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
Christ hath put down all carnall and sinfull rule authority and power for where the Apostle saith 1 John 3. 9. Hâ— that is bâ—rn of God sinâ—eth not He meaneth that the seed and fountain of sinning is not in his regenerating and Spirituall part by which he is born of God but he is also born of flesh and by that onely he sinneth CHAP. XI Why the unpardonable sinne is rather fastened on the deniers of the Godhead of the Sonne then on them that deny the Godhead of the other Persons BUt why should the denying of the Godhead of the Son be so especially said to be a blasphemy unpardonable when as the denying of the Godhead of the other Persons is also damnable for first Saint Basil saith expresly more then once Qut Spiritum sanctum Crâ—â—turam vocant incidunt inblasphâ—miam Basil epist 387. n. 17. 43. illam irremissiâ—item He that calleth the Holy Ghost a creature falleth â—nto the unpardonable sinne so that Eunomius the Heretâ—cke who said the Spirit was the Creature of the Son was involved in Basil cont Euno n. 20. this blasphemy as well as Arius who said the Son was but a Creature of the Faâ—herâ— and therefore called him Mâ—ttendarium onely an Emissarie of the Father as Ruffinus reporteth and Saint Cyprian calâ—eth the Devill Ruff. in symb apud Cyp. n. 91. who is under the pressure of eternall unpardonableness both Antichristum Antispiritum an Antichrist and an Antispirit intimating as much danger in the one as in the other For we â—earn in Scripture that without holyness no man shall see God Heb 12 14. Therefore how can that man expect the gift of Holyness who denieth the Author of Holyness which iâ— the Holy Ghost Secondly He that denieth the Godhead of the Father is an Atheist for all sorts of Religions which confess 2. a God do also confess a Fatherhood in that God even the Heathens called their Jupiter a Father but how can an Atheist expect salvation from God who denieth that there is any God For answer hereunto it may be said that although the denying of the Godhead of any Person in the Trinity be destructive to salvation yet this sin is rather fastned on the deniers of Christ then the deniers of the other Persons First because the confession of the Father and the holy Spirit is not salvificall without the Confession of Christ for even Heathens confessed both a Fatherhood and a Divine Spirit of God as appeareth by the confession of Neâ—u hadnezar Dan. 4. 9. but the Confession of Christ is alone salvificall because he is not alone as himselfe saith John 8. 16. I am not alone but I and the Father which sent me for the confession of Christ includeth Basil de 〈◊〉 c. 12. the whole Trinity as Saint Basil affirmeth Christi appâ—llatio est professio totius trinitatis deâ—larans Deum Patrem qui unâ—it Filium qui unctus est Spiâ—itum qui est unctio and Saint mbâ—oâ—e affirmeth the same Amb. de 〈◊〉 c. 3. Christus implicat Paâ—rem unguentem Filium unctum Spiritum unctionem i. The appellation of Christ is the profession of the whole Trinity declaring the Father anointing the Son anointed and the Spirit who is the ointment and therefore albeit the form of Baptisme was precisely set down to be in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost yet because the Name Jesus Christ implyeth all these Saint Peter mentioneth onely this name Acts 2. 38. Be baptized everyone of you in the Name of Iesus Christ for remission of sins so doth Saint Paul also Rom. 6. 3. Galatians 3. 27 Secondly the unpardonable sin is fastned on the deniers of the second Person rather then on the deniers of the other Persons because the work of redemption was immediately wrought by the second Person For it was the Person of the Son onely that became a Surety for us and not onely a bare Witness or Testifier as the Commenter affirmeth the Son onely took upon him our nature and therein fulfilled the Law for us and suffered death in our stead for our transgressions he onely was our Surety and Mediatour and he onely was incarnate and died and rose again and carried our flesh into Heaven with him and there still continueth a Mediatour for us not by any verball pleading or intreating for our salvation but by presenting there in the glorious Sanctuary of Heaven that humane body and soul which had actually and perfectly performed the whole Covenant of God and therefore even in the most strict Justice of God shewing that Heaven is due by the said Covenant to all his mysticall Body for which his naturall Body was sacrificed on the Crosse for the expiation of all their sinnes which was prefigured by the High Priests entering into the Sanctum Sanctorum All these dispensations and actions which conduced to our salvation must be ascribed onely to the Person of the Sonne but cannot be said of the Father or of the Holy Ghost For that was the Heresie of the â—oc l. 2. c. 15. Sabellians who were therefore called Patripassiani for these workes are proper to the Sonne alone Filius natus passus resurrâ—xisse ascendâ—sse dicitur non Aug. de Trin. l. 1. c. 5. n. 60. Pater As Augustine saith i. The Father cannot be said to be born or suffer or to rise again or to ascend but onely the Sone Therefore Kisse the Son lest he be angry and ye perish Psalme 2. 12. For the denying of him is the renouncing of salvation CHAP. XII The Godhead of Jesus Christ shewed by Scripture and by the type of the Tabernacle BEcause the apprehension and believing of this great Mystery of God Incarnate is a wonderfull consolation to the Christian and the denying thereof pertinaciously a certain note of eternall perdition therefore the Scripture hath very evidently and frequently declared this weighty truth both by express words and otherwise for the child to be born of a Virgin must be called Emmanuel Esay 7. 14. that is God with us or God incarnate and the same Prophet Esay 9. 6. giveth that childe such Titles as cannot be attributed to any meer creature as The mighty God the everlasting Father the Prince of Peace This Prophets words do so agree with the Evangelicall and Apostolicall Doctrine as the Word was made flâ—sh and the Word was God John 1. and God manifest in the flesh 1 Tim. 3. 16 and of whom as concerning the flâ—sh Christ came who is over all God blessed for evermore Rom. 9. 5. that Saint Jerome called this Prophet Hier. proaem in Isai n. 33. Esay Non solum Prophetam sed Evangelistam Apostolum Not onely a Prophet but an Evangelist and an Apostle for as the Prophet before the incarnation bringeth in God saying I have sworn by my self to me every knee shall bow Esay 45. 23. So the Apostle applieth that saying to Christ being the same
think no sober Divine will pronounce Ananias Orig. in Eze. ho. 1. absolutely damned Origen saith Deus non punit bis * Idem in Maâ— Tract 8. Ananias Sapphira in hoc seculo recipiebant peccatum suum ut muâ—diores exirents i. God punished but once for once sinning Ananias and Sapphira received the punishment of their sin in this world that they might depart cleaner to the other world The Jewes resisted the Holy Ghost Act. 7. 51. and amongst them was St. Paul Act. 8. 1. yet the holy Martyr S. Stephen prayed for them Simon Magus so basely esteemed of the Holy Ghost that he offered money for it yet St. Peter invited and exhorted him to repentance not despairing of his conversion and the Church Primitive invited those hereticks to her Communion and fellowship whose special heresie was the denying the Godhead of the Holy Ghost as the a Naz. Orat. 37. Eunomians and Macedonians whom the Church did therefore call b Sec. l. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. enemies of the Holy Ghost and those that did come in to the Church she entertained c. 35. and reconciled them and pronounced Peace unto them If every particular offence against the third Person be indeed this unpardonable sin what shall become of many Preachers who howbeit they be learned and well-meaning men yet many times they erre in delivering false glosses and expositions upon Scriptures and Isychius saith Qui aliena docent in Spiritum blâ—sphemant Isych in Levit c. 10. sic peccant qui Prophetarum dogmata non interpretantur ad intentionem Spiritûs i. They blaspheme the Spirit who interpret doctrines of the Prophets otherwise then they intâ—nded St. Austin saith Donatistae Aug. Epist 53. peccant in Spiritum quia â—xufflant baptisma Catholicae Ecclesiae i. The Donatists sin against the Spirit when they renounce the baptisme which they received in the Church-Catholick because that baptisme was administred to them in the Name of the Holy Ghost and yet both Austin and the Church did perswade many of them to return to the Communion of the Church and also entertained them To quench the Spirit 1 Thess 5. 19. and to grieve the Spirit Ephes 4. 30. surely are sins against the Spirit the meaning is c Aug. de gen l. 4. c. 9. Ne contrista eos in quibus est Spiritus i. Do not vexe afflict or grieve those in whom the Spirit of God is and yet how many have been and still are quenched by afflictions and Prisons lest the Spirit of truth in them should detect the foul practices of men nay the holy Martyrs did pray for their very afflicters whereby it is evident that they despaired not of the possibility of their Conversion and Salvation Some expound this unpardonable sin to be when we resist the motions of Gods Spirit after we are enlightned and so sin with knowledge stubbornly and rebelliously because it is said Heb. 6. 4. It is impossible fur those who were once enlightned and have tasted of the heavenly gift c. if they fall away to renue them again to repentance Upon this place misunderstood Novatus and his Cathari grounded their heresie that such as fell into sin after baptisme could not be received into the Church though they repented as we read in Epiphanius Epiph. hae 59. But did not David commit adultery and murther knowingly did not Peter deny Christ not ignorantly but timerously both of them after illumination but neither of them unpardonably Do not the most holy Christians upon earth even the Elect and after regeneration fall into grievous sins and such men as are called just are said to fall seven times Prov. 24. 16. for there is not found in any mortal man any such high degree of grace as to preserve flesh and blood impeccable so that if this exposition were true who shall be saved Christ saith That servant which knew his Lords will and did it not shall be beaten with many stripes which St. Austin thus expounds Non sempiternam Aug. in exp Epist ad Rom. n. 96. sed severiorem disciplinam significat i. It signifies a more severe but not an eternal punishment You see the question concerning this sin growes very difficult and indeed it is as Athanasius calleth it Athan. to 3. p. 687 625. Tenebricosa p ofunda sententia an intricate and profound sentence but yet very advantagious to be râ—ghtly understood that so we may avoid it The Lord give us understanding by whose assistance I will endeavour to unfold these two Questions First What particular sin that is which is called the blasphemy against the holy Spirit and Secondly Why that sin is especially said to be unpardorable CHAP. II. What the sin against the holy Spirit is and â— Question what is meant by blasphemy TO blaspheme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to speak ill of to deprave to defame to speak against the Spirit of God to traduce and asperse it opprobriously as the Pharisees did Matth. 12. for when Christ had cast out a Devil by the power of his Godhead or Divine Spirit the Pharisees said it was done by the spirit of Beelzebub for what greater obloquie or blasphemy can be invented then when God is called Devil The Pharisees knew that this wonderful work was done by some power in Christ which was more then humane and therefore they knew it must proceed either from God or from the Devil and therefore as St Hilarie noteth Quia humanam infirmitatem haec Hilar. in Mat. Can. 12. tanta ejus opera excederent confiteri Dei nollent dicunt ex Beelzebub esse i. Because this work exceeded humane infirmity and the proud Pharisees would not acknowledge it to be from God therefore they said it was frâ—m the devil So in effect they called God Beelzebub and Christ a Conjurer and this was a blasphemy in the highest degree This Pharisaical blasphemy spread far and near both among Jewes and Heathens and amongst these it was a common received errour that Christ was a Magician as Eusebius notes There was in the first age after Euseb de Demonst l. 3. c. 2. Christ * Hier. Epist exeg 62. Ambr. in symb n. 21. Lact. de Instit l. 5. c. 3. one Apollonius of Tyana a notorious Magician that did many strange feats amongst the rest when he was convented before the Emperour Domitian in his Consistory to be punished presently he vanished out of sight this Apollonius is by Hierocles in Eusebius compared with Christ as being equal to him for miracles insomuch that the Emperour †Lamprid. in Alex. c. 7. Alexander Severus in his Lararium or house-Chappel set up the image of this Magician with the images of Abraham and Christ and worshipped them all and some heathens exâ—olled this Magician far above Christ as we read in St. Austin and because in the dayes of Origen Aug. Epist 4. some Egyptian Magicians like Mountebanks in the
or heightned in him to greater power and efficacie and whereas David prayed Psal 51. 11. take not thy holie Spâ—rit from me it will not follow that David feared he should be left destitute altogether of the Spirit of God but that it might remaine with him in some degree at least but he prayed for the Continuance and Manifestation of Gods help and assistance by the Spirit in the same manner as before he had it because as Prosper observeth Cessatio auxilii pro absentia accipitur i God Pros ad Dem. n. 59. is said to depart from man when he withholdeth his help albeit God is essentially alwayes present so when he withdraweth one grace yet he may manifest his presence by some other grace for every man hath not every grace of the Spirit S. Hierom in one of his exegetical Epistles upon these words 1 Cor. 15. 28. That God may be all in all saith Adhuc Deus est nisi pars Hier. Epist 147. n. 30. in singulis ut sapientia in Solomone patientia in Job post erit omnia in omnibus cum Sancti omnes virtutes habuerint i In this life God is but a part in men as wisdome in Solomon patience in Job but in the next life God will be all in all for then his Saints shall be induced with all vertues And wheras it is said Joh. 7. 39. The holie Ghost was not yet given Yet wee are sure that it was given before both to the Prophets and also to the Apostles but the meaning is as S. Austin expounds it Non quia nulla datio antea sed quia non talis quae de Aug. de Trin. lib. 4. c. 17. n. 72 Linguis legitur i Not as if there had bin no gift of the Spirit before but because the Spirit was not before given in that kind and manner as it was at the feast of Pente cost and so doth S. Cyril resolve the same doubt Cyril Hieros Cat. 16. Spiritus idem descendebat in Pentecoste qui anteà sed tum Copiosiùs i It was the same Spirit that descended at the Pentecost which came before but now it came more Copiouslie Thus are God and man united he taking our flesh and we receiving his Spirit upon this consideration S. Cyprian saith Cum Corpus â— terra Spiritum possideamus Cyp. de Orat. Dom. n. 82. e caelo Ipsi câ—lum tâ—rra sumus i Man is the union of heaven and earth because our bodies are from the earth but we possesse a Spirit which came from heaven CHAP. XVI That the Spirit of God is given to men nâ—â— sanctified how those are said to be Gods anointed who were not anointed with Oile that our King is Gods anointed somthing concerning the Kings touching and Curing the diseased BUt why should we doubt to affirme that the Spirit of Jesus our only Lord God is communicated even to men unregenerate and that in such men this Spirit doth manifest it's presence in some lower degree by some common graces which doe not sanctifie them in whom they are seeing that we find in Scripture that both heathen and wicked Kings are called Gods anointed for Esa 45. 1. Thus saith the Lord to his anointed to Cyrus yet this Cyrus both lived and died an heathen So King Saul though an Israelite yet a wicked man is called 2 Sam. 1. 14. The Lords anointed Now we know that Vnction doth not alwayes signifie only an External or Ceremonial anointing with Oile but it signifieth also the inward gift and inhabitation of the Spirit of God for wee find that those men are said to be Gods anointed whom we cannot find to have bin externally anointed with Oile for so Christ is said to be anointed Psal 45. 7. Yet not with external Oile so also Abraham Jsaac and Jacob Psal 105. 15. are called Gods anointed yet we find not that they were anointed with Oile but these holie ones are therfore said to be anointed because the Spirit of God was in them which is the true and reall unction wheras external ointment is but the signe therof in like manner because Cyrus an heathen is called Gods anointed and yet was never anointed with Oile it must needs follow that his unction was internal and that he was therfore called Gods anointed because God had put his Spirit into him Iâ—say his Spirit although not working so high as to Sanctification in Cyrus but yet a Spirit of wisdome and kingly fortitude and of skill and knowledg politicall and militarie To enable him to governe which gifts are the effect of Gods Spirit And this is the exposition which the ancients give concerning those forenamed unctions first for Christ Euseb us saith Non apparet Christum unctum fuisse communi oleo sed divino Eus de Dem. lib. 5. c. 2. Spiritu i It can not appeare that Christ was anointed with common Oâ—le Ceremonialie but he was anointed with the divine Spirit and so saith Athanasius Oleum Ath. Orat. 2. Cont. Arian Opt. lib 4. Atha Orat. Cont. Aria n 8. Christi est Spiritus sanctus i The Oile of Christ was the holie Spirit and just so saith Optatus and what this unction of Christ was and wherin it consisted is shewed by the same Athanasius upon those words God of God unitio verbi cum carne vo catur unctâ—o i The union of the Godhead with the manhood was Christ's unction Now for the anointing of meere men and that without any infusion of Oile Eusebius saith Dei Spiritus Eus de Dem. l. 4. c. 15. est dei Oleum i The Oile of God is the Spirit of God and he tels further in the same place that Abraham Isaac and Jacob are called Gods anointed Propter divinum Spiritum cujus participes erant i By reason of Gods Spirit with which those holie patriarks were indued and to the same purpose S. Basil saith Spiritus Basil hom de Bapt. n. 14. sanctus est unctio in nobis i our unction is the holie Spirit which is in us For so it is said also of our Saviour expresly Act. 10. 38. God anointed Iesus of Nazareth with the holie Ghost The appellation of Christ and of Christian is from this unction and we use to say of infants when they are baptized that they are made Christians which signifieth anointed not because of the old Ceremonie of Crisme or anoâ—â—ting with Oile which with us hath bin long agoe disused but as Dionysius formerlie when it was in use gave the reason unction and Christian signifie deificam Spiritus communionem Dionys Areop eccleâ— her c. 2. i The communication of the divine Spirit because wee beleeve that God with the external Sacrament conferreth the inward grace which beleife the ancients did represent by their anointing the baptized with Oile Now if it may app are that by vertue of such an internal Unction of which I spake in Cyrus some unregenerate men have actually exercised and performed
