. And therefore I think it appears there 's a vast Difference between the Knowledge of Spirits and Bodies insomuch that we may justly pronounce That no positive Ideas can be formed of Spirits as Spiritual Substances but what carry the resemblances of Matter in 'em other Ideas must be form'd by comparing 'em with Matter and pronouncing what they are not rather than what they are But Thirdly let us examin the Measures and Extent of Humane Knowledge with respect to the Object as it is Finite or Infinite As for the Knowledge of Finite Objects an Estimate may be taken from what has been deliver'd on the two preceeding
they saw 'em thro a Veil or in St. Paul's Language with respect to further Discoveries thro a Glass darkly And what is this but that they knew them in part or by inadequate Ideas I 'm sure our Knowledge is as much cramp'd in several of those Instances produc'd by our Author from the Intricacy and Immensity of the Things ' emselves as those Gospel-truths shut up from the Iews by the Mosaick Veil of Types and Figures And consequently why is not the one as much a Mystery to us as the other to the Iews and for this very reason because we know them inadequately But to go a little further with him I remember in the State of his Question as well as in other places he gives us to understand That all Reveal'd Matters may be judg'd of even by common Notions both as to their Manner and Existence as easily as the ordinary Phoenomena of Nature and therefore concludes That there 's nothing in the Gospel contrary to Reason or above it and That no Christian Doctrine can be properly call'd a MYSTERY This is the State of the Question and what he asserts must be a Criterion in judging what is mysterious or above Reason So that we may hence conclude and that upon his own Principles too That that Thing whose Manner or Existence cannot be conceiv'd even with as much ease and clearness as the ordinary Phoenomena of Nature is a Mystery and above Reason Certainly here is a fair Concession and such as will make things mysterious because we can but form inadequate Ideas for as this Author confesses we can form Ideas of the Beings of Things and know as much as is useful from their Properties and Effects whilst we are ignorant of the manner of their Existence or Production See N. 8 11. the one of Plants and the other of Rain Here he manifestly fixes our inadequate Ideas upon the Modus of Things with respect to their Operations and Existence that is our Ideas are inadequate because we cannot decipher wherein their Modus consists tho' we know their principal Properties by their Effects and Uses And now we may call in his own Principles to conclude against him and affirm That inadequate Ideas must necessarily imply a Mystery for inadequate Ideas imply our Ignorance as to the Modus of Things and that thing whose Modus cannot be comprehended according to his own Principles is mysterious and above Reason Here I think he pretends to Out-do the most improv'd Arts of Priestcraft whilst he declares for nothing but Reason and banishes Mystery out of the World and yet imposes things that surpass the highest Mystery since he labours to make the World embrace his Contradictions for the undoubted Decrees of Reason This is in his own language trifling with a witness or pitiful shifting or fooling or what not and such as discovers a mighty Scarcity of good Arguments N. 13. But he hath not done with us yet and therefore concludes with an obliging Proposal If they will still be fooling and call these things Mysteries I 'm willing to admit as many as they please in Religion if they will allow me likewise to make mine as intelligible to others as these are to me Ib. I hope I have made good the first part That there are true and proper Mysteries even in the Schools of Nature And if so it 's manifest notwithstanding his vain Triumphs we have an Argument à majori That there are Mysteries in Revelation I say it 's a majori to every one but him that has the Face to assert That an infinite incomprehensible Spirit is an Object equally intelligible with Objects of Sence or with Wood or Stone As for the last part of his Proposals I believe every one will consent That he shall make all those reveal'd Truths we call Mysteries as intelligible as he 's able provided he 'll promise not to reject 'em because he fails in his Undertaking or in a word because he cannot make them compare with common Ideas or Notions And now I hope I have said enough to invalidate all the Arguments of this Chapter But lest he should think me rude or that I neglect him too much I shall make some short Returns to a few Passages that are yet behind And 1st He instructs us what it is to comprehend a Thing viz. When it s chief Properties and their several Vses are known to us for to comprehend in all correct Authors is nothing else but to know and as of what is not knowable we can have no Idea so is it nothing to us I shall for once admit that in the common Notion of Humane Perception or Comprehension we think we know or comprehend a Thing sufficiently when its chief Properties and their several Uses are known to us but