Ambr. de Dignit Hom. c. 2. Faculties of the Soul Vnderstanding Will and Memory St. Ierome tells us that Christ was therefore baptized in Jordan because that Hier. in Mat. c. 16. River represented the Trinity for that it was called Jordan because it issued from two Heads the one called Jor the other Dan All these Threes are severally distinct and yet unseparated in Nature One Sun One Fire One Water One Arm. One Tree One Soul And one Jordan Yet when we say the Three Persons are but of one Essence the Reader is to be informed that we are not so to be understood as if we affirmed that there is no Essential or Quidditative difference between these Three Persons for the Three Divine Persons must needs be distinct and different in some Essential difference otherwise they all must be confessed to be but One Person Therefore something there must be whereby the Father is Father and not Son and so in the other Persons to constitute them Persons distinct each from other For in Logick we learn that even the very Accidents have their respective Essence such as it is to make them what they are so must the several Divine Persons have and to this our Orthodox Divines consent for thus they write Personae habent unum esse absolutum Essentiale Naturale Sed diversum esse Relativum Personale i. e. The Three Persons have but one Essence absolute of their own nature but Diverse Essences Relative and Personal So that these several Essences or Acts and Quiddities are not in the absolute nature or God-head of them but in the Relative Personalities for they are all Absolutely but One God and yet they are distinct and several Persons they are intirely and truly One thing and as truly Three several things Which St. Anselm as it seemeth to me doth very acutely thus determine and express Anselm de incarn c. 3. Tres Res sunt una res viz. Vna res Absoluta Tres res Relativae In uno Communi unum sunt sc Dietate In tribus Proprietatibus Diversae sunt i. e. The Divine Persons are Three things and they are but One Thing viz. They are Three things Relatively but One thing Absolutely for in one common thing they are but One that is one in Essence or God-head but Three in Persons or Proprieties Thus he and much more to this purpose If it be enquired what those Propertics are which are peculiar to each Person and that do distinguish every Person each from other In this we are plentifully resolved by former Writers Richardus de St. Victore thus sets Rich. de St. Vict. de Trinit c. 15. and 25. down their personal Proprieties Pater dat solum Filius accipit dat Spiritus accipit solum i. e. The Father giveth only The Son receiveth and giveth The Spirit receiveth only from both There cannot be another Property or Person which neither giveth nor taketh for if so then we should be driven to confess a Quaternity of Persons instead of a Trinity Nazianzen sets down the Proprieties in these words Ingenitus Genitus Procedens i. e. Naz. Orat. 23. and Orat. 28. Basil Epist 349. Unbegotten Begotten Proceeding And St. Basil thus Paternitas Filiatio Sanctificativa potestas i. e. Fatherhood Sonship Sanctificative power for although the Father and the Son do Sanctifie yet they do it not immediately by themselves but mediately by the Holy Ghost who is the Spirit of Sanctification If therefore each Person have any one thing peculiar and proper to it self and incommunicable to any other of the Divine Persons this Property must needs prove it to be a several and distinct Person And if there be any one Person in the God-head which doth neither give to the Other nor receive from the Other This must needs prove a Person without any communion with the other and so the Vnity would be lost Now that it may by the Scriptures appear that there are several Proprieties in the several Persons and those incommunicable to the other Persons We read that The Son is the Image of the Father but it is never read that the Father is the Image of the Son or Spirit So it is said The Word or Son was made flesh but neither the Father nor the Spirit are ever said to be made flesh So the Son is called The only Begotten so is not the Father or the Spirit therefore the Ancient Writers called the Father Ingenitum Innascibilem Impassibilem i. e. Not Begotten not Born not Passible nor can the Father be said to proceed from the Son or Spirit But these Properties cannot be affirmed of the Son who is Begotten born and suffered nor of the Holy Ghost who proceedeth from the Father and the Son Besides these The Scripture doth cleerly declare the several Personalities in the God-head by our Saviours words Joh. 14 15. I will pray the Father and he shall send another Comforter Here is evidently a distinct Trinity I and He and Another As touching the Vnity of the Three Persons the Arians utterly deny it and therefore they expostulated with the Catholicks because in the asserting thereof they used some words which were not found in holy Scriptures as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Essence and Consubstantiality and they nick-named the Catholicks calling them Homousians because the Nicene Fathers had inserted the word Homousion in their Creed One Pascentius was so offended therewith that simply mistaking it to be the name of a man he required that the Church would anathematize or excommunicate Homousion as b Aug. Epist 174. Austin reports But Athanasius made this answer to the Arians b That they themselves used many more words c Athan. in Decret Nicaen Concil which were not Scriptural As That the Son was not always That the Father was not always a Father That the Son was Factura i. e. a Creature and that he was made of nothing whereupon one Sect of the Arians were called d Soz. lib. 4. c. 28. Exoucontii and that those frequent Arian words Homoiousion and Innascibilis were not found in the Scriptures and that the Catholicks were forced to use new words because the Arians raised new Heresies although among the Catholicks the self same Ancient Doctrine had continued immutable for upon the like occasion even the holy Scripture it self had assumed a new word as we read Act. 11. 