the world Clemens Alex. and Naz. Observe that the very Clem. Alex. Paed. l 1. Naz. Orat. 40. heathens called a man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i light onlie because he was indued with the light of a reasonable soule much more may those be said to be Inlightned who are indued with the Spirit of Illumination from God Ephe. 5. 8. Ye were darknes but now are light in the Lord and. 1 Joh. 1. 5. God is light for the baptismal regenerating Spirit is the Spirit of God Eusebius noteth in the life of Constantine the Great Post baptismum sibi visus est luce Euseb de vita Con. l. 4. n. 45. plenus quasi numine siderari i Assoone as he was Baptized he seemed to himself to be full of light as if he had bin assisted by some heavenlie power people had such a conceit of Baptismal illumination that Nazianzen reporteth of his reverend Father that as he Naz. Orat. 19. came out of the Baptismal font to them a visible light seemed to shine round about him But I proceed CHAP. V. That the word renuing doth in this place signifie baptisme those that fall after baptisme have yet left to them a second remedy and that is repentance VVE have seen that those that fall into sin after baptism must not expect a release or remedy for their sins by any second or new baptisme the words which follow as some do dangerously understand them at the first veiw seem to exclude such sinners from the second remedy of repentance which is surely an erronious conceit as will appear presently If they fall away it is impossible to Renew them again unto repentance the plain meaning of these words is That those which fall into their old unregenerate and carnal course of living after they have once been renewed by baptism must not expect to be restored to their regenerate and former integrity innocency and cleanesse and freedom from the guilt of their sins by another new baptisme for a second baptisme cannot acquit them of their sins so as their first baptisme did repentance which signifieth amendment of life is not obtained by a second renovation by baptism for that cannot â—enue them so as to make them appear clean and puâ—ged from their sins in the sight of God water once washed in is accounted foul afterwards the Philosopher could say of a fowle Bath Qui hic lavant ubi lavantur St. Ambrose said of Pilates washing in vita Diog. apud Laert. Ambr. non diluit sed in quinavit in psa 61 they that wash in foul water had need to wash again a second baptism is so foul that it addeth a new pollution as will appâ—ar hereafter Indeed God by one baptism wherewith his Regenerating Spirit doth concur doth renew men unto repentance or amendment and newnesse of life but if afterwards we fall away by polluting our selves with new sins let us not so flatter our selves as to imagine that we can be restored and renewed by a second baptismal renovation for no such renewing is to be expected There are two remedies prescribed by God for assoilment from our sins the first is Baptism Act. 22 16 Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins The second remedy is Repentance Act. 3. 19. Repent ye therefore and be converted that your sins may be bloâ—ted out To renew them to repentance If the Apostle meant that it were impossible for those that fall after baptism to repent it may be wondred why he did not say It is impossible to repent and why he should use two words Renâ—w Repentance for repentance it self is a renewing Renewing is a generall word may be distributed into two sorts First there is a renewing Sacramental and baptismal when a man is baptized or illuminated and thereby initiated to a new state and way of living according to new rules of life Secondly there is a renuing Moral when a man once illuminated or baptized having falne into greivous sins yet by grace given changeth his wicked course of sinning to a careful and conscionable new way of living according to direction of the Gospell Hence I collect that the meaning of these words is That he that hath once been renued by baptismall illumination to repentance or amendment of life if such a man fall he cannot the second time be renued by a second baptismal renuing a second baptisme will not acquit him of his sins but yet he is not excluded from a morall renuing by leaving his sinning which is called repentance briefly though he may be renued yet it may not be by a new baptism though he may repent yet his repentance is not to be wrought by a second baptism For the right understanding of this exposition I here lay down to the Readers view these few plain propositions First a man that after baptisme falls into sin though ever so great yet by the Grace of God may repent and be recovered Secondly a man baptized that is falne in his old carnal living may be renued and possibly may become a new man and a new creature for a sinner after baptism may he renued because he may repent Thirdly the reader may take notice that in this place the words Illuminated and Renue are of the same signification So that the meaning is that he that is once by baptism illuminated cannot again by baptism be illuminated and he that is once by baptism Renued cannot again by baptism be renued to repentance Fourthly a man may once be enlightned and baptized and thereby renued to amendment of life and repentance and freedom or acquitment from his sins past and this by the Spirit of God in the laver of regeneration and by the vertue of Christs death But after this one renuing by baptisme he cannot again be renued to resipiscence newnesse of life and acquitment from his sin by a new baptism To renue them Al though a sinner cannot be renued more then once by the Sacramental renovation of baptism yet there is another way left open for renuing and that is penitentiall renovation and acquiring new Spirituall Graces and this way is and ought to be frequently iterated as it is said 2. Cor. 4. 16. The inward man is renued day by day and to this we are exhorted Ephe. 4. 23. Be renued in the spirit of your mind that is by excluding our sins and by acquiring new and higher graces So that when our Apostle saith It is impossible to renue them he cannot possibly mean that renuing is absolutely impossible but onely that renuing by a new or second baptisme is indeed impossible When St. Peter desired John 13. 9. That not onely his feet but his head also might be washed he had this answer He that is washed needeth not save to wash his Aug. de fide ad Pet. Diac. c. 36. n. 74. feet which place is by Saint Austin urged again rebaptization Baptisma semel dandum est non iterandum Baptisme
the Triniâ—ie such we pronounce Baptized but not rebaptized for we may not account such to be baptized who were not dipped in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holie ghost and such were those who were dipped by the Photinians Montanists Manichees and by Maâ—cion Cerdon thus he And in this S. Cyprian may so far be justly excused in requiring that those who had bin so dipped by those hereticks should be againe re dipped by the Church in lawfull baptisme for saith he Haeretici illi non possunt Cyp. de haer Bapt. n. 85. baptizare qui negant dietaâ—em Paâ—ris aut Filii aut Spiritus nam Marcion non poterat qui negabat Trinitatem i Those hereticks can not minister true baptisme who therein denie the Godhead of the Father or the Son or the Holie ghost for therfore Marcions was no baptisme because he denied the Trinitie And therefore such pseudo-baptismes as were Ministred by such hereticks so as is shewed before Cyprian will not call Baptismes Non est Baptismus sed tinctio i It must not be called a baptisme but a dipping And of those whom the Church baptized after they had bin formerlie dipped by those hereticks he saith Nâ—n est râ— Baptizaâ—io Cyp. ibid. ad Quint. n. 86. â—aeâ—eticorum sed haptizatio i We can not say such hereticks are rebaptized but that they are baptized If Cyprian had held himself to this Doctrine and gone no further in his zeal againâ—â— the hereticks and schismaticks of his time he had escaped much blame where with succeeding ages have charged him and not without Cause as will appeare anon Upon Cypâ—ians grounds of Baptizing Aâ—tiâ—rinitarians who had bin so fouly dipped before the Canons of the first Nicene Council as they are recorded by Ruffinus direct that when any heretick of the sect of Paulus Samosatâ—nus would forsake that heresie and joyne with the true Church that such an one should not be entertained before he were new baptized this is in the 21 Canon of Ruffiâ—us But before in the ninth Ruff. n. 16. Canon it is ordered that if any Catharist or Novatian leave that sect to joyne with the Church he should be received and for such there is no mention or direction of a new baptisme because the baptisme of the Novatians was a true baptisme but the Samosaâ—eniâ—n dipping was but a Pseudobaptisme because Samosatenus denied the Godhead of Christ as is before declared Also before the Nicene Council and Cyprians time amongst the Canons of the Apostles recorded by Clemens one is Ordinati vel Paptizati ab haeâ—eticis reordinandi and râ—baptizandi suntâ— i Those that have bin ordained and baptized by hereticks must be re ordained and re baptized this was not intended to countenance a Second Baptisme but because the tinctions or dippings of those who would not confess the Trinitie were not to be esteemed Baptismes And therfore Athanasius also after the Nicene Council had condemned the Arrian heresie for denying the Eternal Godhead of the Son saith plainly Arâ—iani verum Baptismum Athan. cont Arrian serm 3. n. 6. amittunt quiâ— verum filium negant i The Arrians in denying the Son of God doe therby cease to administer true Baptisme for we find that after that Council the Arrians denying the Trinitie would neither use the same forme of Doxologie which the Church Catholick used nor the same forme of invocation of the Trinity in Baptisme but glorified and baptized thus Gloria Patri cum filio in Spiritu and In nomine Patris Basil de Spirit c. 25. n. 27. per filium in Spiritu Because they would not acknowledg the Son and the Spirit to be aequal to the Father CHAP. IX That the disciples of Ephesus Act. 19. who had bin Baptized by Johns disciples before were re-baptized because Johns Baptisme was then out of date and null THe principal president of a Second and a true Baptisme after an imaginaâ—ie and pseudobaptisme is cleerly set foâ—th by that passage of the great Apostle and recorded Act. 19. of the Ephâ—sian disciples who had bin baptized unto Johns Baptisme but because that baptisme was out of date at the time when they were first dipped therfore when they heard S. Paules words they were baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus For although Iohn Baptisi's baptisme was a true Baptisme whilest the time of his Baptismal office lasted in so much that our saviour never that we find caused any to be re baptized who had bin baptized by Iohn yet we know that Iohn's Baptisme was to have a period and not to last alwaies But how long it was to last and to be in force is the cheif question material for the exposition of this passage To this question I will set downe the answer given Optat. lib. 5. by Optatus That Iohns baptisme being to repentance and beleife in him that was to come even Christ to be manifested especiallie to his death and resurrection this baptisme must last till then and further also until Christ had ordained a new forme and law of baptisme to be perpetual in his Church So that until Christ after his resurrection had given a new rule and precept of baptisme the ould baptisme of Iohn was accepted but after Christ had once said Goe and teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son c. I say after this Iohn's baptisme was expired nor could he or his Disciples baptize any longer in that forme of beleeving in him that was to come because now he was come and manifested and gone out of the world Christs new law and precept of baptisme was the bounds and limits of Ioâ—n's baptisme from that time all baptismes must be In the name of the Father and of the Son c Now these Disciples of Ephesus were indeed Baptized with Iohn's Baptisme but they were so baptized when it was to late and when that forme of baptisme was quite expired and out of date for their baptisme was after Christ had setled the new law of baptisme In the name of the Father c Without the observation wherof a thousand dippings or duckings will not make one baptisme so that those Ephesians can not be properly said to have bin baptized because the very essence of that Sacrament was wanting Optatus speaketh Opt. lib. 5. home to this purpose Hiqui apud Ephesum post legâ—m Iohannis Baptismaâ—e baptizaâ—i leguntur in Sacramento erraverunt quia jamintroductum fuerat baptisma Domini exclusum fuerat seâ—vi i Those Ephesians who are said to have bin baptized with Iohn's baptisme greatly erred in that Sacrament because then the Baptisme of the Lord Christ was brought in the baptisme of his servant Iohn was shut out Briefly that baptisme which before Christs new precept was good and usefull after the precept became useless and void So saith the same Father of the same question Post hodiernum non licebat quod
heri licuit i. after Opt. ibid. that day it became unlawfull which the day before was lawfull But how shall it appeare that these Ephâ—sians were not baptized either by S. Iohn himself or else by his Iohannists till after the death of Christ and after he had prescribed this new forme of baptisme I answer thus probably first they confess they were baptized to Iohn's Baptisme they say not by Iohn Secondly Iohn never was at Ephesus for ought can appear Thirdly Iohn had bin dead at least 14 yeares before this time and passage some say 19. yeares It was 12 years after Christs resurrection and ascention before S. Paule took that journie to Ephesus Fourthly before Christs resurrection his Commission given to teach and baptize all nations the Gospel might not be taught and preach't to the Gentiles as Mat. 10. 5. these Ephâ—sians were for the Apostles were forbidden to goe to the Gentiles or even to the Samaritans who dwelt in that land and were partlie of the Iâ—wish religion and the Seaventie went not out of the land as appeareth Luc. 10. 1. No more then Christ did therfore in all likelihood these Ephâ—siâ—ns were neither taught nor baptized till after the new law of baptisme Fiftly had they bin Iewes of Ephesus and had bin timelie baptized with in the Holie Land by Iohns baptisme S. Paul would not have caused them more then others to be rebaptized nor would God so have countenanced rebaptization as to give them the Holie ghost at imposition of hands Now whereas some late Expositors denie that those Ephâ—sian disciples were againe baptized by S. Paules direction and this they doe because they are unwilling to give such a countenance to Anabaptisme the truth is that they were indeed then baptized as that narration doth cleerly shew and yet that act doth not at all warrant any re baptization properlie so called Origen saith Refertur in actis quod baptizati a â—rig in Rom. â—â— 5. n. 50. Johanne rebaptizati sunt in nomine Iesu quia Johannis baptisma â—rat baptisma in lege non in Christo i It is related in the Acts that those were rebaptized who had formerlic bin baptized to Iohns baptisme because Iohn's baptisme then was no better then the legal washing and was not a baptisme in Christ For it could not be accounted an Evangelical baptisme because it was not so performed as Christ had prescribed S. Cyprian cleerly affirmeth Baptizatos a Paulo eos qui jam baptismo Joannes Cyp. de haer Baptiz prope fin n. 85. i the Ephesians were baptized by Paul who had bin before baptized with Iohn's baptism and yet that this act doth not warrant two several Baptismes S. Ambrose sheweth Baptizati baptismo Joannis Act. 19. Amb. de Spirit l. 1. c. 3. revera baptizati sunt postea nec iteraâ—um est baptisma sed non erat ptenum baptisma i Those Ephesians were indeed baptized by Paul and yet it was no re baptization because that baptisme of Iohn was an imperfect baptisme Finally the Iewes in our time may as well justifie their Circumcision which unto this day they use Sacramentallie because they beleive that the promised seed of circumcised Abraham is yet to come yet we know their circumcision is mortiferous and S. Paule hath said Gal. 5. 2. If ye be â—ircumcised Christ shall profit you nothing that is if you be therefore circumcised as beleeving that Christ is yet to come in the flesh Even so the baptisme of Iohn Sacramentallie used was an ingagement to beleeve on Messiah to come which baptisme if it be so used after Christ is come and gone how is it any better then the now lewish circumcision seing both are upon the same reasons quite expired and out of date and are moreover a denying that Iesus is the Christ All this while I find no warrant or lawful president of a Second baptisme for when a true baptisme succeedeth a pseudobaptisme it must not be called a re baphization but a baptisme Thus much of the lawfulnes of a ture baptisme after a pseudo baptisme CHAP. X. Of true Christian baptisme that it may not be twice ministred No heretick maintained two baptismes but only Marcion what Marcion was and his reasons for multiplying baptisme why the Novatians Donatists and our new Anabaptists doe re baptize Cyprian's error and Athanasius his ludicrous baptisme IN the next place we are to inquire whether those who have bin truly baptized according to that forme rule law and precept which our saviour prescribed for baptisme after his resurrection Math. 28. 19. May in any case be rebaptized for our Christian religion would be a very pleasant easie religion if those that fall into any grand and enormous sins after one baptisme may be affoiled and wholy acquitted totiès quotièt as oft as they fall by new baptismes But surelie renuing by a new baptisme is that renuing which our Apostle tels us is Impossible One true Baptisme is indeed a renuing to repentance and so S. Paule called Iohn's baptisme Act. 19. 4. Iohn verily baptized with the baptisme of repentance and so is our Christian baptisme but after this one renuing by baptisme to repentance it is impossible to be renued by a Second baptisme to repentance Amongst all the old and new Anabaptists since the birth of Christ I find none that â—ver asserted and taught a second baptisme to be lawfull and usefull after one baptisme which they thought and confessed to be a true and lawfull baptisme except only Marcion But lately amongst us some teach that Baptisme may be iterated as well as the Lords Supper who was a most odious and despicable Heretick he indeed permitted three severall suâ—cessive Baptismes and accounted them all lawfull though in truth not one of them was so the reason which moved him hereunto is related by Epiphanius Thus Maâ—cion saith he was born in Pontus Epiph. haer 42. and was the sonne of an Orthodoxe Bishop and lived a câ—asle single life a good while at length he deflowred a Virgine and was therefore by his own venerable Father ejected out of that Church then he travelled to Rome and there petitioned to be vestored to the Church but could not obtain it hereupon he began a new Sect and among other impieties he ordained that a man might be thrice Baptized if he sell so oft into sin and this he did because himself so fell And because he could not obtain absolution from the Church by pennance therefore he would have it by a new Baptisme Epiphanius addeth further that this Narcion permitted women to baptize as he had good reason that so the same persons might release with whom the sinne was committed A second kind of Re-baptization was practised by the Catharists or Novatians and also after them by the Donatists both of them African monsters but theirs was upon this reason They had seperated themselves from the Church Catholick upon pretence that it was not a true Church