may we not at the same time discern that there are others we cannot conceive and that the Modus or precise Nature of those we know are inconceivable And so we may without Offence or in a strict and proper way of Speech affirm That there 's a great deal mysterious in the thing and above Reason and yet we do not pronounce it above Reason as he suggests ib. because we know no more than concerns us but because there 's something inconceivable tho' to conceive it does not so directly concern us But 2dly as for that which is mysterious even in Matters of Revelation we do not pretend that it is any thing to us I mean as if we were oblig'd to comprehend or define the precise Modus of the thing This is to be a Mystery and no Mystery However since we discern in certain reveal'd Truths something which we cannot comprehend we may believe those reveal'd Truths to be so far mysterious and they so far concern us as to pay the Obedience of Faith to 'em and not reject the Whole because we cannot comprehend Every-thing that belongs to ' em This ought to be an Eternal Rule to our Author in matters of Revelation because it 's founded upon his own Words and Principles We believe the Divinity of our Saviour because we have not only its Uses set forth but we have it represented in the principal Properties of the Godhead even such as are ascrib'd to GOD the Father and consequently in the Sence of this Author we may be said to comprehend or know this Divine Truth Therefore if any thing arises as to the Modus of its Existence or otherwise that is mysterious not knowable or of which we can have no Idea his own Rule directs him that this is nothing to him and consequently is by no means to be an Argument against this Divine Truth I 'm sure if 't is not ridiculous not to supersede our Disquisitions in matters that do not directly concern us another Assertion of his ib. it 's undoubtedly ridiculous to make Disquisitions in such Cases and make them an Argument for rejecting the clearest reveal'd Truths which is the constant Practice of the Modern Reasoners
not only the Sence of the Word but the Things we contend for are recorded in Scripture as any he has produc'd to the contrary So that in truth we are ready to render up ourselves to the Voice of Scripture as well as submit the Merits of the Cause to it without being influenc'd and carried away by such weak Practisings as he has set forth in a Dialogue that would merit some Stripes if perform'd by a School-boy rather than Applause as 't is the Product of a pretending Master of Reason See Sect. 36. And now I have done with his Scripture-authorities but cannot pass by one Remark of his which I find to be the chief Improvement that graces his Second Edition Nor is it undeserving our particular Notice that Mystery is here made the distinguishing Mark of the False and Antichristian Church See Rev. xvii 5. And no doubt but as far as any Church allows of Mysteries so far it is Antichristian and may with a great deal of Iustice tho' little Honour claim Kindred with the Scarlet Whore Here is a very bold Stricture and yet a Man with half an Eye may discern that his Observation is as irrational and ridiculous as his Inference for Mystery in this place I suppose would not have pass'd for a distinguishing Mark had not her Doctrines and Practices merited the other part of the Title viz. The Mother of Harlots and Abomination of the Earth had she not held a golden Cup in her Hand full of Abominations and Filthiness of her Fornication Ver. 4. and been drunken with the Blood of the Saints and with the Blood of the Martyrs of Iesus But as for his Inference had he consulted St. Paul's Second Epistle to the Thessalonians a little better he might have learn'd that there 's a Mystery of Iniquity as well as Godliness but perhaps he was unwilling to be disappointed of a malicious tho' illogical Suggestion he might there have inform'd himself That it was always the Devil's Business to imitate the True Religion by mighty Signs and lying Wonders if it were possible to deceive the very Elect nay that Antichrist sitteth in the Temple of GOD shewing himself that he is GOD and consequently he must pretend to Mystery with a witness So that upon the whole this Gentleman may as well assign the Devil's Miracles for a distinguishing Mark of Antichrist and prove the true Religion to be nearly related to Antichrist the Scarlet Whore and the Devil because she proceeds upon the Authority of Miracles Nay rather we may upon his Argument affirm That Miracles are a distinguishing Mark of the true Religion And since Antichrist and the Devil pretend to Miracles the Religion they pretend to must be true too Whereas we know these to be Divine and Authoritative those Diabolical and Usurped so we pronounce this the Mystery of Iniquity that the Mystery of Godliness The next thing that offers itself is the Suffrage of the Primitive Church It 's true there are a great many things intervene wherein he labours more to give us a Specimen of his Wit that Reason But truly I think they are both of a piece for I can discover nothing that deserves a single Reflection much less a