26. That whereas before the Church-Members were called Disciples and Brethren now they are by a new name called Christians First at Antioch and this because false Brethren and false Teachers arose teaching Doctrines contrary to the Apostles and yet these Brethren were called Disciples and named themselves from men as John Baptists Disciples did and as those mentioned 1 Cor. 1. 12. said I am of Paul I am of Apollo I of Cephas c. therefore the Church to prevent a Schisme would have all that professed Christ to be called
by one new name Christians which is thought to be prophesied by Isaiah when he said Isaiah 62. 2. Thou shalt be called by a new name Finally because the Arians used the word Triousion teaching thereby that the Three Persons were of three several Natures and Essences therefore the Catholicks to assert the Vnity of the God-head in all and every Person most significantly used the word Homousion Thus Athanasius e Atha in Disput cum Ario. c. To. 4. Notwithstanding this true and just allegation The Arians perswaded Constantius the then Arian Emperor by Edict to forbid that any new words should be used in matters of faith and this upon a pretence of a Scriptural inhibition because St. Paul thus chargeth Timothy O Timothee depositum Custodi devitans 1 Tim. 6. 20. Hil. advers Const lib. 1. profanans vocum novitates But St. Hilary addressed this answer That St. Paul did indeed command Timothy to avoid novelties yet they were only profane Novelties Now you command us to avoid new words which are holy and tending to Piety which is all one as if you should forbid a new Antidâ—te against a new poison or a new War against new enemies Thus he But there are other new words of as great concernment which some have found fault with without cause as is next to be shewed CHAP. V. Of the word Trinity Why it is used the real Warrant for it in Scripture Why Baptisme is administred in the name of the Trinity And why the Trinity is called three Persons THere are some that cavil even at the word and appellation of the Trinity because they finde not this word literally in the Scriptures who yet cannot deny that the same thing and Doctrine is really found there but both Heathen and Christian Writers reprove such Wranglers as stand upon words when the thing it self is evident a Cic. cont Salust Vbi rerum testimonia adsunt quid opus est verbis And b Aug. Epist 174. dedâ—ct Christ l. 4. c. 11 Quid est contensiosius quam ubi de re constat certare de nomine And Bonorum ingeniorum indoles est in verbis verum amare non verba A good disposition and an humble Christian will embrace an old truth though clothed with a new word The Scriptural evidence for the reality and truth of the thing is cleer For at the Baptism of Christ the Three Persons did distinctly sensibly and separatly shew or declare their presence at one time The Father audibly by a voice The Son and Spirit visibly and therefore c Chrys hom 24. Antioch hom 46. 31. Idem Serm. de Epiph. To. 6. St. Chrysostom calls the Baptism of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Epiphanie or manifestation of Messiah and he also calls that Apparition Theophania i. e. the appearing of God And moreover tells us of this Festival of the Epiphany which even in his days was solemnized by the Church That is was kept for the commemoration not of the Nativity but of the Baptism of Christ and for this reason the Church of England appointed that on the Feast of Epiphany the third Chapter of St. Luke should be read as a Lesson proper for that day wherein the Baptism Luk. 3. 21. of Christ and this Apparition is declared for therefore it was called Epiphany because at this Baptism the Lord Jesus was by the Father and the Holy Ghost openly proclaimed to be That Son of God and that Messiah which had been before promised and Prophesied in whom only God would be well pleased and be at peace with man And surely that Heavenly and Mysterious Apparition of the two other Persons was also for a further reach and purpose namely to declare to the world that this Jesus was that man which was assumed into Personal union with the God-head and that this Emmanuel or God incarnate was hereby declared to be assumed into the number of the Trinity at that time Although in respect of his pure God-head and as he was God the Word he was One of the Persons of the Trinity before and also from Eternity And although this Emanuel or God incarnate was one of the Three Divine Persons at the first instant and moment of his Incarnation yet he was not so declared and manifested to be so until this glorious Apparition For this very cause it may with great reason be thought that in correspondence to this Apparition at his own Baptism when he afterwards prescribed the form and words of Baptism for all Christians He strictly commanded that they should be baptized In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost In the Original it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 28. 