it could not be itterated he answereth that when Christ said Iohn 13. 19. He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet He spake of Baptisme of the thing not of the person for then he would have said He that is washed well c. But in that he added not the word Well it was to signifie Quicquid in Trinitate factum suerit bene est i. Opt. ib. That Baptisme which is ministred in the Name of the Trinitie is well ministred Now because Baptizmal grace is conferred onely by the Trinity therefore the Baptisme is not nullified by the Baptizers unworthinesse As when white wooll is died into a royall purple the Opt. ib. colour is not called principally by the touch or handling of the Dier but by the blood of the fish Purpura Murex So neither is it the Officiating of the Minister but the Operation of the Trinitie through the blood of Christ that giveth Baptismall grace which grace cannot be impaired or nullified by the unworthynesse of the Minister And therefore Saint Cyprian upon better consideration in one of his Sermons said Sive Judas sive Paulus baptizeâ— Chrâ—stus peccatum tollit Cyp. serm de Bapt. Christi n. 94. i. Whether Indas or Paul baptize it is Christ who neverthelesse taketh away sinne And this was also the judgement of Saint Austine concerning Baptisme administred by the Donatists who were both Separatists and Hereticks Donatistae non rebaptizandi sunt quia in Aug. Epist 48. Nomine Christi baptizati sunt inter Baptismum Apostoli Ebriosi nihil interest si utâ—rque sit Baptismus Christi i. The Donatists may not be rebaptized because they have been already baptized in the Name of Christ there is no difference substantiall between that Baptisme which is ministred by an holy Apostle and that which is ministred by a debashed fellow If the Baptisme be in that form which Christ ordained and what Christs Baptisme is Optatus tells us Christ appointed in what the Nations should be Opt. lib. 5. Baptized viz In the Name of the Father and of the Sonne c. But he did not limmit by whom they should be Baptized and therefore saith he Quisquis in Nomine Patris Filii Spiritus baptizaverit Apostolorum opus implevit i. Whosoever shall Baptize in the Name of the Father c. doth perform that Baptisme which was given in charge to the Apostles for when Christ said go-and Baptize all Nations he did not say do you Baptize and none other Thus he Now albeit all men have not a Commission or calling to Baptize yet if it be so performed as is said by persons that are not qualified thereunto those persons are indeed to be accounted presumptuous intruders but yet the Baptisme for substance is a true Baptisme and shall stand neither may it be iterated although it was ministred with violation of good order When Athanasius was a Boy playing with his fellow boyes in their game Athanasius acted a Bishop and in their sport he baptized another Boy but used the manner and the form of words which he had seen and heard used in the Church Hereupon when the businesse was brought before the Church Bishop Alexander adjudged that ludicrous Baptisme to be a true Baptisme and would not suffer the Boy that was so Baptized to be rebaptized although at that time for ought can appear Athanasius who Baptized another was himself unbaptized As see in Sozomen In Soz. l. 2 c. 16. Ruffinus l. 1. c. 14. Socrat. l. 1. a Ma haeus Epmus Nor. An. Dom. 1637. this Diocesse in a Town called Acle about ten years since a woman Baptized an â—nfant in the form prescribed in the Gospel whereof when notice was given the then most learned and vigilant a Bishop would not appoint the childe to be rebaptized but yet ordered that the woman for presuming to do that office which did not belong to her should be publickly reproved so carefull were the Ancient and modern Churchmen to avoid Anabaptisme To the second Allegation of uncapablenesse of Baptisme 2. Respons particularly of â—nfants their indocâ—bility cannot be a sufficient reason to nullifie their Baptisme or to rebaptize them For first we do nothing doubt but that Infants born 1 of Baptized Parentâ— are capable of Baptisme as well as the Jewish Infants were of Circumcision and we think the Evangelicall Prophâ—t Esa 49 22 Prophesied of such presenting of Infants to the Church which are to be brought in their arms and that â—nfants are capable of Sanctification and that as they have formerly so they may still receive the holy Ghost as it is said of Jeremy c 1. v. 5. and of John Baptist Luke 1. 15. and that such are esteemed by Christ and called believers Matth. 18. 6. where the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are used And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke 18. 15. Because the Spirit of God is the seed of Faith and of all Christian vertues and therefore it is called the seed 1 John 3. 9. 1 Pet. 1. 23. so that Infants having the Spirit may thereby be said to have Faith In radice semine potentia actu primo in fundamento because the Spirit is the root the Seed the foundation and first act of Faith Now as we read Act. 10. 47 Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we Upon these grounds St. Cyprian with his Councel when the question was by the Epistle of Fidus moved whether Infants of two or three dayes old might be Baptized answered Quid deest ei qui in utâ—ro Dei manibus formatus Cypr. lib. 3 Epist 8 n. 71 est unusquisque nostrum in Osculo Infant is deâ—et recenâ—es Dei manus câ—giâ—are c. i No capacity of Baptisme is wanting in the Infant he was formed in the womb by God when we consider that the youngest Infant is but newly come out of his Creatours hands why should we doubt to salute him with an holy kisse And St. Austin saith A parvulo recens naâ—o usque ad decrepiâ—um Aug. Enchir. cap. 43. n. 58. senem nullus prohibendus est à Baptismo id est Baptisme may not be forbidden to any age from the new-born Babe to most extreem old age But secondly suppose that Baptisme administred to 2. Infant were not duely and rightly with good order conferred on that age the fault must be imputed to the Minister and not to the Baptisme being performed in the form prescribed by Christ nor to the Baptized Infant and the same reasons before alleadged against rebaptizing of others will serve as well against rebaptizing of these But so much hath been by Divines unanswerably written and said for paedobaptisme that nothing of moment can be added by me CHAP. XI That the ancient Church allowed but one Baptisme is shewed by their deferring it till ripe yeares and to old
to Offer or that their white baptismal garment was not made or that they had not sufficient provision to entertaine the baptizers or that they would stay till the Bishop or the Metropolitan came that he might baptize them these were but excuses Naz. Orat. 40. the true cause was as is shewed by Naz. They would not forsake their lusts They feared to ingage them selves to live a strickt Christian life which reason was Tert. deBaptism c. 18. long before intimated by Tertullian when he said Qui intelligunt pondus baptismi magis timebunt consecutionem quam dilationâ—m i They that understand the weight of baptisme will more feare to take it upon them then to delay it for in those dayes conscionable men upon their baptisme resolved to live a strickt and austere life being perswaded that sins after baptisme were far more ponderous and displeasing to God then sins before baptisme and that baptisme was an easier remedie for former sins then repentance or pennance was for later sins as Nazianzen also urgeth in his baptismal Naz. Orat. 40. Oration to deter those from sinning who were then to be baptized Post baptismum peccare grave est coâ—rectio per penitentiam est baptismo molestior quantam vim lacrymarum impendemus ut cum baptismo exaequari possit It is a heavie thing to sin after baptisme renuing by repentance is a greater molestation then by baptisme O what an abundance of tears must fall from us before our repentanced can aequalize the water of baptisme Now what necessitie was there that men should so put off and procrastinate their baptismes until old age and their death bed that then they might be acquitted of all their sins and go out of the world cleane and pure but that the Church did by our Apostles words in this place and others understand an Impossibilitie of any new or Second baptisme The Exclâ—siastical Historie in detestation of Re baptization Socrat. l. 7. c. 17. reporteth a memorable storie of a bergerlie vagaband Iew a notorious hypocrite who went to several congregations and sects of Christians counterfitted himself to be converted to Christianitie learned to answeare such Catechistical questions as were required of them that petitioned for baptisme and had bin baptized in the Church of Catholicks at Constantinople and had got much monie which charitable people had bestowed on him in pittie of his povertie and congratulation at his baptisme after this he went to another congregation in the same citie of the Novatiau sect and there presented himself with the like hypocrisie as one newlie converted and petitioned the bishop that he might be baptized concealing his former baptisme Paulus the Bâ—shop commanded that preparation should be made for baptizing this Jew so the font was filled with water and a white baptismal garment was bought for him and when Paulus had proceeded so far in the baptismal office that he was come to the time of dipping him looking into the font he perceived that there was no water in it then he commanded the font to be replenished supposing that the former water was sunck into the bottome hole for want of care in stopping that sinck and caused the sinck and all cranies to be carefully stopp't and so proceeded to dipping but loe the Second time the wather was vanished wherupon Paulus was much amazed and looking upon the Iew with indignation said O homo aut veâ—eâ—ator es aut baptismum accepisti Soc. l. 7. c. 17. i O man either thou art a counterfit or els thou hast bin baptized before hereupon One of the standers by wistly viewing the Jewe declared that he had indeed bin before baptized by Bishop Aâ—ticus who was the successor of Chrysostome this busines happened in the time of Theodosius the yonger Not long after another strang paslage happened in the same citie of Constantinople which was taken as a Nic. l. 16. c. 35. signification of the nullitie of such pseudo baptisme as was ministred by those hereticks who denied the Godhead of Christ For when one Barbas was to be baptized by an Arâ—an Bishop named Deuterius this Arian changed the baptismal words prescribed by Christ and said Baptizaâ—ur Barbas in nomen Patris per filium in Spiâ—itu i Barbas is Baptized in the name of the Father By the Son in the Spirit At these words the font-water presentlie vanished out of sight and Barbas was amazed and fled unbaptized This I trust is sufficient for the clear exposition of that hard place which principallie was intended to assert the unitie of Christian baptisme and not the Impossibilitie of repentance The sum of what hath bin said in this exposition is comprized in the 4 Conclusion following First that the Impossibilitie there mentioned is not to be understood of an Impossibilitie of repentance nor of an Impossibilitie of renuing but onlie of an impossibilitie of being renued by a new or Second baptisme Secondly That baptisme having bin once administred in that form which is prescribed by Christ no Second baptisme may be ministred to the parties so baptized upon any pretence either of non age in the baptized or unworthines and unfitnes in the baptizer Thirdly that such baptismes or rather dippings which are ministred by those hereticks who denie the Trinitie and therfore doe not dâ—p in that baptismal form which is prescribed by Christ are utterlie void and null Fourthly That baptisme rightlie administred to those who have bin heretically dipped before is not to be called a re-baptization but a baptisme By all that hitherto hath bin objected It cannot appear That the blasphemie against the Spirit what soever is meant by that sin is absolutely unpardonable but still there is one remedie left wherby the sinner may find help and that is repentance CHAP. XII An Exposition of Heb. 10. 26. The particular sin against the holie Spirit is shewed to be the denying Christ to be God what is meant by accounting his blood to be Common or unholie The unsufficiencie of legal Sacrifices and the sufficience of Christs sacrifice THere is another place in this Epistle much urged by some divines by which they would infer that if a man once fall into this sin there will be no means or hope of pardon left the words are thus read Heb. 10. 26. 26. For if we sin wilfully after we have received the Knowledg of the truth there remaineth no more Sacrifice for sins 27. But a certain fearful looking for of judgement and sierie indignation c In this Chapter we have an evident discoverie of the grand capital sin which is commonlie called The sin against the holiâ— Spirit or Holie Ghost wherein the obscuritie of it as it is delivered in three of the Evangelists is cleered and by examination of the Apostles words in this chapter it will appeare that the sin which in the Gosple is called the blasphemie against the Holie Ghost is the blasphemous undervaluing of the Person of the Son of God whose
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-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
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
the most principal to assert the Immortality of his humane Soul and thereby to set forth this true doctrine of the Immortality of all mens soules and the Church had great reason for it because all Christians for some Centuries of years generally believing this doctrine In the fag end of the primitive times many atheistical and Epâ—curâ—an professors sprung up and denyed this truth obstinately and then it became an heresie and was so recorded by St. Austin as is said before under the title of the Arabick heresie and so occasioned a new article of Christs descent although it was an old Scriptural received truth to be put into the Creed I am not ignorant that in Epiphanius the Epiâ—uâ—eans are set down Epiph. haer 8. among hereticks who denyed this truth and so are Sâ—oicks and Pythagoreans and Jewes which I take to be something unproper because none can be called hereticks except they at least professe Christianity and perhaps Epiphanius meant such Christians who in Philosophy were of those Sects or Jewes by birth CHAP. IX Of the most ancient Creed why so many additions have been made and particularly the article of Christs descent THe Reasons that move me to think that the new article of Christs descent was added to the Creed principally to set forth the Immortality of man's soule are now to be brought forth to the Readers view It was a long time before the Church-Creed went about in writing though some private men did so preserve it yet it was learned by oral tradition and so rehearsed Hil. de Synodis cont Arian n. 7. at baptismes and this is noted by St. Hilarie Fides Apostolica non scripta erat literis sed Spiritu Conscriptas sides hucusque nesciverunt Episcopi i. The Apostles Creâ—d or faith was not written by letters but by the Spirit untill these dayes about the Nicene Council the Bishops did not take notice of any written Creeds and the same Father findeth fault with the writing of Creeds Fides scribenda est quasi in corde non fuerit i. Hilar. contr Const l. 3. n. 6. Faith must now adayes be written as if it had no place in mens hearts and although this symbole or Creed were not written yet it is confessed that it went about traditionally and without additions from the Apostles as Terâ—â—llian for his time sheweth Ab initio Evangelii Tert. Cont. Prax. dâ—cucurrit ante priores quosque haereâ—icos i. The rule of faith spread from the beginning of the Gospel and before Praxea's herâ—sies began And again he saith Regulam Tert. de praescr haeret hanc Ecclesia ab Apostolis Apostoli à Christo Christus à Dâ—o tradidit i. The Church delivered the Creed as it came from the Apostles and the Apostles from Christ and Christ from God for there is nothing in that Creed but what is the expresse doctrine of Scripture Now the reason why the Apostolical rule of faith or Creed was not published then in writing is rendred by Ruffinus in Cyprian The Apostles did not deliver this Symbole Cypr in Symb. iâ— paper or parchment but by tradition oral to be laid up in the heart that so it might the better appear that the doctrine thereof was really from the Apostles for Infidels might have got it into their hands If it had been written and by that colour of rehearsing this Creed hypocritically mighâ— have undermined the Church therefore it was delivered rather vocally then in writing just as the Commander in War giveth the Word or sign vâ—cally and noâ— in writing by which friends are discerned from enemies which wate hword is called Symbolum as the Creed is that is a token or signal Thus far Ruffinus The most ancient record of the Christians Symbolâ— which I find written and without exception for that which is in the Constitutions of Clemens I believe is much later is in Tertullian who was a Writer as himself saith in the year after the birth of Christ 160. Tert. de Monoga which I have here inserted that the Reader may see how much hath been added to that first Creed untill these dayes as I find it in Tertullian lib de Veland Virgin principio Regula fidei una immobilis irreformabilis Tert. de Velan Virginibus Credendi in unicum Deum Omnipotentem mundi conditorem Vide Doctrinam praedicationis Apostolicae apud Irenae lib. 1. â— 2. Filium ejus Jesum Christum natum ex Virgine Maria Crucifixum sub Pontio Pilato tertia die resuscitatum à mortuis receptum in coelis sedentem nunc ad dextram Patris venturum judicare vivâ—s mortuis per carnis ctiam resurrectionem The onely Rule of Faith unmoveable and unreformable is To believe in one God Almighty maker of the World and his Son Jesus Christ born of the Virgin Mary câ—ucified under Pontius Pilate the third day raised from the dead received into heaven sitting now at the right hand of the Father that he shall come to judge the quick and the dead by the resuâ—râ—ction also of the flesh This is all in that place the same again in substance is rehearsed but in a few more words * Tert. de Praesc p. 92. Cont. Prax. p. 379. Lib. de praescriptionibus with the mention of the Mission of the Holy Ghost and the same again Lib. Cont. Praxean mentioning also the Mission of the Holy Ghost without any other considerable difference the same Father in the place above noted de praescript tells us Haec Tert. de Praescript regula nullas dubitationes habet nisi quas harâ—ses in ferunt i. that this rule of faith hath no doubts or dissensions among Christians but such as a e raised by heresies therefore what doubts and dissensions have been so raised is next to be considered CHAP. X. Of Heresies which occasioned neâ— additions to the old Creed THat the springing up of the tares of heresie gave occasion to the Church to enlarge the Creed thereby endeavouring to extirpate those errours it may appear by these instances whereof some are undeniable and the rest very probable and have been so thought formerly by †Erasm ad facul Theol. Sorbon others 1. In the Creed of Ruffinus in Cyprian is Credo resurrectionem hujus carnis i. e. the resurrection of this flesh because the Origenists would not believe that the resurrection should be of the same body but of another new body 2. By the Nicene Fathers to the words Jesus Christ was added Unum Dominum i. One Lord against the Arians who would not confesse the Father and the Son to be but one One Lord. 3. The same Fathers added the word Homoousion against the said Arians because they would not believe that the Father and the Son were both of one Godhead or substance 4. The Article of Remission of Sins was added after that the Novaâ—ian hereticks refused to admit any to their Communion though they were penitents which after baptisme