formal Reply I proceed therefore to the Suffrage of the Fathers to whom he makes an Appeal He tells us indeed It is not out of any deference to their Iudgments N. 40. and therefore we must conclude he submits to it because he 's perswaded they peremptorily declare for his Opinion but I hope to prove the contrary For tho' he confesses he has bestow'd a great deal of Pains upon 'em yet this is so far from discouraging us from entering the List that I hope to make it appear that his Pains are either an Effect of his Ignorance in these Authors or of his Dishonesty in suppressing their Opinions And first all that he proves out of the Fathers is That they have asserted other Notions of Mystery than what we contend for whereas he himself assigns four or five different Notions and if Classick Authors were consulted we could produce some more and therefore he might as well reject one of his own Notions because the Fathers have not mention'd it But I find this Author upon every turn shamefully betrays his Reason for he knows not what is incumbent upon him to prove and therefore we need not wonder if he proves not his main Design I 'm sure he 's now to prove a Negative or that which amounts to it if he proves any thing viz. That the Fathers he cites no where apply the word MYSTERY to things beyond Humane Comprehension or that those Notions of the word Mystery which he finds recorded are deliver'd exclusively of all others for if he has neither cited all their Notions or Acceptations of the word nor prov'd that they are exclusive of all others he proves nothing against the acceptation of the word we now contend for and if so the most cursory Reader will presently pronounce That he must give up the Cause in case he fixes it on this Issue I mean the Authority of Fathers But because I will take no advantage of his weakness I will go along with him in his own Instances And 1st What he cites from Clemens Alexand. concludes nothing for I know no Christian that denys the Christian Religion to be an Illumination because it brought hidden things to light and that with respect to the Mosaick Veil But this only proves one of his own Notions that is indeed allow'd by us But to be short with him Whereas he has the Face to tell us That several of those Texts of Scripture alledg'd by him are by this Father expounded on his side and consequently against our Notion I shall appeal to what has been already cited from him to prove the quite contrary Indeed I could add a great deal more to discover his Judgment of the Inconceivableness of certain Objects of Faith or Matters of Revelation and because I 'm engag'd I shall produce a few Instances And first where he stiles Christianity an Illumination he speaks of the Fulness of Christ as a Mystery reveal'd indeed but the Nature of it known to a very few and he proves it from the Incomprehensible Nature of GOD Strom. lib. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet more fully on Moses's words Exod. 33. ver 18. Shew me thy Glory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. p. 365. Strom. lib. That is by the Effects of his Power Again on St. Paul's words 1 Cor. 5. Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us Strom. lib. 5. he observes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here it 's evident he argues from the Incomprehensibleness of the Divine Nature and consequently must fix the Mystery on this Bottom as well as the want of Revelation Indeed we may justly argue à majori from the Sence of this Father if the Nature of the Godhead be in the Opinion of this great Man so highly incomprehensible how much more
must the Fundamental Article of the Christian Religion be so the consists of the Union of the Divine with Human Nature and consequently in a proper sence mysterious See N. 42. Thus much for St. Clement the next Authority is Iustin Martyr which concludes nothing to his purpose For First he only uses the Word in a loose Sence and not exclusive of any other signification and if this may be an Argument against that Sence which this Reasoner declaims against it will be so against others which he has expresly assigned This may serve for a sufficient Return to the next Paragraph where Tertullian stiles all Religious Rites or Acts of Worship Mysteries which among the Heathens were generally kept secret yet tho' this be an allowed Sence of the Word it can be no Argument but that Mystery even in Tertullian's time was apply'd to Things in ' emselves abstruce or incomprehensible Of the same stamp are his Arguments from Origen which prove no more than what all sides own viz. that Mystery in a vulgar or more loose Sence is put for Symbols Types or any abstruse or sacred Matter N. 44. Certainly had this Gentleman consulted any other Pieces of this Learned Father he might have inform'd himself that he uses Mystery even in Divine Matters for Things that are to us incomprehensible Thus in the forecited Passage speaking of the Thing as it now is he expresses himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vt Supra See pag. 56. Again on the Words of our Saviour Mat. xix 24 26. he observes That GOD was able to make a Camel pass thro' an Eye of a Needle and yet no one but God or Christ or he to whom he shall reveal it is able to comprehend it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Afterwards he challenges any Man to Illustrate or Explain such Mysteries being Things only comprehended as well as performed by GOD 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 382. 