word there used is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so again when Christ shewed himself to St. Paul in the Temple Act. 22. 17. he was in a trance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now an exstasie or trance is as St. Austin describes it Cum abripitur animi intentio Aug. de Gen. ad lâ—t l. 12. c. 6. Ibid. c. 21. n. 69. à sensibus i. When our soul is elevated and taken off from the use and management of our bodily senses and is actuated inlightened by the Spirit of God or some Angel So the same Father saith again Bono Spiriâ—u assumitur anima hominis cum in somnis futura videt sic Aâ—gelus apparet Joseph in somnis i. When in our sleep things to come are revealed to us our soul is taken and informed by some good spirit as Joseph was by an Angel Matth 2. 13. And so also Prosper saith Ecstasis est cum mens aliqua inspiratime assumitur i. An Ecstasie is when Prosper in Psal 115. n 46. our soul is wholly taken up and imployed by some inspration And St. Bisil saith That when we read that the Basil in Ps 28. hom 5. Word of the Loâ—d came to the Prophets we are not tâ— think so grosly as if God uttered vocal and audible sounds or words to them but that he informed and instructed their soules by a more divine way of illumination though something like as we in our ordinary dreams do imagine we hear voices and discourses of men and see our friends or such like when they are but the imaginations of our brain St. Austin Aug. Epist 101. doth very fitly resemble them thus Non erant voces corporâ—ae exâ—rinsecùs sed quales apud nos tacitè transâ—urrimus memoriâ—â—r vel canâ—ando i. e. When the Word of the Lord came to a Prophet it was not any outward corporeal voice but in such a way as we use when silently in our minds and by our memories we discourse with our selves inwardly as in running over a businesse or an Oration or a song which men usually do onely by thoughts though our tongue never move and just so doth the holy Poâ—t Prudentius describe St. Prudent in hamartig p. 187. John's Revelation Corporeus Johannes adhuc nec carne solutus Secedenie anima non discedente videbaâ— St. John saw the Revelation when his soul was not out of his body but retired to it self from the use â—o the body and St. Basil tells us Si nos viveremus animâ Basil hom Divers 3. n. 11. nudâ sine carnis velamentis cogitationes cognosceremus nunc verbis opus est i. When our soules have put off the garments of our flesh then they shall understand one another by thoughts as now men do by words And St. Austin is of the same judgment Tunc patebunt Aug. de Civ l. 22. c. 29. cogitationes invicem i. That our pure spirits shall perceive and converse with one another by thoughts Now when our soules are so ecstatically retired from our bodies as that they do not so much as contemplate the Phantasmes as their object then are they in a fit posture to converse with the Divine Spirit of God or those immaterial and heavenly spirits the holy Angels and when our soules are so elevated then such visions or revelations as are presented to our minds are as evident to us as if they had been sensibly presented to our eyes or eares and thus St. Hieromâ— Hier proaem in Esai n. 33. saith That the holy Prophets were instructed in their Prophecies by God in such câ—stâ—sies and by Angels also for that which we read Zach. 2. 3. The Angel that talked with me in St. Hier. it is thus read Angelus qui loquebatur in me i. The Angel which spâ—ke in me and Terâ—ullian saith Ecstasis est qua Propheâ—ia Constat i. e. Tertul. de anima c. 21. Prophâ—cie doth coâ—sist in ecstasie and in the Primitive times of the Church before the ordinary gift of Prophetical Revelations was ceased St. Cyprian tells us Impletur apud nos Spiritu sancto puerorum innocens Cyp. l. 3. Epist 14. n. 71. aetas quae in ecstasi vidit oculis audit loquitur ea quibus nos Dominus monere dignatur i. With us children in their innocent age see and hear in ecstasies and declare to us suâ—h things as God doth vouchsase to admonish us of and St. Austin doâ—bteth not to call that Aug. de Gen. cap. 5. l. 6. wonderful sleep of Adam when the rib was taken out of him an ecstasie or divine â—apture Deus misit ecstasin in Adam evigilabâ—â— plenus Prophetiae inirans in curiam angeloâ—um i. e. God sent an ecstasie upon Adam he awaked full of Prophecy entring into the Court of angels and therefore Origen reckons Orig. in Cant. ho. 2. Adam amongst the Prophets Now when such ecstasies were brought upon men by God or good Angels from him the person so illuminated was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but if evil Angels invaded 2 Tim. 3. 16. and actuated mens minds then their ejaculations were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ethusiasmes because they proceeded from Satan the heathens god by which spirit the Oracles of the heathens gave answers in Pythonists and that spirit it was which spake in men possessed with an evil spirit so that many times when the Priest was in an extatical fury or madnesse he knew not what the evil spirit spake in him or her just as men possessed did not know what they said or did such persons were by the Church called â—nergâ—menâ— daemoniâ—â—â— that is such as were acted and wrought upon by evil spirits and therefore Tertullian translates this Tert. de anima c. 21. word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amentia madnesse they knowing no more what they said then that Serpent in which the devil spake when he tempted Eve For whereas the Spirit of God in divine exstasies did wonderfully enlighten holy Prophets who were therefore called Videntes i. Seâ—rs contrarily the spirit of Satan did mostly darken the minds of his Prophets and Demoniacks so that they perceived nothing of what their lips uttered and therefore Justin Martyr said of Justin lib. 1. ext n. 6. such Sibylla non intelligunt quae dicunt i. These Prophâ—â—â—sses do not understand what themselves prophâ—sie and Origen saith Pythia furit nec sui compos est dum promit Orig. cont Cels l. 7. n. 36. 〈◊〉 i. The Pythonisse is mad when she uttereth the Oraclâ—s and therefore such are commonly called Arrepâ—iâ—iâ— men forcibly snatcht and used but as an instrument by the evil spirit and the same Origâ—n tells Orig. Peri Arc. l. 3. c. 3. Hier. in vita Hilarion n. 10. us that Magicians would cause young Children to pronounce Poems which they never learned and St. Hierome writes of one Orionus a Demoniack in whom the evil spirit spake with many several voices at the same
time This is sufficient to shew in what manner those extatical apparitions probably might be presented to mens soules and also may be an argument of the soules sepaâ—ability because by this we perceive it may have operations which do not at all depend upon the body and in all these revelations and intercourses with Angels good and bad we cannot receive any certain intelligence what the state of the other world is CHAP. XIII Of the apparitions of the dead and that they are not the soules of men deceased but other spirits assuming their shapes ALthough the known Inhabitants of both parts of the other Woâ—ld I mean the holy Angels and the infernal spitits have oftentimes appeared to and conversed with mortal men yet still we are ignorant of the affaires both of the City of God and also of the infernal Sodome howbeit those spirits have shewed themselves in plausible shapes of men and of our friends and kindred and not in such terrible apparitions as might deter men from any converse with them for the Scripture declareth that God and good Angels have appeared in shapes of men and that evil Anâ—els have also appeared so as to Sâ—ul in the likenesse of Samuel and also to Christ in his temptation for no doubt Satan conversed with him in the similitude of a man and the Ecclesiâ—stical Writers asfirm the same Tertullian tells us that in the Tert. de anima c. 57. exorcismâ—s which the Church in his time used over men possessed with unclean spirits the spirit would say Se esse aliquem pâ—rentum aut bestiarium aut talem gladiatorem defunctum i That they wâ—re some of their forefathers or some beast-master or such a fencer deceased and again he saith that it was usual with Magicians Ibid. to tell men that the spirits which they raised were the soules of dead men and that they could raise the soules of the holy Prophets from the dead The like is also observed by St. Chrysostome that when evil spirits appeared Chrys Ser. 2. de Laz. n. 〈◊〉 unto men they used to say Monachi illius sum anima sed non câ—edo quia daemones dicunt i. I am the soul of such a Monk deceased but I do not believe it because the Devil said so and again he saith That Idem ibid. the Devil perswaded Conjurers and witches to murther some young men making them believe that the soules of those whom they murthered should become familiar spirits and be at the command of those Conjuâ—â—rs to serve them and fulfill their commâ—nds and in later times Johannes Wier de praestig l. 1. c. 15. Wierus writâ—s that to satisfie the curiosity of the Emperour Maximilâ—an the fiâ—st about the year of ouâ— Lord 1500 a certain Magician in his Court raised spirits representing the shapes of Hector Achiâ—es and David which visibly apâ—â—aâ—ed â—n the presence of the â—â—id Emperour Many more such instances may be alledged out of Wriâ—ers of approved credit but these may suffice to inform us that althouâ—h many have comâ— to us from the other world yet none have given us intelligence of the state of things there for although those apparitions good and bad have entertained discourse with men as with Saul and with the blessed Virgin yet of this particular they have been silent and for this reason perhaps Poets called such apparitions and ghâ—sts Silenâ—â—s umbras and therefore they had a pretty fiction that such spirits as returned to this life from the dead first drank of the a Virg. Aen. 6. Lâ—â—hean River to signifie that they were so silent of those affaires as if they had forgot what their condition was in the other world because either they would not or could not relate the stâ—â—y of it even in the holy Scripture the place of the dead is called the Land of forgeâ—fulnesse and that Psal 88. 12. which the Latine reads Anima mea habiâ—asset in infeâ—no qâ—i dâ—scendunâ— in insernum our English Translation reads Psal 94. 17. My soul had almost dwelt in silenâ—e and â—hey that go down inâ—o silence for this Psal 115. 17. reason as I suppose Necromancie or consulting with the dead is forbâ—dden by God Deuâ— 18. 11. not that we should think the dead can at their own pleasure or at the desire of the living return to us without the special diâ—pensation and appointment of God for St. Austiâ— assâ—â—â—d himself that if it were in the power of Aug. de Cur. pro Mort. c. 13. soules departed to come and converse with mortals his holy and most loving mother dâ—ceased who followed hâ—m by Sea and Land in her life would nor have been so long absent fâ—om him but would have come and administred comfort to him among his man old sorrowes and so he concludes out of the 27 Psal My faâ—her and my mother have forsâ—keâ— me But bâ—cause Psal 27. 10. God having dâ—termined to conceal from us the state of the dead and because men should not delude thâ—mselves nor be deluded by Satan by conversing with Devils when they were raised in the shapes of men departed this life therefore Necromancy is forbidden and indeed as Origen hath well noted upon that Law Orig. ho. 7 in Esai 22. that they that enquire of the dead A daemonihus quaerunt qui moâ—tui sunâ— Dâ—o i. Nâ—cromancers that enquâ—re of the dead do consult with Devils who are dead to God CHAP. XIV That the Commemoration of the dead in the prayers of the Church was intended principally to set forth the Immortality of their soules IF it be enquired to what end or purpose the ancient Church set up that custome of praying for the soules of men departed it will appear that the chief motive hereunto was to declare the Churches assured belief that the soules of men survived after this life was ended and conrinued in a state of Immortalâ—ty for it cannot appear clearly that the Church had any precept for it or any example in the Scripture and so much is acknowledged by Epiphanius when he wrote against that Aërius who separated from the Church partly because he disliked the custome of praying for the dead and cheifly because Eustatius was preferred to the Bishoprick before Aâ— ius I say Epiphanius Epiph. haer 75. confesseth that the Church performed those rites to the dead Tradiâ—ione à patribus accepâ—aÌ„ i. because the ancient Fathers did so before his time and from them the Church received that custome for saith he Quis poterit Ib. n. 22. statutum matris dissoâ—â—â—re aut legem paâ—ris i. Who can dissolve the statutes of the Church our Mother or the laws of the Fathers and it cannot appear to us what benefit the dead receive by the prayers of the living nor hath the ancient Church fully satisfied us herein for St. Ambrose prayed for the deceased Emperor Theodosius Ambr. de obit Theod. n. 47. whom he then beleeved to be in lumine Sanâ—torum
â—â—tu i. that he was in the light of God and company of Saints and St. Austin prayed thus for his godly Aug. Confes l. 9. c. 13. Mother deceased Pro peccatis matris mea deprecor te Deus demitâ—e illi debita sua c. i. I beseech thee O God for the sins of my Mother that thou wouldst forgive her and yet immediatly he saith Credo jam feceris quod rogo i I beleeve thou hast alreadâ—y done what I now pray for Notwithstanding the Church did so pray and Epiphanius gives this reason why the names of the dead were Epiph. hae 75. mentioned in the Church-prayers Quia hoc magis fuerit utile quid commodius quod credunt praesentes quòd bi qui decesserunt vivunt non sunt nulli i. What can be more profitable to the living then to be assured that the dead persons commemorated do still live and that they are not annihilated So we see the Church had other reasons which moved them so to commemorate the dead though the deceased received no benefit thereby As 1. To commend unto the living and in their mindes to preserve the wholesom doctrine of our Souls immortality 2. Their prayers did challenge the performance of Gods promises to those deceased who had lived and died in the Lord as is declared Rev. 14. 13. Blessed are the dead that dye in the Lord saith the Spirit 3. For the coâ—solation of the living the Priest declared that the sins of such holy men which had lived and died in the faith of Christ were forgiven 4. The Church gave thanks for their departure to rest as acknowledging the mercy of God by which they were saved and not by their own merits Some Divines think that when St. Paul prayed for Onesiphorus The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day 2 Tim. 1. 18. that Onesiphorus was at that time dead because in the end of the Epistle in the salutations there is no mention of Onesiphorus but of his familie only 2 Tim. 4. 19. And because there is no state or condition of men in this life though never so sinful which excludeth them from the benefit of being prayed for therefore some Expositors have thought that when St. John said There is a sin unto death I do not say he shall pray for it 1 Joh 5. 16. his meaning is that such an one who liveth and dieth in a soul-destroying sin such as shall in this book afterwards be discovered without repentance for such a mans prayers are unprofitable and vaine not excluding others that die in the Lord to be commemorated in the prayers of the living as Onesiphorus before mentioned and in that sense as is before said and this is St. Heromes exposition in his objurgatory Hier 10. 9. Epiad Evang. Epistle to Evangius if it be his own and so also saith the interlineal glosse with Lyra. St. Austin being hard put to it to give an account why the Church prayed for the dead and what benefit the dead had by the prayers of the living by the questions of Dulcitius and Paulinus confesseth most inge Aug. lib. de Cur promortâ— c. 1. nuously that the dead can have no benefit at all by our prayers here except by their good life they were capable of good before their death and again he saith Because the Church knoweth not unto what dead men Aug. ib. c. 17. her prayers are profitable therefore she prayeth pro omnibus regeneratis i. for all the regenerate that none may be omitted CHAP. XV. That the Fathers did not beleeve that Souls departed were insensible as if they were dead or asleep because the Saints departed do pray for the Church Militant as the Fathers thought HAving shewed before what the Church Militant did here below for the Triumphant part above it would now be considered what the Triumphant Church above doth for us that are on earth in the judgement of the Fathers The ancient Church were so far from thinking that our souls died with our bodies that they affirme and verily beleeve that the souls of holy men departed and being in rest did pray for the Church on earth for so St. Hierom tels us the Saints deceased pray for the living Hier. Epist 53. n. 17. for they that had so much charity on earth as to pray even for their enemies and persecutors much more will they now in heaven pray for the Church St. Paul is not lesse charitable after his departure then he was before and so he wished Heliodorâ—â— that if he died before Hier. Eipst 1. n. 1. Hierom to pray for him when he was in heaven so likewise he desireth a Id. Epist 27. n. 7. Principia and b Id. Epist exeg 140. n. 30 Paula to remember him when they are in heaven And St. Ambrose professeth c Amb. de fide Resur n. 30. That he expecteth the intercession of his brother Satyrus deceased for the speedier deliverance out of the miseries of this life and that he hoped the godly Emperour d Id. de Obit Theod. n. 47. Theodosius departed did yet pray to God for his surviving Children and that the dead Emperor e Id. de Obit Valent. n. 46. Gratian did pray for his brother Valentinian Of the same Judgment is St. Chrysostom f Chrys ser de uno Legisl to 6. n. 55. for he doubteth not to affirm that the Martyrs and Prophets Apostles deceased do actually pray for the living and before him St. Cyprian in his life-time contracted with Cornelius g Cyp. l. 1. Epist 1. Qui prior è vita discesserit oret pro sratribus i. That which of them should first dye must pray for the survivers and in an Epistle written to some Martyrs who were very speedily to suffer death for Christ he desireth †Cyp. ad Marty n. 98. Naz. Orat. 24. them to be mindful of him when they were in the honour of Martyrs with the Lord. Greg. Naz. tells us that Athanasius though deceased yet as he was perswaded did still help and assist the Church and that his friend St. Basil deceased and now in heaven yet Naz. Orat. 20. even there poured out prayers for the people And of his reverend old father deceased who had been a long time Bishop of Nazianzum he saith That he doubteth Id. Orat. 19. not but though he were in heaven yet the same Pastoral care which he had on earth remaineth still with him and now that he is approached nearer to God he doth more good for that flock by his prayers in heaven then he could do by his doctrine on earth This is enough to shew what the Fathers thought of the Immortality of the soules of men and the same opinion was so generally received of Christian people in those dayes that as St. Chrysostome reporteth they Chrys Ser. 4. de Laz. n. 42. would commonly boast that they should
will be unfolded CHAP. XVIII The Conclusion of this first Book with a friendly Caution to the Commenter BEfore I close up this Book I desire the Commenter who denyeth the Godhead of Christ and the Works of Creation and Redemption by him to lay to his heart that saying of St. Austin Domine qui In Vita Aug. pro Cor. lanâ— lib. 3. c. 42. non amat te propter opus Creationis dignus est inferno quid dicam de to qui non amat te â—ropter Redemptionem i. Lord he that doth not love thee for thy work of Creation is worthy of hell but what shall I say of him that doth not love thee for the work of Redemption And when the same Father heard an heavenly voice saying unto Idem ibid. him Augustine amas me Dic quantum amas me i. Austin lovest thou me declare how much thou lovest me This holy man returned answer thus Si ego Deus essem tu Augustinus vellem fieri Augustinus ut tu Deus fieres i. If I were God and thou wert Austin I would desire to be Austin that thou might'st be God I do not marvel that he which denieth the Godhead of his Saviour doth labour to prove and also earnestly desire that mens souls may die with their bodies and more yet that they may be for ever annihilated or if a resurrection and judgment must needs be that hell-torments may continue but three dayes for although some School-men argue that it is better to be in the state of eternal torment then to be annihilated and so not be at all yet I am sure the Scriptures and Fathers speak otherwise as of Judas Matth. 26. 24. It had bin good for that man if he had not bin boâ—ne Then they shall say to the mountaines Fall on us Luk. 23. 30. And I doubt not but the devils whose continuance is but Misera aeternitas Aug. de Civ l. 9. c. 13. Minut. Foel p. 330. n. 102. as Austin speaks Eâ—eâ—lasting misery would willingly have an end of being wish an end of torment Minutius Foelix saith of some Malunt extingui penitùs quam ad suppliâ—ia reparari i e. They would rather be for ever dead then to be restored to a living torment and Nazianzen saith Optandum est imprâ—bis hominibus igne Naz. Orat. 10. aeterno dignis ut corpus â—orum protiâ—us extingueretur i. e. They that have earned eternal fiâ—e may wish that they may never reâ—urn from death but More perire serae †Idem poem 14. n. 42. Prosp iâ— Sent. 170. to be like the beasts that perish because as the first death taketh mens soules from them against their wills so the Second death as Prosper saith Animan nolentem tenet in corpore i. In hell the soules of the damâ—ed shall be kept in their bodies against their wills I have read of one in despair that wished that he had been a toad rather then a man and St. Ambâ—ose saith Ambr. ad virg laps n. 36. to such kind of men Beatae vos serae volueres quibus nullus meâ—us est de inseris i. Happy are the silly beasts and birds in whom there is no fear of hell yea some have been so affrighted with the thought of those infernal torments that they feared to leave this present life as Seneca reports of Mecaenas a noble but a very Sen. Epist n. 17. voluptuous Heathen that he wished Deformitatem debiâ—â—tatem crucem acuâ—am modo vita prorogetur i. That with continuance of this life he would be content to suffer deformity diseases yea and the sharp pain of the Crosse and of such despairing men St. Austin saith Si Aug. de lib. arbit l. 3. c. 6. quis dixerit non esse quam me miserum esse mallem respondebo mentiâ—is If I should hear such a man say I would rather dye then live in this misery I would give him the lie Now I heartily wish and pray that this Commenter may live to see and revoke and repent these blasphemies because I am verily perswaded that they are such of which it is said in the Gospel that he that so blasphemeth and therein liveth and Matth. 12. 32. dyeth impenitent shall never be forgiven in this world nor in the world to come of which I shall have occasion to speak at large hereafter Now that this first Book may not swell to the Readers too much tediousnesse it shall here end for I am apprehensive by mine own reading of other mens Books as they will be of mine and as Austin said of Aug. de fide cont Man c. 24. his own Ita â—ibri termino reficitur lectoris intentio sicut labor viatoris hospitio i. The end of a book refresheth a weary Reader as an Inne doth a weary Traveller L. Deo FINIS THE Second Book Wherein is shewed THAT JESVS CHRIST is the True and Onely Supream and most High GOD. Qui stabilimenta fidei Christianae subvertere nititur Stantibus eis ipse subvertitur Aug. Cont. Julian l. 6. c. 1. Qui fidem incertam habent certam infidelitatem ostendunt Athan. Cont. Arian Orat. 1. 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 HAving in the first Book transacted some of the lighter errours of this Commentary I now proceed to the weightier blasphemies therein contained and particularly to that of the denial of the Divine nature and eternal Godhead of Jesus Christ which I conceive to be that blasphemy which the Scripture saith shall never be forgiven And because the diligent discussion thereof will give a great light to the Mystery of our Saviour's Godhead I have resolved to make my entrance into that Discourse by handlingt this blasphemy as it is described by three of the Evanglists Matth. 12. 31. Mar. 3. 29. Luk. 12. 10. And because the Exposition of those places in my way may perhaps to others seem new though in truth it is not so I do here humbly submit mine own opinions therein unto the Judgment of the Church and her more Learned and grave Divines The GODHEAD OF Jesus Christ CHAP. I. Of divers doubts and difficulties concerning the sin against the holy Spirit and divers opinions thereof IF this question be loosely and negligently handled what man can be found free from this sin for every sin against God may be called a sin against the holy Spirit because as Athanasius Atha de Commu essent p. 625. noteth Contumelia unius Personae est blasphemia universae plenitudinis deitatis i. A Comumelie against any one Person in the Trinity is the blaspheming of the fulnesse of the Godhead But if you say that by this sin is meant some particular sin or blasphemy onely against the third Person I ask Did not Ananias and Sapphira thus sin Act. 5. 3. Why hath Satan filled thy heart to lie to the Holy Ghost Yet I
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
and is in every Person and therefore it is said holy Father Joh. 17. 11. And thy holy child Ieâ—us Acts 4. 27. as well as the third Person is called the holy Spirit and all Persons together are so stiled Holy Holy Holy Esa 6. 3. Revel 4. 8. and yet the third Person hath a property and personality in holiness not communicable But now we must distinguish thus Holyness in God is either the holyness of Nature and so every Person is holy or holyness of Office that is to be a Sanctifier and thus it is the property of the third Person for although the Father and the Son do sanctifie yet they sanctifie mediately by the Spirit but the Spirit sanctifieth immediately by himself so that when sactification is said to be the work of the whole Trinity you must thus understand it Paâ—er est fons Filius exemplar Spiriâ—us impressor Sanctâ—â—aâ—is i. The Father is the Fountain the Son is the Pattern the Holy Ghost is the Stamper or Communicator of holyness in us and to us as the whole man is said to see but he seeth onely by the eye Next I am to shew that every person is called Spirit for John 4. 24. God is a Spirit and every Person is God and it is not you that speak but the Spirit of my Father which speaketh in you Matth 10 20 and the last Adam was made a quickning Spirit 1 Cor 15 45 We see there is mention of the Spirit of the Father of the spirit of the Son for the last Adam must needs be meant of Christ neither are these observations new but are the old Collections of the Primitive Church writers St. Basil saith d Basil cont Euno l. 3. Spiritus appellatio est communis tribus personis i. The appellation of Spirit is communicable to the three Persons and before him Tertullian saith e Tert. de Orat. c. 1. Iesus Christus est Spiritus Dei i. Jesus Christ is the Spirit of God Athanâ—sius speaketh more home f Atha de Com. essen 625. to 3. Dâ—â—taâ—â—m verbi Christus inse Spiritum sanctum vocat i. Christ himself calleth his own Godhead the holy Spirit and St. Hi râ—me doth also as punctually observe the same g Hier cont Pala. l. 2. c. 6. n. 23. Spiriâ—us sanctus vocatur Spiritus Iâ—su i. The holy Ghost is called the Spirit of Jesus Neither let the English Translation of these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 trouble thee because they are in some places translated holy Spirit and in others holy Ghost and sometimes they signifie onely the third Person as Matth. 28. 19. But in another place they signifie the Spirit or Godhead of the second Person as he breathed on them and sâ—ld Receive the holy Ghost John 20. 22. of which he also saith I am with you alwayes even to the end of the world Matth. 28. 28. which is meant of the comfortable presence of his Godhead by which Christ is said to dwell in our hearts for so also the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when it signifieth the soul or humane Spirit of Christ it is sometimes translated Spirit and other times Ghost as Luk. 23. 46. Father into thy hands I commend my spirit that is my soul and having said thus he gave up the Ghost that is his soul and life Now for as much as the Godhead of Christ or God in Christ is a Spirit and also is holy it may be truely said without any fallacy both Logicaâ—ly and Theologically not onely disjunctively but compositively and joyntly the Godhead of Christ is an holy Spirit for of him it is said Rom. 1. 4. that he was declared to be the Son of God according to the Spirit of holyness which surely is an holy Spirit by which he is said to sanctifie the Church Ephes 5. 26. Heb. 2. 11. Heb. 13. 12. And to this St. Austine speaketh very pertinently and plainly h Aug. de Trin. l. 5. c. 11. n. 62. Quia Deus est Spiritus potest dici Pater Spiritus Filius Spiritus Pater sanctus Filius sanctus Trinitas potest appellari Spiritus Sanctus i. Because God is a Spirit it may be said the Father is a Spirit and the Son is a Spirit and the Father is holy and the Son is holy and the Son is holy the whole Trinity may be called an holy Spirit CHAP. IV. That the blasphemy against the holy Spirit mentioned Matth. 12. was meant of the denying and blaspheming the Godhead of Iesus Christ FOr the right understanding of this question I desire the Reader to take notice of these few observations following 1. That this Pharisaciall blasphemy was uttered and intended onely against the Person of Christ and therein onely against his Godhead and therefore the answer of Christ must needs be a Vindication of his Person and of his Godhead for otherwise Christ might seem not to have answered punctually to the slander and blasphemy objected if we shall confess that the blasphemy was against the Person of the Son and yet imagine that his answer is onely concerning another Person viz. the Person of the holy Ghost 2. Observe again that Christ doth not there make any mention of the blasphemy against the Person of the Father though there was as much reason that he should as to mention a blasphemy against the third Person But he keeps himself punctually to the second Person himself against whom onely this blasphemie was spoken and intended neither did he at this time go abour to assert and vindicate the honour either of the Person of the Father or of the Person of the holy Ghost against which Persons nothing was expresly said or meant but be did onely declare the power and Truth of his own Godhead in his own Person and therefore he said If I cast out divels by the Spirit of God the kâ—ngdome of God is come unto you Matth. 17. 28. By the Spirit of God he meaneth the Godhead residing in his own Person 3. Thirdly observe that as in his Arguments he spake onely of his own Person like a good disputant confining himself exactly ad idem to the same thing the Pharisees spake of so in his answer and in denouncing judgement against those blasphemers by the rule of right reason he must still continue his speech of the same Person therefore in effect he saith thus Although a word spoken against me as I am a man and the Son of man may be forgiven yet a blasphemy or word spoken against me as I am very God cannot be forgiven Or thus The villifying depraving blaspheming or speaking against my humane nature may be pardoned but the depraving denying or blaspheming my Godhead my divine Nature my divine and holy Spirit shall not be forgiven 4. Observe again that the Jewes had indeed depraved him in both his Natures 1. In his manhood thus Behold a glutton a wine-bibber a friend of publicans and sinners Matth. 11. 19. and
expâ—cted in this life for against this thorn in the flesh did this Apostle pray â— but it was answered My Gâ—â—ce iâ— sufficient That 2 Cor. 12. 7. is no other deliverance may be had but power by grace to resist this temptation yet not so much power as to annihilate and quite extinguish it in this life If it be here objected that the Holy Scriptures acknowledge Gen. 6. 9. Job 1. 1. Luke 1. 5. some persons just and righteous and perfect ones as Job and Noah and Zecharie the answer is that this perfection doth not imply impeccancie or impeccability for such just men fall seven times Prov. 24. 16. Noah was just but it is said there in his generation such may be called perfect Travellers but not perfect Possessors having not yet finished their course so a child is called perfect which hath all his limbs and lineaments compleat yet is far from a perfect man and a perfect man is yet far short of Angelicall perfection Men are called just who are not Aug. de natura Grat. â— 38. free from sin Justi suâ—runt sine peccato non suerunt That this truth hath been ever acknowledged by the Church may appear in that the Apostle saith â—f we say we havë no sin we deceive our selves civitas 1 Joh. 1. 8. Dei oâ—atâ— dimiâ—te nobis debiâ—a the universall Church in the time of prayer saith Forgive us our trespasses Indeed Aug. de Civit l. 19. c. 22. De peccat merito l. 2. c. 6. S. Austin confesseth That a man may sometime live without acting a sin yet that any mortall man can be without sin he denyeth For when the Pelagians urged that the Virgin Mary was without sin he desired to be excused from all accusation of that Blessed Mother of our Lord God yet he was assured that all Saints on earrh would submit to that speech of Ambr. de Jacob l. 1. c. 6. Hier. ad Ctesiphon cap. 5. Id. Cont Pelag l. 2. cap. 8. Saint Iohn If we say we have no sin c. Sainâ— Ambrose saith Non glâ—riâ—r quia justus sum sâ—d quia redemptus not glorying in Justice but in Justification St. Hierom saith men are called just not because they are without sin but because they are endowed with many vertues as Ezechias was a just man though he sinnâ—d and wept he did not lose the repute of a just man for some sins but he retained it because withall he performed many just and worthy actions besides a man is â—steemed righteous when his unâ—ighteousnesse is forgiven as he is â—steemed with God a performer of the Law whose transgrâ—ssions are pardoned Omnia Aug. Retract 1. c. 19. mandata facta deputanâ—ur quando quiâ—quid non fit ignosciâ—ur Now that the rebellion of flesh and blood or concupiscâ—nce doth contâ—nually dwell in all mankind during this life may clearly appear in the Holy Person of Saint Paul by his own words for thus he writes Rom. 7. 19. The goâ—d that I would I do not but the evil which I would not that I do f we inquire what evill it is which the Apostle would not do and yet did it it must needs be answered that evill concupiscences or carnall lusts did arise in him which he desired to be quit of and free from that they might not all be in him but because evill concupiscences will ever be in mortal men therefore his next care is that such desires may be râ—sisted so that they proceed not into action as he saith Rom. 6. 12. Let not sin reign in your mortall body that ye should obey iâ— in the lusts thereof he doth not say let it not be for it will alwaies be in us but let it not rule and pâ—evail over Grace So Gala. 5 16. wâ—lk in the Spirit and ye shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh he doth say ye shall not have those lusts but not fulfill and peâ—form them and ver 17. Ye cannot do the thing that ye would that is because ye cannot as you desire be free and quit from evill desires so as no evill desires at all should arise in you yet resist them do not obey them Tene Aug. de Verb. Dei ser 43. manus pedes ocuâ—oâ— c. withhold your members from acting those carnal suggestions Where he saith What I hate that I do We are not Rom. 7. 15. to imagine that the Apostle meaneth that although he hated fornication adultery rapine c. yet he did act these things but he meaneth that he hated evill lusts which yet did continually arise in him he desired they might not all be in him Nolo concupiscere tamen conâ—upisco O â—i tamen Aug. de verbis Apost ser 5. ago quamvis membraâ—â—eneo arma nego So himself adviseth Rom. 6. 13 Yâ—â—ld not your members as iâ—st â—ments of unrighteousness Although sinfull desires arise in Id de Temp. Ser. 45. your carnall heart Rebellant râ—bella pugnant pugna This is the strife betwen the flesh and the spirit he did continually resist those temptations Luctabatur noâ— Id. ibid. subjugâ—baâ—ur alwayes strâ—ving with them but not overcome by them Rom 8. 8. They that are in the flesh cannot please God Though holy men are in the flesh yet because they are not over-ruled by the flesh they do please Id. de verbis Apost Ser. 6. God Carnem portant sed non pâ—rtantur ab â—a Where he saith Rom. 7. 25. With the mind I my self serve the Law of God but with the flesh the Law of sin We are not to think that the naturall mind or intellective faculty of this Apostle was free from carnall concupiscence for by nature our whole man body and soul is carnall but the mind here signifieth his understanding reformed and renued by the Spirit of God for the very naturall spirit or mind of man needeth â— renuing by the Spirit of Grace as himself saith Ephes 4. 23. Bâ— râ—nued in the Spirit of your mind When he saith Rom. 7. 17. It is no more I that do it but sin that dwelleth in me His meaning is not to excuse himself so as if he were without sin and blameless But that his Spirituall part or in ward man did detest that which his carnall part or outward man did suggest Just so doth this Apostle ascribe his holy and spirituall actions not to himself but to the Grace of the Spirit as 1 Cor. 15. 10. I laboured more then they all yet not I but the Grace of God which was with me So 1 Cor. 7. 10. I command yet not I but the Lord. So again Gal. 2. 20. The conclusion is that The Son himself that is to say Christ as he is considered with the plenitude of his Mysticall Body and so is the Whole Christ cannot be perfectly subject and obedient to the Godhead untill this mortall hath put on immortality and our naturall body be raised a Spirituall body when
still worship toward the Temple and our Saviour tells us which is the true Temple indeed Iohn 2. 19 21. Destroy this Temple in 3 dayes I will raise it up But he spake of the Temple of his body For Iesus est Deus Templum Dei saith Nazianzen i. Naz. Orat. 43. Jeius is both the Temple of God and the God of the Temple And so Saint Austine saith Christus est Sacerdos Aug. de dog Eccl. n. 73. Sacrificium est Deus Temâ—lum i. Christ is the sacrificer and the sacrifice he is the God and the Temple And Origen saith Christus est Templum in Orig. in Josh Hom. 17. utero Virginis formatuâ— i. Christ is the Temple built in the Virgins womb And Athanasius more plainly expresseth this Mystery Digni sunt Ariani qui Atha Or. 5. cont Ar. n. 4. â—aepè percant qui prisci populi reverentiam â—rga Templum laudant sed Dâ—minum in carne ut in Templo suo adorare recusant i. The Arians have well deserved perdition who praise the Iewes for their reverence towards the Temple yet themselves refuse to worship the Lord iâ— the Temple of his Body Solomon saith Proverbs 9. 1. Wisedome hath built her an house Who is wisedome but God and what house is it but as Athanasius often expoundes that saying Corpus Christi Atha ser 3. cont Ar. n. 6. est Domus sapienâ—iae i. The house of Wisedome is the Body of Christ The word building in Scripture is applyed to an humane body as well as to an house Gâ—nesis 2. 22. Deus aedificavit costam in muâ—erem i. God builded the woman of Adams rib and Ruâ—h 4. 1. Rachâ—l and Leah did build the house of Israel and in three dayes I will raise it Iohn 2. As if it were the raysing of an house So the Mysticall Body of Christ which is his Church is called Gods building 1. Cor. 3. 9. In brief Iesus Christ in respect of his divine Nature is our God and the Temple wherein our God dwelleth and that which is truely said to be his rest for ever Psalme 132. 14. Is his glorified Body now in Heaven When we compose our selves to Prayer we lift up our mindes to this God in that Temple God Incarnate is the finall and ultimate Object of our adoration there is no way to approach to our God with any hope of obtaining pardon and remission of sins but through the open doores of the Temple of his wounded body therefore our Prayers are all sealed with Through Iesus Christ our Lord. He that maketh any approach to God otherwise then considered in this Temple must expect to finde him onely as a severe and offended Judge but whâ—n he looketh on us through his Sonne his severity is sweetned Filius est dulâ—edo Dâ—i i. The Sonne is Fulg disc object Arian n. 1. the sweetnesse of God When he beholdeth us through Jesus Christ he is pacified and gâ—acious the clouds and tempests of Gods anger are asswaged by the serenity of the Countenance of Jesus Vulâ—u quo Coelum tempestatesque sâ—renat Virg. Aâ—n 1. Are we not therefore called Christians because we worship God in Christ To him Saint Stephen directed his Prayer Acts 7. 57. Lord Iesus receive my spirit And Saint Paul also Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God even our Father comfort your hearts for so Christ had given direction before Iohn 14. 13. Whatsoever ye shall aske in my Name that will I doe that the Father may be glorified in the Son By what hath been said I trust the danger of this Commentors bold assertion will be discovered who tells us that Christ is not to be believed P. 54. in finally but God in Christ not believing or not considering that the Godhead is in Christ And therefore Christ in respect of this Gohead is to be believed in and prayed to finally and â—erminaâ—ely as the utmost object of our Faith and the Manhood of Christ so endowed with and united to the same Godhead is to be believed in and prayed to Mediately for by the Incarnation of the Godhead in Jesus he became our Advocate and Mediatour and a Priest which is next to be discoursed CHAP. XV. That the most high God became a Mediatour and a Priest and that Christ is prayed unto and yet is a Mediatour Every Person in the Trinitie may be prayed unto THe Commentor tells us That the supream God P. 80. c. 5. v. 5. can no way be a Priest and therefore Christ is not supream God because he is maâ—e a Priest This assertion is most false and blasphemous he that affirmeth it either never was Christian or else must be an Apostate because to say that the most high and onely God cannot be a Priest is all one as to say This God cannot assume flesh or be Incarnate For in the same manner the supreme God became a Priest in which he became a Mediatour and both by assuming humane nature For if it be demanded how we can pray to Christ seeing he is our Mediatour and Priest who interceedeth and prayeth for us and that by him we approach to God so that we may seem rather to pray by him then to him and if Christ be the finall Object of our Prayer who is our Mediatour To this it may be answered that Christ is a Mediatour in the same sense that he is a Priest and in that sense he prayed Now he became a Priest and a Mediatour by assâ—ming Manhood for Saint Chrysostomâ— Chrys Hom. Ant. 32. n. 12. saith truely Christus orabaâ— ut homo nam Deus non â—rat i. Christ prayed in that he was a Man for God doth not pray And Saint Austine saith Christus Aug. de Civit. â— 20. c. 10. est Sacerdo quatenus est Filius hominis i. Christ is not a Priest but by being the Sonne of Man For although it be said Rom. 8. 26. The Spi it maketh intercâ—ssion for us though the Spirit as it signifieth the third Person was not Incarnate the meaning is onely that the Holy Ghost helpeth our infirmities in prayer as is there said and nos intâ—rpellare facit It enableth and stirreth us up to pray as Saint Austine Aug. expos in Ro. n. 96. expounds it not that the Spirit it self prayeth for us When Eudoxius the Arian was newly placed in the Episcopall seat of â—onstanâ—inople the first sentence that he uttered was this blaâ—phemy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soc. l. 2. c. 33. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Father is impious the Sonne is pious at which words when the people began to raise a tumult he appeased them by saying that his meaning was that the Father never prayed but the Son did often pray his intent was hereby to insinuate that because Chrâ—st prayed therefore he was not God but was onely a creature which â—s the Argument which our Commenter useth against the Priesthood of God for indeed the pure Godhead