1 Vol. But now in the close of this Paragraph he thinks he sufficiently explodes our Notion of Mystery when he tells us Origen was far from thinking any Doctrine of our Religion a Mystery in the present Sence of the Word that he expresly affirms them to agree all with common Notions and to commend themselves to the Assent of every well-dispos'd Hearer This truly looks very plausible but I 'm perswaded Origen in making good this Assertion will run counter to the Notions of this Indefatigable Reasoner For First It 's well known who the Holy Father was engaged with a Learned Heathen who had formed an Objection That the Christians were to believe Things tho' in themselves never so absurd or ridiculous and therefore it was his business to take off the Objection by shadowing forth the Reasonableness of every Doctrine He begins with the Doctrines of Natural Religion the Being of a God and our Love towards him but when he comes to the Mystery of our Saviour's Incarnation he makes a stand and repeats Celsus's Objection viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Answer is remarkable for it evinces the Divinity and Incarnation of our blessed Saviour as a standing Doctrine of the Christian Church to the Eternal Confusion of all Socinian Pretences to Antiquity Let our Accusers know that we as it were speaking the Sence of the Christian Church do not only think but are fully perswaded that he is Originally or in the Beginning GOD and the Son of GOD nay he is the Substantial Word Wisdom and Truth and as for his Mortal Body and Human Soul we attribute the greatest Things to it in as much as a most exact and compleat Union with his Divinity it obtains a kind of Divinity so that we may still treat our Blessed Saviour GOD and Man as GOD with the highest Acts of Divine Worship His words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You see the great Design of the Apologist is to represent how such Honour and Dignity is derived upon the Humanity of our Saviour and consequently the Reasonableness of paying Divine Worship to him even as GOD-Man or GOD Incarnate and pursuant to this to justifie those Honours that accrew to the Body of our Saviour he appeals to the Natural Transmutations of Matter whereby Bodies are often highly refin'd and improv'd and then ingeniously concludes Why should not the Infinite Power of GOD therefore be able to change the Mortal Body of Iesus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus we see how out of Ignorance or a worse Principle the Disputer of this World for the Title belongs to him tho' not so deservedly as those on whom St. Paul bestows it has Misrepresented the Sence of this great Man whose main Design was to shew the Reasonableness of paying Divine Worship to the Blessed Jesus and this he sufficiently perform'd by asserting his Divinity but he did not attempt to demonstrate the Modus of the Union of the two Natures by common Notions He has indeed expresly asserted our Saviour's Divinity as well as Humanity in the highest Notion of it and I defie this profound Reasoner to state the Union of both Natures by common Ideas or Notions much less to give us as familiar an Idea of it as we have of Wood or Stone Till he has done this he trifles and we shall still believe that our Saviour's Incarnation is thus far a Mystery Thus we have turn'd those very Fathers he most relies on against him and tho' he has the Confidence to fix a peremptory Challenge upon the Writings of the three first Centuries I could produce as much more had I not a regard to my own Time and that of the Reader 's which ought to be a sufficient Consideration with every Man to prevent him from engaging in Impertinences or dwelling too long where Necessity does not require it I shall therefore only beg Leave to add the Judgment of Irenaeus Si autem omnium quae in Scripturis requirantur absolutiones non possumus invenire credere autem haec talia debemus Deo qui nos fecit rectissimè scientes quia Scripturae quidem perfectae sunt quippe à verbo Dei Spiritu ejus dictae Nos autem secundum quod minores sumus novissimi à verbo Dei Spiritu ejus scientiâ mysteriorum ejus indigemus non mirum est si in spiritualibus coelestibus in his quae habent Revelari hoc patimur nos quandoquidem eorum quae ante pedes sunt quae conteruntur à nobis videntur sunt nobiscum multa fugerunt nostram scientiam Deo haec ipsa committimus Si ergo in rebus creaturae quaedam quidem eorum adjacent Deo quaedam autem in nostram venerunt scientiam quid mali est si eorum quae in Scripturis requiruntur universis Scripturis Spiritualibus existentibus quaedam quidem absolvamus secundum gratiam Dei quaedam autem commendemus Deo non solum in hoc saeculo sed in futuro ut semper quidem Deus doceat homo autem