the Father â—ohn 5. 37. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time noâ— any time noâ— seen his shape and yet his voice was certainly heard at Christs Baptisme but Saint Hilary reconcileth both places telling us Pater nec visus nâ—â— audiâ—us est ab illis â—udaeis quibuscum Christus loquebatur i. Those Jewes to whom Hil. de Trin. lib. 9. Christ then spake were not present when the Fathers voice was so uttered yet this doth not hinder but that as others heard his voyce so others might see his Person presented in some visible shape besides who can tell what Person it was that said Let there be Genesis 1 light If it were the Person of the Father then why may we not say it was the Father which walked in Paradise and talked with Adam Saint Austine moves the question Aug. de Trin. l 2 c. 12. Whâ—n three men appeared to Abrabam why may we noâ—â—â—r they were â—â—e thrâ—e Pâ—â—sons of the Triâ—iâ—ie seeing neither of those that appeared is there said or so much as intimated to be greater or lesse then the other It is but a vain cavill of this Commenter in p 332. saying they were noâ— God but Angâ—ls created because it is said Heb 13. 2. some have entertained Angels for who knows not that in Scripture very often the Son of God is called the Angel of the holy Ghost is said to be sent which is all one and this is enough to verifie that Abraham might entertain God and Angels in those Persons albeit the Father cannot be called an Angel but yet that creature or shape which the Person of the Father did or might assume may be called his Angel as is sâ—id before ch 4. p 119. That the onely and most high God did then appear to Abraham I do nothing doubt and our Commenter confesseth him to be called Jehova which he also confesseth to be an appellation proper to God himself and in that eighteenth Chapter and the five and twentieth verse He is called the Judge of all the Earth and yet he will afford this Jehova no better honour then to be a Creature an Angell and Minister and Delegate though he doth not take upon him to shew us any such Delegation or Commission whereby any creature is ordained to be a Jehova how many Jehovah's would this Commenter have But it was indeed Jehova that is the onely Lord God which appeared but whether in the Person of the Father or the Sonne or the Spirit or All Saint Augustine thought it was an uncertain and an Aug. ib. occult question This was his judgement which seemeth to incline to a probability of the apparition of the three Persons Origen in Gen. ho. 4. Epiph. in Ancor n. 27 1 Ful. de praedest lib 2. though divers other Fathers differ from him as Origen and Epiphanius who thought that the apparition to Abraham was of the Sonne of God and two created Angels with him and Fulgentius saith flatly id est That the Sonne appeared and not the Father By what hath been said it appeareth that in the judgement of the Ancient Church Writers it was the true Jehovah which appeared to Abraham even that onely Jehovah who is the Father and the Sonne and the Holy Spirit in Essence although in a Person distinct from the Father and the Holy Ghost they all agree in the apparition of the same God but they doubt to pronounce what Person it was neither will I but leave this question to the judgement of the learned Reader and proceed to shew some reasons why Eusebius alledged by the Commenter and our Fathers thought that onely the Son appeared to the Patriarchs and not the Father Because the Orthodoxe or Catholicke Church did constantly believe and confesse that onely the Sonne of God or second Person did take upon him our nature and became the Sonne of Man and that onely he was God Incarnate he onely was born of the Virgine and converâ—ed with the posterity of Abraham Isaac and Iacob on earth and onely that Person suffered on the Crosse and died for us and that neither the Perâ—on of the Father nor the Person of the Holy Ghost can be aid or truely believed to have taken our nature on them and to be boâ—n of the Virgine nor to be the seed of the woman oâ— the seed of Abraham or the Sonne of David nor to have suffered for Mans redemption And because all the apparitions of God in the shape of Man mentioned in the Old Testament were but Types and prefigurations of the reall Incaâ—nation of the Sonne of God to be exhibited upon promise in the fulnesse of time Therefore Eusebius and other Fathers thought and said that it was God in the Person of the Sonne onely which appeared Typically for that onely the Person of the Sonne was really to be Incarnate and that neither the Person of the Father nor the Person of the Holy Ghost did appear to the Patriarches in humane shapes because neither of theâ—e Perâ—ons were to take our Nature on them for the work of redemption And that this is a faire probable reason may appeare in that the Orthodoxe Church condemned the Heresie of those that were called Paâ—rispassiani which is called by Saint Cyril 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est The confounding Cyr. Hier. car 4 of the Persons of the Father and the Sonne which Heresie is recorded not onely by this Eusebius Eus hist l 7. c. 4. 5 and by him called the Heresie of Sabellius but also before him and before Sabâ—llius by Tertullian and called the Heresie of Praxeas and after Eusebius Tert. de haer contr Prax. Soc. l. 2. c. 15 by Saint Basil Nazian Epiphanius and Augustine The Heresie is described by Socrates The Sabellians are condemned for saying that the Trinitie is only three Names and but One Person for so they affirme that the Father suffered Now I desire the Commenter to tell us why Eusebius might not say that it was at least sometimes the Person of the Sonne which appeared to the Patriarches and not the Person of the Father as well as all true Christian Churches doe to this day affirm and believe that the Person of the Sonne was â—ncarnate and suffered and not the Person of the Father For though the Church doth acknowledge that the Father and the Sonne are the same God because we doe not divide the Substance yet we say that the Father and the Sonne are not the same Person because we will not confound the Persons The poyson which this Commenter would infuse to weaker soules by saying that Eusebius would not have the Angell which appeared to Abraham to be the supreame God which Eusebius never said is to make men believe that there is a great and lesser God or else that Jesus Christ is not the One Onely and very God the affirming whereof is that blasphemy which himself saith shall not be forgiven unto men CHAP. VII Of the Incarnation
Generation from Adam but our better and spiritual regeneration is derived from Christ and as there are no Sons of Men but such as are so from Adam so ther are no Sons of God but those that are so from Christ Now if it be demanded how Christ and wee can be accounted one and what it is which came from Christ and is in man that so he may be said to be in us and so that what he did or suffered should be really accounted as done or suffered by us for although wee know why Adam's sin is imputed to us viz. because wee are of the same Lump propagated carnallie from him but yet why Christs righteousnes oâ— his sufferings should be imputed to us seeing wee are not propagated from Christ nor ever were in his loines as wee were in Adams is now the question To which this is the arswer that as Christ received his flesh and blood from man so man hath received the divine Spirit from Christ and as the natural bodie of Christ is made of the same lump of Adam that our's is so man hath in him the self same spirit that is in Christ though he be in heaven and wee on earth by which spirit wee are called the Sons of God just as Christ by taking our flesh is called the Son of Man Nos homines vocamur filii dei quia filius dei Atha in decret Nic. Conc n. 13. nostrum gestavit corpus quia Spiritus filii in nobis est i Men are called the Son of God because the Sons of God took his bodie of man and put his owne Spirit into man and therfore Christ doth fitly sustaine an Universal person of mankind That the Spirit of Christ is given and put into man the Scriptures doe manifestlie declare First it appeareth evidently in the regenerate Man of sueh S. Paul speaketh when he prayeth Ephe. 3. 17. That Christ may dwell in their harts And how Christ may be sayd to dwell in Man Saint John sheweth 1 John 4. 13. Hereby we know that we dwell â—in him and â—e in us because he hath given us of his Spirit and hence it is that Saint Chrysostome saith Anima sancta est Tabernaculum Chrys ho 2. Antioch Christi id est The soul of an holy Man is Christs Tabernacle For indeed though Christ had not at all assumed flesh from Man yet because the same Spirit which is in Christ is also so put into and communicated to man it is sufficient to make Christ the head of the Saints his Members to be but one mysticall Body with him And this is intimated by Saint Paul when he saith Ephesians 4. 4. There is one body and one Spiriâ— which is as much as if he should say though the Saints on earth are many yet because all are endued with one and the same Spirit of Christ therefore all are but one body with Christ even as in man there are many parts and members yet because all parts have the same soul in them therefore all together are but one body Hence it is that Origen saith Omnes salvandi sunt Orig. in Eze. ho. 9. unum Corpus id est All those which shall be saved are but one body and Saint â—asill giveth this reason of their vnitie Quia unus est Deus si in singulis Bas Epist 141. sit omnes coadunat id est Because there is but one God if this one God be in all he doth thereby Tert. de Trin. n. 28 Christus est ecclesia De Paenit n. 16 unite all and this unitie is also expressed by these odd words in Tertullian Spi itus nos Christo confibulat id est It is the Spirit that doth button us or joyn us to Christ For this reason the Scripture saith Romans 12. 5. We being many are one body in Christ And again 1 Corinthians 6. 17. He that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit And again Galathians 3. 28. Ye are all one in Christ Jesus yea such is our conjunction and union with Christ and his with us by reason that his Spirit is in us that Theodoret doubted not to say Si pati possit Theod. in Dâ—alog impatib n. 13. divina natura supervacanea fuisset corporis assumptio id est If the pure Godhead were of a nature passible so that it could have suffered for man God should not have needed to be Incarnate And Saint Augustine puts the case a little plainer and nearer thus Si Christus non assumpta carne à Virgine sed vera tamen apparens nos vera morte redimeret quis eum non potuisse audet dicere Suppose Christ had not taken his flesh from the Virgine and so not from Adam but yet had really taken a body upon him some other way and in that assumed body had really died to redeem man who dares say that he could not and no doubt such a suffering had been sufficient for our redemption if as I said before God had not otherwise determined and limited himself by his sentence of the curse and death upon the seed of Adam And thus we have seen how Christ and the Saints are united and become one body SECT II. More of the same That Jesus Christ was a Person every way fitly qualified to be Man's Redeemer both for that he was free from all sin Originall and Actuall although he took flesh from the loynes of Adam and also in regard of the infinite worth and excellencie of his Person THe qualities required to a redeeming high Priest are set down Heb. 7. 26. For such an high Priest became us who is holy harmless 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 undefiled seperate from sinners For if Christ were not absolutely without sin in his own Person he could not be a fit sacrifice for our sins the Lamb of God must be answerable to the paschall Lamb his Type A Lambe without blemish and so the Scripture describeth Christ 1 Pet. 1. 19. as a Lambe without blemish or spot and that he knew no sin that he did no sin and that in him 1 John 3. 5. is no sin As for any actuall sinne there will be no question among Christians but the difficulty is in shewing Christ to be without Origâ—â—â—l◠〈◊〉 because he was in the loins of Adam when he fell and is the Son of David of Abraham and of Adam and the Church hath ever acknowledged that the whole lump of Adam is a Prosper Resp ad Genu. Massa corruptionis as Prosper saith and b Aug. Epist 105 157. De Civit. l. 15. c. 1. alibi Massa damnationis Vâ—nculnm damnationis Apostatica radâ—x Massa originaliter tota damnata as S. Austin often confesseth in all these words and many more id est a corrupt lump a lump of damnation an Apostate root totally condemned from the the very Originall The Apostle also seemeth to lay this to the charge of Christ 2 Cor. 5. 21. He hath made him to
our whole Man in our Redemption Thus having said so much concerning this question I submit the determination thereof to the Judicious Reader onely adding this that if Christ did indeed take not onely his Body but the whole man by traduction from Adam we may most comfortably entertain a more evident and reasonable Argument of the Redemption both of our bodies and soules by him because hereby we may conceive our selves to be joyned and united unto Christ in a more noble tie then onely in our flesh that as he hath communicated his Divine Spirit to Man as is shewed before so our humane Spirit is communicated to him CHAP. XV. That the Spirit of God is communicated to the unregenerate and of the diversitie of the Measures and the graces therof IN the next place I am to shew how the Spirit of God is said to be communicated to men unregenerate as I promised before and this because many men are apt to beleeve that to have the Spirit of God is a grace proper and peculiar only to those that are the the Sanctified holy ones but the contrarie will appeare a none for a man may have Gods Spirit in him yea and divers common gifs and graces of that Spirit and yet remaine unsanctified and void of vertue and holines Aug. de beat vita n. 16. S. Austin saith Omnis homo deum habet nec tâ—mâ—n omnis beatus est i. every man hath God in him and yet every man is not in a state of blessednes so there is in every man a natural goodnes for every creature is good and where goodnes is there is God though this natural bonitie may be mixed with a great deale of moral pravitie and the same Spirit of God worketh in all men but yet to several purposes and with several Naz. Orat. 44. operations and in diverse degrees Spiritas spirat quando vult super quos vult quantum vult i The Spirit bloweth when it will and on whom it will so much as it will and though the Spirit of God be alwayes in man yet men doe not alwayes perceive it Aug. Confes. lib. 9. c. 4. Id. n. 88. or consider it S. Austin confessed Christus miserat spiritum in me Ego nesciebam i Christ had sent his Spirit into me and I knew it not and againe he saith â—git Spiritus Domini per bonos malos per Scientes nescientes ut per Caipham i The Spirit of the Lord worketh by good and bad by men that know it and by men that know it not as it did by Caiphas Men may have the Spirit of God and Operations of that Spirit in them and some graces also of that Spirit and yet those graces possibly shall not be operative so high as to Sanctification neither are they such high graces as divines call Gratum facientes But yet graces they are for grace is but a free gift and therfore is it called grace because it is Gratis data i freely given There may be grace in those persons who are not therby rendered favourable gracious or acceptable in Gods sight for even our natural endowments and temporal blessings and our very Creation rightly considered will appeare to be an act of Gods grace and therfore men do usually give thanks to God for their very Creation This doctrine of the great variety of graces and workings of Gods Spirit is most evidently set forth 1 Cor. 12. There are diversities of gifts and diversities of operations but the same Spirit the same Lord the same God And you may find mention of many graces there which are not saving or sanctifying graces but are Common even to reprobates as knowledge healing prophecie toungs c. Which wee know may be and are found in men not Sanctified even the knowledg and skill of manual arts are the operations of Gods Spirit in man which no divine will say are saving or sanctifying graces as wee read of Bâ—zaleel Ex. 35. 31. That he was filled with the Spirit of God in wisedome and in all manner of workmanship to devise Curious workes and to worke in Gold Silvâ—â— and brass Philosophers use to say If heaven stood still man could not move so much as his litle finger but surely if God were not Primus Motor in us to be as the soule of our soules we could not live or move and though God be in man and operateth in him yet his operations are diversified by divers degrees in some he worketh but weakly and low in others higher and stronger even to produce holines and happines but though the Spirit of God be in every man yet this Spirit is not a Sanctifier in every man as he is not Paracletus i a Comforter in every man this doctrine hath bin taught of old by the ancients Deus in est multiformiter Richard de S. Vict. de Trin. l. 2. c. 23. secundum participationem Gratiae aliis per participationem potentiae aliis vita aliis sapientiae aliis bonitatis aliis beatitudinis imanum suam parcius vel largius extendens i God is in us by distributing his graces in great diversitie some partake of power some of life only others have wisdome others goodnes others blessednes for so doth he open his hand more or less as he pleaseth The Spirit of God in Scripture is often resembled to water because as the same water falling from heaven in raine upon several Creatures produceth in them great diversitie and varietie of effects Aqua in spiâ—is alba in rosis rubra in Cyril Hieroâ— n. 18. hyacinthis purpurea i The same raine in the thorne produceth a white flower on the rose bush a red and on the hyacinth a purple Colour So doth the Spirit produce diversitie of effects in men so againe Aqua in Aug. de Mirab. script l. 1. c. 18. vite vinum â—it in apibus mel in Oliva olâ—um i Water in the vine is made wine in the Olive tree Oyl in bees honie in man blood teares c. And the like illustration is used by Epiphanius Chrysost To shew Epiph. in Ane Chrys ho. 4. Antioch that the same Spirit of the same God in some mea produceth but life or understanding in others it produceth those effects and more also as wisdome judgment counsel in others more also as faith hope charitie fortitude even to martyrdome and to blessednes the effect of Gods Spirit in Samson was seen eminently in his great strength in Solomon it was great wisdome in Moses mâ—eknes in the Prophets foresight all these are gifts of one and the same Spirit though in such great varietie and when the Scripture mentioneth divers Spirits as Esa 11. 2 Rev. 1 4 It meaneth severall gifts and graces of one and the same Spirit wee may observe that Elisha 2 Kings 2. 9. did not pray for two Spirits but duplex Spiritus that the same Spirit of Eliah might be doubled on him that is increased
drunkards c. shall inherit the Kingdome of God yet we beleive that Noah Loâ— David and the penitent theif who had offended in these sins shal notwithstanding inherit the Kingdome of God the Apostle in the words immediately following doth cleerly unfold the meaning both of that and of al other Threatnings when he saith vers 11. And such as these were some of youâ— but ye are washed but ye are sanctified but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus so that in al threatnings we are ever to suppose that ther is at least this secret and reserved condition Except ye repent according to Gods declaration which is thus exprest 1 Joh. 1. 9. If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins And hence is the rule of divines Omnes commâ—nationes dei sunt intelligendae sub conditione impaenitentiae i The threatnings of God are ever to be understood with the condition of impenitencie This is the judgment both of our modern divines Orig. in Num. 23. hom 6. also of the Ancients Origâ—n saith Ostenditur Deus quandoque dicere non facâ—reâ—ait ergo per Hieâ—miam loquar super gentem si convertetur gens illa 〈◊〉 c. i Because it appeareth that God saith he wil doe that which yet he doth not performe therfore he hath informed us by Jeremie what his meaning is when he saith â—f I speak against a nation if that nation be convered and repent I also wil repent and againe the same Father saith Deus cum possiâ—â—â—cens punire nunquam hoc facit Orig. in Hier. 1. hom 1. sed etiamsi condemnavâ—râ—tâ— dicit tamen quod sibi semper dicere proposiâ—um est ut liberentur a condemnatione per paenitentiam qui condemnati suerant per delictum ut in Ninivitis i God could punish without threatning but doth not and although he hath condemned yet he saith as indeed he ever purposeth that those against whom the sentence of condemnation is gone forth yet may be delivered by repentance St. Chrysostom hath the like observation upon those words Jona 3. 4. Chrys hom 5. Antioch Forty daies and Ninevy shall be destroyed This threatning did not fail saith he for God declareth Jer. 18 7. That when he speaketh against a Nation his meaning ever is that if that nation repent he also will repent of his indignation and yet the Truth of God is no way prejudiced although the judgment threatned be not so effected because it is alwaies meant conditionally yea it is ever more probable that because God so openly threatned secretly he did really not intend at all to execute that judgment which he so threatned and more yet That he therefore threatned because Chrys hom Antioch 53 he did not purpose it Chrysostom saith Deus Gehennam mmatus est quo Gehennam non inducat i God therefore threatneth hell that thereby he may not condemn Basil in Esa c. 13. Basil in Esa c. 5. to hell And Saint Basil saith Deus interminatur ut sic exoretur i God therefore threatneth that thereby he may provoke men to prayer that by it he may be pacified and again concerning the figtree Luc. 13. 6. he saith Exitat agricolam ut diligentius excolat est comminatio quae efficiat ut à peccato convertantur i. Soz. l. 7 c. 1â— the intent of the threatning was to incite the husbandman to take greater care of it so there is a threatning intended onely to provoke men to conversion It is observed by Sozomen of the most gentle and godly Emperour Theodosius that his Edicts penall did commonly threaten very severe and direfull punishment but that he did not execute them even as our most mercifull God when he seemeth most severe in his threatning yet he secretly reserveth an inlet of mercy to stay the execution if the offenders will repent and therefore the prudent Jewes would not condemn that man for a false prophet who had in the name of God threatned judgments although the judgments threatned were not so executed because they knew that the executing or suspending thereof depended on the penitencie or impenitencie of men Thus having in generall shewed that Gods threatnings are to be understood conditionally let us now examine this particular threatning against such as commit the sin against the holy Spirit of which it is said It shall not be forgiven CHAP. III. That the blasphemy against the holy Spirit is then onely unpardonable when it is accompanied with final impenitencie IT is worthy of our observation that Christ immediately Mat. 12. 31. before he denounced that the blasphemy of the spirit should not be forgiven he had said Mat. 12. 31. All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men Certainly if all sin be forgiven it must needs follow that the blasphemy of the Spirit shall be forgiven unto some and therefore it is not absolutely unpardonable All the difficulty will be to understand how all sins shall be pardoned and yet this sin shall not be pardoned Both sayings must needs be true because Truth hath spoken them Surely the meaning is That there is no sin so great that it can bring damnation Aslemb c. 15. page 27. upon those who truly repent All sins are pardonable to the penitent and therefore this blasphemy also is pardonable if it be repented but without repentance it shall never be forgiven in this world whilest men continue in this sin nor in the world to come if men dye in it But yet it must needs be confessed that there is a difference in the repentance which is required to the pardon of this grand sin and that repentance which is necessary to preceed the pardon of other inferior Vide infra Cap. sins for no actuall sin is to be thought pardonable without repentance in some measure of which difference I shall speak hereafter in its due place But for the present it is expedient to enquire whether this blasphemy be in any case pardonable I have shewed before what the Scripture saith of those that denied Christ as Peter did and those Jewes Acts 3. 14. although denying Christ seemeth to be that sin of which it is said Luke 12. 9. 10. it shall not be forgiven Therefore the next thing to be enquired is the judgment of the Church in the exposition of those words It shall never be forgiven Athanasius in his Ath. to 3. pag. 626. book de Communi essâ—ntia Patris Fâ—lii c. First laieth down this conclusion Nullum â—st peccatum irâ—â—â—â—ssibile apud Dâ—um in illis qui verè 〈…〉 â—gunt i No sin is unpardonable with God in them which truly repent and he maketh this observation on those words of Christ That he did not say that he who sâ— blasphemeth and repenteth but onely he that blasphemeth shall not be forgiven and that therefore the meaning is that he that so blasphemeth and continueth persevering impenitâ—ntly in
that sin shall never be forgiven for if this sin cannot at all be remitted by repentance in this life why was the Church so offended with Novatus for not admitting penitents to his Atha ib. pag. 624. Communion who in time of persecution for fear had denied Christ and yet if there be a possibility of remission after this life why is Origen so condemned for affirming that the punishment of the damned shall have an end Again he saith 〈◊〉 those who were ignorant of the Godhead of Jesus and so did not believe or confesse it shall not be pardoned what will become of his own Disciples Ausim dicere ne ipsos bâ—atos Discipulos Atha ibid pa. 265. perfectam sententiam de ejus Divinitate habiusse antequam Spiritus sanctus in die Penticostes eos visitasset i I dare bouldly affirm that the blessed Disciples of Christ had not a perfect opinion of their Lords Godhead untill the holy Spirit descended on them at the Feast of Penticost for we read Math. 28. 17. that after his resurrection some worshiped him but some doubted Heathens Turks Jewes and Arrians do unto this day blaspheme the whole Trinity and therefore do certainly blaspheme the Holy Spirit yet if any of these should be converted to the true faith and with a penitent confession and with teares should come to the Christian Church renouncing their blasphemies and desire admission thereinto and to be instructed and then baptized what Christian would be so hard-hearted as to deny them St. Austin goeth yet further Aug. in Exposit Epist ad Rom. n. 96. Si ex eo numero hominum quibus Dominus crimen peccati in Spiritum Sanctum objecit veniret ad ecclesiam ad fidem Christi paenitens salutem cum lacrimes posâ—ens quaero utrum quisquam tanto errore esset ut neget ad baptismum admitti aut frustra admissum esse contendat i If any one of those very Pharisees unto whom particularly Cbrist objected this sin against the Holy Ghost had been converted to the Christian faith and with repentance and tears had desired that saving doctrine I demand whether any one would be so ignorantly nice as to deny him leave to be baptized or to affirm that if he were baptized it would not profit him Certainly if Julian or Arrius who by divines are said to have sinned this sin had so offered themselves to the primitive Church in their times they had not been refused for we know that Novatus and his sect were therefore condemned by the Orthodox because they refused to admit such as had denied Christ as is said before The conclusion and resolution of this question by Aug. Epist 50. n. 31. St. Austin is this that this sin is unpardonable only in this case viz. If such a sinner continue in duritia cordis usque ad finem vitae hujus and again Aug. Enchirid cap. 83. n. 58. Si in hac obstinatione mentis diem extremum clandit i If such a blasphemer continue and persevere in this hardnesse of heart and obstinacy all his life time and in it depart this life then will there be no hope of forgivnesse And for this reason onely this grand sin Vid. infra may be called in the Apostles words 1. John 5. 16. A sin unto death Not because it doth alwaies necessarily bring to that sinner eternall death but because it Aug. Epist 50. â— 31. will do so if that sinner live and die in this sin obstinately and impenitently of which saying I shall more largly speak here after in its due place of this sin when it doth necessarily bring the sinner to eternal damnation the same Saint Austin saith very truly as I conceive Non probatur ab aliquo commissum nisi cum de corpore exierit i none can be properly said to have committed the sin unto death untill the sinner be actually dead because if he repent before his death then the sin canot be said to be unto death Finallie neither this sin or any other Apostasie except it be final is so absolutely unpardonable but that forgivenes may be obtained through Christ if the sinner seeke pardon with true repentance But whether any repentance may be had by such who have once fallen into this grand sin is the next thing to be enquired CHAP. IV. An exposition of Hebr. 6. 4. that the word Inlightned signifieth baptisme Anabaptisme is inhibited as both unprofitable and also sinful BEcause no sin how great soever can be said to be absolutely unpardonable if the sinner wil truly repent him of it and that there is no case or condition in this life wherin sinfull man should despair and cast of all hope of pardon therefore divers * Calvin l. 3. 3. 24. Instit Polan p. 339. Buc. p. 155. divines tell us that the reason why it is said of this sin that it shall never be forgiven is because when it is once committed it is ever after accompanied with final impenitentie and that by the just judgment of God such apostates are punished with final and Eternal blindnes and that they cannot possiblie repent and for this doctrine they alleage the saying of S. Paul Heb. 6. 4. It is impossible for those who were once enlightned if they fall away to renue them to repentance Whether this be the true meaning of those words or not it will better appeare if we diligentlie by way of exposition examine them together with the context both before after Which I will not presume to undertake or performe by mine owne single judgment but will call in the assistance of former expositions by the auncient Fathers upon that place where we read as followeth For it is impossible for those who were once enlightned and have tasted of the heavenly gift c. If they fall away to Renue them againe to repentance The Apostle having in the former verses told those Hebrâ—ws that they should not expect that he would new lay the foundations of Christian religion which had bin done to them before wherof one was 〈◊〉 and its Doctrine for if they must be alwaies nâ—w rounded in Christian religion as oft as they fall into â—in then should they be as often baptized that if they fell a second and third time they should as often be baptized and therby reâ—â—ored to their former estate by so many several baptismes This is the eâ—position of Theophilact Si iterum eâ—â— in primordiis religionis instiâ—ueret Theoph. in locum ruâ—sus baptizaret poâ—iquâ—m denuò â—apsi essent baptizaret aâ—que â—teâ—um per â—ujusmodiâ— iterationem essent multi baptismi verum hoâ—â—bsurdum non oportet iterari baptismum i If the Apostle must new lay the foundations of religion in his disciples as oft as they fall into sin then must he new baptize them and if they fall againe he must baptize them againe and againe but â—f so then there would be many Baptismes which were absurd for Baptisme may
not be iterated He mentioneth Baptismes in the plural not as if there were more baptismes then one to be applied to one Person but because of the multitudes of â—ersons Baptized There is but One â—aptism Eph. 4. 5. But that one given to many is called Baptismes yet but One because it may not be administred to one Person more then once and this the Apostle teacheth in these words It is impossible for those who were once enlightned if they fall to Renue them againe by Baptisme unto repentance For it is impossible this Word for sheweth that these following words are a reason rendred of the former words and particularlie of Baptismes as if he should say I will not againe lay the foundation of Baptisme in them that were baptized before because a Second baptisme is both impossible and unprofitable for as a man can not be twice borne naturally so can he not be twice regenerate or new borne And if a Man should be rebaptized it would doe him no good nay it would be an aggravation of his sin because it is a Contempt of the cross and death of Christ as will appear anon Impossible He doth not say only It is unprofitable or unseemly and unexpedient but Impossible Ne sperent se denuò posse Baptisma consequi Theoph. in loc i. That men might not imagine that they mâ—ght be acquitted of their sins by a new Baptisme For those who where once inlightned The Principal thing as I conceive which hath made this Scripture seem so obscure of late which the auncient expositors did most cleerly expound â—s the ambiguitie of this word Inlightned which certainly doth signifie in this place Baptized and so S. Ambrose Theodoreâ— and Theophilact do all unanimâ—uslie expound it And so did also even the Novatians who yet from a true exposition of that word did suck this poison That such as lapsed into notorious sin after baptism could not be admitted into the Church any more by repentance The Syriaâ—â— translation also reads for Inlightned Baptized as is acknowledged by Beza non inâ—pte i. as he thinketh noâ— unfiâ—ly and nothing was more ordinarie in the primitive Church then to call Baptisme Illumination and the Baptized Illuminatos Which appellation was no doubt taken from the words here used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and againe Heb. 10. 32. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that the ancient Christians by this word Inlightned understood Baptized wich will evidently appear by what followeth Inlightned once Inlightned signifies Once Baptized amongst the Apostolical Constitutions in Clemens this is one In Illuminatione seminaâ—um Dâ—aconissa absâ—ergiâ— Clem. Rom l. 3 Const cap. 15. â—as ne mulieres aspiciantur a viris i In the Illum nation of women other women ministred because it was not comely for men to behold their nakednes here Illumination must needs signifie Baptisme for in those times and long after both men and women were Baptized naked as also it may seeme to be intimated by the Scripture Phrases of putting of the old man and putting on the new man which was represented by putting of their old apparrel and by putting on the white Baptismal garment which is so frequently mentioned in the Farhers and that people were baptized naked doth appeare in Dionisius Cyprian Cyril Hierosol Ambrose Dion Areo. n4 Cyp. 91. Cyr. 21. Aug. Epist 118. c. 5. Arnb. n. 49. Cuspinian in vita ejus Just Apol. 2. n. 13. Chrys n. 40. Cyril Catech. Chrys hom 60. Antio Epiph. n. 33. Naz Orat. 39. Naz. Orat. 39. and 40. and Austin And particularlie by the Historie of the Emperor Constantine the fift who for a certaine miscariage in his baptisme was Nicknamed Copronimus this by the way In Justin Martir baptisme is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i Illumination and the baptismal Font is both by him and Chrysostome called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i an Illuminatorie for as we call it the Font because of the water in it the ancients would as readily have called it the Phont because of the Sacramental Illumination So both S. Cyril and S. Chrysostome call the Catechising of those who were already Baptized Catechesis Illuminatorum i The Catechesis of the Baptised and doe expressly expound those words Heb. 6. and. Heb. 10. to signifie the Baptized just so doth Epiphanius call the Font. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in Gre. Nazian the festival of Christs Baptism is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i The day of Illumination and he useth both words promiscuously Christus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i and Iesus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i Christ was illuminated Iesus was Baptized and that feast he calleth both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i Illumination and also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i The feast of Baptism Neither was this appellation used because of lights set up in the church at the time of Baptisme when it was performed in the night as in the Wakes or vigils of Easter which was the custome in S. Chrysostoms time But the Chrys n. 63. Baptized were called Illuminates who had bin Baptized in the day time and the fonts were called Illuminatories at other times when no Baptism was administred as S. Chrysostome tels That in an uprore in the Church such Chrys Serm post râ—ditum n 40. great store of blood shead was made that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Or Font was fillâ—d with blood for then the Fonts were litle wels or cistems whose tops were no higher then the Church pavâ—ment To this I ad that the ordinarie gloss upon those words saith Ne quis existimet Lyra. in loc secundum vel tertium Baptisma post peccata posse fieri i the Apostle used those words least any Man should imagine that a second or third Baptisme might be used to release us of sins so doth Dionysius Cart expound them of Baptismal grace and our vulgar Concordance in the title of Illuminati adds Per Baptismum Why Baptism is called Illumination the words following declare viz. because with the Outward Sacrament of water the inward grace of the Spirit is as by a conduit convayed wherby Original and actual sins past are remitted and the strength of sin is abated by the same Spirit of regeneration and a new life kindled and the peacable and sweet tranquilitie of Christs Kingdome by the comfortable promises of the Gospel is tasted which is an heaven upon earth for Grace is the Inchoation of glorie All these things are expressed by these words following Tasted the heavenly gift made partakers of the holie Ghost tasted of the good word of God and the powers of the world to come For a man that is indued with the regenerating and illuminating Spirit of God may very well be said to be enlightned when as our meer natural soule and understanding is called a light of which and the common and ordinarie concurrence of Gods Spirit it is said Joh. 1. 9. It Inlightneth every Man that â—ommeth into
Godhead is there called the Holiâ— Spirit or Holie ghost as hath bin shewed before in my Second book and this blasphemio consisteth in the denial of the Godhead of Iesus Christ wherby his allsufficient Sacrifice is undervalued and the Son of God is troden underfoot as being esteemed but a creature and a meer man and therby becometh contemptible and his Blood even the blood of the Covenant is esteemed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i But common ordinarie unholie blood no better then the blood of another ordinarie common man and not Sanctified and ordaineth for that great and high mysterie to be offered as a full and sufficient expiatorie sacrifice for the sins of the world according to the Covenant of God For he that denyeth the Godhead of Christ must needs think that his blood is but common blood as other mens blood is and therfore not of sufficient worth and value to redeem the world more then another mans blood is and indeed if his blood be no better then the blood of another man and if it be not the royal blood of God Act. 20. 28. It hath not it can not redeeme us Now whether the sin mentioned in this place be absolutely unpardonable and altogether remediless will better apeare by a diligent exposition of that text as it stands in relation to the context both before and after it For if we sin c If everie sin which is committed after we knew and professed the Christian religion should be unpardonable what man could be saved seeing the most righteous men fall and therfore doe daylie pray forgive us our trespasses therfore this saying can not be understood of every sin but suerlie here is one special grand and capital sin meant and what that is the words going before and following doe declare For verse 5. it is said in the Person of the Son of God Sacrifice and Offerings thou wouldst not but a Vide. Psal 40. bodie hast thou prepared for me That is because the Legal sacrifices or the blood of bulls and goates could not redeem man therfore an humane bodie was prepared for the Son of God that in that assumed humane nature he might in man's stead beare the curse and suffer death which man had merited And because we who are but meer men weak and sinfull can not by our selves performe the will and law of God without performance wherof no man can be saved therfore the Son of God came in our stead to performe the whole law so as was required and willed of God as it is said vers 9. Then said I loe I come to doe thy will o God So that both the active obedience of Christ in doing the law and his passive obedience in suffering the punishment of our transgressions are here set forth in these words vers 10. By the which will we are sanctified through the Offering of the body of â—esu Christ once for all That is by Christs performing the will or commandments of God in our stead and through the Sacrifice of himself on the Altar of the Cross for our sins his mystical bodie or Church is Sanctified for it is said vers 12. This man Christ Offered one Sacrifice for sins for ever and again vers 14. hâ— one offering he hath perfiâ—ted for ever them that are Sanctified and then we are exhorted vers 22. Let us draw neer with a true heart in full assurance of faith and vers 23. Let us hold fast the Proâ—ession of our faith without wavering If we sin there remaineth no more sacrifice c Having shewed what the foundation of our Christian religion is namely Jesus the Son of God God Incarnate and in his humane nature performing the covenant law and will of God both actively and passively for us and in our stead and requiring that we should have a full assurance of faith of the truth of that Doctrine without which faith Christ will not profit us he now shewes the sad consequences of rejecting this doctrine by Apostacie or falling away from our Christian religion in these words There remaineth no more sacrifice for sins but a certaine fearfull looking for of judgement So that the sin here meant is Apostasie that is forsaking Christianitie as Julian did esteeming of Christ but as of an ordinarie Coman man and therfore distrusting the sufficiencie of his blood and death as not an equivalent price and ransome for man's redemption The truth of this Exposition will better appear by the words following wherein this particular sin is evidently expressed and is called verse 29. Treading under foot the Sonne of God counting the blood of the Canant unholy or as it is in the Originall a common thing and doing despight unto the Spirit of Grace Now to tread under foot is to vilipend and undervalue Christ as esteeming him not sufficient to take away or satisfie for our sinnes to count the blood of the Covenant unholy or Common is to esteem of the death and blood shedding of Christ to be of no more vertue and power then the death and blood of another Common man and they that so basely undervalue Christ as to think and to account him but a meer man do despight unto the Spirit of Grace What is the Spirit of Grace in the Sonne of God but his Divine Spirit and Godhead even that Spirit from which all Graces flow which are called the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ So they who have no higher estimation of Christ then of a meere man do despight unto his Divine Nature his God-head for what greater spite can be then to un-God him the word here used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to despite in effect is all one with the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Saint Matthew and the Spirit of Grace here is the same which is there called the Holy Spirit which doth signifie the God-head of Christ as hath been shewed before For if he that despised Moses Law died without mercy verse 28. Yet Moses was but a mere man and so but a Theod. in loc fervant to this our God Quanâ—ò morte dignior est qui Mosis Deum habâ—t despicatui i. What shall become of him that despiseth the God of Moses and the saving Doctrine of Christ who is the Onely Eternall God Moses propounded life as a reward to them that should perform the Law Christ did perform that Law in mans stead to mans behoof and benefit and offereth to men the benefit of that performance and with it life eternall onely with this condition of believing on him Therefore that man which will not give credit to this joyfull-Evangelicall offer must expect to perish eternally for if Christ be rejected absolutely and salvation through him despised and not hoped for or expected There is no other sacrifice for our sins possibly to be found nor any other Name by which we can be saved By what hath been said it appeareth that these words If we sinne in this place signifie the sinning of the
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
Christ is the Authour or Testator of the Evangelicall Testament and not onely a Witnesse or Martyr as the Commenter would have him Chapter VIII The Immortalitie of the Soules of Men asserted against this Commenter from our Saviours Page 23 words Matthew 22. 32. Luke 23. 43. That the Article of Resurrection is therefore expressed to be said of the body onely because the Soul dieth not which is shewed in Saint Pauls Rapture and Saint Stephens Prayer from Church Writers Philosophers and Physicians observations in Anatomie the Souls mortalitie was the old Arabick Heresie Of the immortalitie of Christs humane Soul and consequently of ours That the Doctrine of the Souls immortalitie is now an Article of the Creed and why this Article was then newly added to the old Creed Chapter IX That the Article of Christs descent was added to Page 26 the old Creed principally to set forth the Immortalitie of the Soul of Christ and so of our souls An examination of the tradition oral and the writing of Creeds The summe of the ancient Doctrine of Faith briefly delivered by Irenaeus and the most Ancient Creed thereunto agreeing recorded by Tertullian Chapter X. That divers additions were made to the old Creed Page 29 occasioned by divers Heresies What the Heresies were and what Articles they occasioned and particularly that the Arabick Heresie denying the Souls immortalitie occasioned the Article of Descent is probably shewed for that it was not any Creed generally received before the death of Saint Austine the Nicene hath it not yet the Athanasian at first had it not nor is it in the symbolicall Hymne called Te Deum A modest censure of the Athanasian symbol and an Observation concerning the multitude of Creeds Chapter XI Of the word Hades which is translated Hell Page 32 that it proves the soules immortalitie in that it signifies a being subsistence or permanencie of the souls of dead men separated from their bodies and residing in a Mansion and Condition invisible to us Mortals That the place and state of souls separated is kept secret from us though the knowledge thereof hath been and is much desired Of Saint Hierom's and Curina's visions and the apparition of Irene deceased Chapter XII A censure of those visions of Saint Hierome and Page 35 Curina by comparing them with the Ecstasies of Saint Peter and Saint Paul mentioned Acts 10. 10. and Acts 22. 17. What an Ecstacie Traunce or Vision is In what manner God spake to the Prophets in visions Of Saint Johns Revelation The difference between Divine Inspirations and prophane Enthusiasmes That the one illuminates the other obtenebrates mens understanding and how such raptures or exstacies do argue and prove the Soules seperabilitie and immortalitie Chapter XIII That the Apparitions of the dead do not prove the Page 39 Souls immortalitie For that they are not really the Soules of men deceased but possibly may be the delusions of Satan assuming the shapes of men Why Necromancy is forbidden Deuteronomie 18. 11. Albeit the dead cannot appear to the living at their desire That the state of Soules seperated is concealed Chapter XIV That the Soules immortalitie is confessed by the Page 41 Church Catholick That the Commemoration of the dead in the Church Litnrgies was principally to set forth the Churches belief of the immortalitie of their Soules For that the dead receive no benefit by the prayers of the living The Opinion of some Divines concerning Saint Pauls prayer for Onesiphorus 2 Timothy 1. 18. and of that saying 1 John 5. 16. of which see a full Exposition in my fourth Book Chapter XV. That the Father's did not believe as the Commenter Page 43 doth that Soules departed are insensible as if they were dead or asleep because the Saints departed do pray for the Church Militant as the Fathers thought Chapter XVI Of the departures of mens soules That their conductors Page 48 and leaders to the other World are Angels good or bad That soules seperated are setled in certain Mansions is shewed by Scriptures and Fathers whereby the permanencie and immortalitie of the soul is clearby proved That all those severall mansions go under the generall appellations of Heaven and Hell Chapter XVII A particular detection of the blasphemies contained Page 51 in the Commentarie which are reduced to these two heads The first shewing the blasphemies against the Godhead of Jesus Christ The second shewing the blasphemies against the Incarnation of God and his gracious work of Redemption CHAP. XVIII The dreadfull consequences of the Commenters Page 51 blasphemies in denying the Godhead of Christ and his great works both of Creation and Redemption That it is much better never to have been born or by death to be annihilated or to perish as the beasts doe then to live and die in these sinnes and to rise to judgement The conclusion of the first Book The Table THE SECOND BOOK Containing an assertion of the Godhead of Jesus Christ against the Commentarie Chapter I. AN introductorie discourse concerning Page 1 the sinne against the Holy Spirit as it is described Matth. 12. 31. Mark 3. 29. Luke 12. 10. Divers doubts difficulties and opinions thereof Chapter II. What the word Blasphemie signifies That this Page 4 sinne was the blasphemous denying the Godhead of Christ The spreading of that Pharisaicall blasphemie amongst Jewes and Heathens Of Apollonius of Tyana the Magician compared by Heathens with Christ for miracles Certain considerations premised for clearing doubts concerning this sinne and two conclusions extracted from those consisiderations Chapter III. That the Godhead of the Sonne is called Spirit 7 and Holy Spirit that every Person in the Trinitie is and may be called the Everlasting Father in respect of Creatures and yet how the appellation Father is proper to the first Person That every Person is holy and an Holy Spirit and yet how the appellation Holy Spirit is proper to the third Person That the words Spirit and Ghost signifie the same thing Chapter IV. Diverse Observations of the words of Christ Matthew Page 20 12. The result is that the Pharisee's blasphemie consisted in the deniall of Christ's Godhead The difference between a sinne against the Sonne of Man and against the Holy Spirit The judgement of the Fathers herein Chapter V. The Opinion of later Divines concerning this Page 14 sinne that they affirm Arius and the Emperor Julian the Apostate to have sinned this sinne An examination of the particular sinne of the said Arius and Julian and a breif narration of their lives and deaths Chapter VI. Why the Blasphemy of denying Christs Godhead Page 33 is called the unpardonable Sinne that the Commenters Doctrine in this grand Heresie is no better then Judaisme or Turcisme that it is by the Fathers esteemed and called Antichristianisme To deny Christs Godhead is to renounce redemption and salvation by him wherein the worth and preciousness of the blood of Christ consisteth Chapter VII That the Commenter in Logick sheweth himself Page 37 to be a
Baptisme That the principal scope of that place is against the presumption of Anabaptisme or a second Baptisme Chapter V. That the word Renue is to be understood onely of Page 16 renovation by a new Baptisme That sinners after Baptisme may have the remedy of repentance but not by a new Baptisme The distinction of renuing 1 Baptismall 2 Morall or penitentiall Four Propositons by which the meaning of these words is collected In what sense sinnes originall or actuall are said to be taken away in Baptisme Chapter VI. How a second Baptisme is said to be a new crucifying Page 19 of Christ That it is ignominious to the All-sufficient sacrifice of Christ That a second Baptisme doth no good but much harm it aggravates sins even as rain maketh weeds to grow that these words do not prove an impossibilitie of repentance but onely an impossiblitie of renewing by a new Baptisme Chapter VII A review of those words Heb. 6. 4. and some Page 25 doubts cleared That none were anciently called illuminate but onely the Baptized That Catechising was not then called illumination What moved the Apostle to handle the Doctrine of Baptisme and so strictly to forbid Anabaptisme in the Epistle to the Hebrews rather then in other Epistles Chapter VIII The distinction of Baptismes into true and false Page 30 The formes of Pseudobaptismes among Hereticks That after their dipping a true Baptisme may be administred and yet cannot be accounted Anabaptisme The Novatian Baptisme was a true Baptisme Saint Cyprian is in part excused Chapter IX That the Disciples of Ephesus Acts 19. who Page 34 said they had been baptized to Johns Baptisme were notwithstanding then Baptized by Saint Pauls appointment yet that this example doth not warrant Anabaptisme because Johns Baptisme was then out of date and Null Johns too late Baptisme compared with the now Jewish Circumcision and both found unlawfull Chapter X. Of true Christian Baptisme that it may not Page 38 be twice ministred No Heretick maintained two Baptismes but onely Marcion What Marcion was the reason why he multiplied Baptisme The reasons why Novatians Donatists and the late Anabaptists rebaptized answers to their reasons Of baptizing Infants of Saint Cyprians error and Athanasius his ludicrous Baptisme Chapter XI That the ancient Church allowed but one Baptisme Page 46 is shewed by the then frequent deferring it till ripe years or old age That their delaying was mostly for carnall respects The danger of delaying Baptisme The Story of a Jew Anabaptist An example upon an Arian Pseudobaptisme The summarie meaning of that Scripture and the Exposition concluded Chapter XII A full Exposition of Heb. 10. 26. The particular Page 52 sinne against the Holy Spirit is shewed to be the blasphemous denying Christ to be God What is meant by accounting his blood common or unholy The unsufficiencie of legall sacrifices and the sufficiencie of Christs sacrifice Chapter XIII Of severall degrees of this sin of denying and rejecting Page 57 Christ and salvation by him First some deny him outwardly onely by compulsion and terror of torments Secondly Others wilfully uncompelled Thirdly Others both willfully and also after-knowledge as Arius Julian and this Commenter The concurrence of Theophilact and Saint Anselm in the sence of this place Chapter XIV That the remedy of repentance is not absolutely Page 61 taken away from them who have sinned the grand sin of denying and renouncing Christ That such possibly may repent That this sin is then onely unpardonable when it is accompanied with small impenitencie The Conclusion of this Exposition Chapter XV. Whether such blasphemers if they repent may Page 64 possibly find mercy The difference of repentance Legall and Evangelicall The repentance of Judas The difference of Repentance and Rescipiscence The Conclusion that true repentance is never totally rejected Objections out of the Old Testament answered Why temporall pressures are not alwayes removed upon true repentance Chapter XVI A full and large Exposition of 1 John 5. 16. Page 70 That the Fathers called some sins Veniall and some Mortall albeit every sinne in its own nature and merit is mortall or deadly What is meant by a sinne unto death and a sinne not unto death That sins are not equall Chapter XVII The judgement of the Fathers and ancient Expositors Page 74 concerning sinne unto death The Discipline of the Primitive Church correspondent to their judgement That the greatest sinnes may be and actually have been pardoned The true sence of the Fathers in calling some sinnes veniall and some mortall Chapter XVIII The meaning of those words I do not say he shall pray for it That the praying or not Page 79 praying mentioned is to be understood of the living and not of the dead The practice of the Church in praying for penitents The manner of Ecclesiasticall or outward pennance shewed in the pennance of the Lady Fabiola In what case God forbad praying for sinners in the Old Testament Chapter XIX That no condition of any grand sinner is so desperate Pag 83 during life but that he may be prayed for in this sence that he may have the grace of conversion Certain Propositions of Divines concerning the matter now in hand are examined The practice of the Synagogue and Church in praying for all Mankind the concurrence of the Church of England therein praying even for Heathens Idolaters Persecutors and Hereticks Chapter XX. The meaning of those words I do not say he Page 89 shall pray for it set down positively and conclusively The difference between praying for the Person and praying for the sin The different prayers for a sinner penitent and a sinner not yet penitent The practice of this Church in praying for persecutors and yet against them The prayers of Christ and Saint Stephen explained The case of Alexander the Copper-smith Chapter XXI A Recapitulation of the former Expositions of Page 94 those foure places That finall impenitency cannot be called the Grand sinne The difference of repentance required for the inferiour and unknown sins Of the Solifidian doctrine The particular sin of misbelieving the Incarnation of God censured with Charitie The conclusion of this fourth Book FINIS Errors of the Press In the Title page line 12 for 1647 read 1646. In the advertisement to the reader p. 3. l. the last to Joh. Hen. Bistersâ—ldius add and published An. 1639. In the preface p. 12. l. 29 r. only In the 1. Book p. 18 l. 10 r your word is p. 28. l. 7. r. mortuos p. 29 l. 18 r. one Lord p. 30 l. 38 r. Nicetas p. 33 l. 41 r. a dead p. 34 l. 32 r. Sentence p. 47 l. 19 soul r. joul p. 51 l. 29 pro r. per in the margin In the 2 Book p. 3 l. 8 fur r for p. 6 l. 27 Lucan r. Bucan p 8 l. 33 Ehat r. That p. 12 l. 16 aith r. saith l. 18 sod r. Son l 23 conjicietur r. conjicietur p. 17 l. 19 r. how can p 18 l. 37 Olympus r.