19. i. e. into the Name which signifieth that they should be baptized into the Trinity For name doth often signifie the very thing it self which is named as Divines call that word by which a thing is call'd Nomen Nominans and they call that thing which is named Nomen Nominatum Baptism is the Sacrament of our entrance and admission into the body of Christ so by those words Christ signified that he would have Christians to be by Baptism offered and tendred for their admission into the fellowship union communion and society or spiritual corporation with the Father Son and Holy Ghost and this himself had declared before when he thus prayed to the Father Joh. 17. 21. for all Beleevers That they all may be one as thou Father art in me and I in thee That they also may be One in us And so St. John telleth us 1 Joh. 1. 3. Truly our fellowship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ and because this communion or fellowship is wrought by the holy Spirit being the Cement or Ligament by which we are to be united and joyned to the Trinity therefore St. Paul mentioneth the Communion of the Holy Ghost with Christians 2 Cor. 13. 13. And the fellowship of the Spirit Phil. 2. 1. Another evidence real we have by the words of St. John 1 Joh. 5. 7. There are Three that bear witness in Heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit and these Three are One These words do so cleerly declare both a Trinity in the God-head and an Unity of the Three that it is no marvel that the Arian Faction did raze them out of that Epistle in so much that they were omitted in divers Copies after the days of Arius But we finde them alledged before Arius was known by St. Ciprian in his Tractate De simplicitate Praelatorum pag. 164. in the Basil Edition of Froben And again we finde them cited by Athanasius to Arius himself in his disputation held with the said Arius at the Nicene Council as is set down in his Book entituled Disputatio cont Arium the words are found pag. 717. in the Basil Edition Ex Officina Frobeniana An. Dom. 1556. which Scripture was not then
Father and the Son under the name of Wisdom Prov. 8. 22. The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way before his works of old I was set up from everlasting I was brought forth just so doth the Psalmist express the Eternal generation of the Son Psalm 1103. Ex utero ante Luciferum genui te so was the old reading of those words in Jerome and Austin Brought forth and from the womb these words signifie that by Wisdom the Son is meant and the mention of the Womb of the Father doth signifie that this Son is of the same substance with the Father as children of the womb are of the same substance with their Parents and Before the morning Star signifieth that the Son was before time or any other Creature And that it may appear that by Wisdom the Son of God is meant the words of the Apostle will declare 1 Cor. 1. 24. where he calleth Christ The wisdom of God And as the Psalmist tells us that God made all things in wisdom So the Gospel tells us who this wisdome is viz. The Son The Word The Father created all things but he created them by the Son which St. John expresseth in these words Joh. 1. 3. All things were made by him that is by the Son or Word and this St. Paul doth clearly apply to Christ Col. 1. 16. For by him were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in Earth visible and invisible whether they be Thrones or Dominions or Principalities or Powers so that even the most glorious Arch-Angels and Angels are but the Creatures of this Son of God and this Wisdom of God Finally These men that tell us That God hath not always a Son may as well tell us that God had not always Wisdom But as they dare not deny the Wisdom of God to have been from Eternity so neither can they without very great impudence deny the Word or Son of the Father to have been from everlasting I will conclude this Chapter with the words of St. Basil who thus argued against the Anti-Trinitarians out of the words of St. John k Basil Hom. 16. To him that shall say There was a time when the Son or Word was not you may answer If this speech be true which the Gospel delivereth In the beginning was the Word I pray when was that time when he was not CHAP. IIII. Of the Holy Ghost That he is one of the Three Divine Persons and that he is to be prayed unto which is shewed both both by Warrant of Scripture and by the practice of the Primitive Christians and of the Church of England wherein he is confessed in Creeds and invoked in Baptisms and Doxologies THe Macedonian Hereticks confessed the Divine Personality of the Father and the Son but they denied the Person of the Holy Ghost and there are some among us who although they will not openly deny the Divinity and Person of the Holy Ghost yet they are doubtful and suspensive therein And this because they cannot or will not finde that any Prayers in Scripture are used or directed to the Holy Spirit as they are both to the Father and the Son They finde the Son of God praying to the Father Father into thy hands I commend my Spirit And Forgive them Father they know not what they do They Luk. 23. 46. 34. find also St. Stephen praying to the Son Lord Act. 7. 59. Jesus receive my Spirit For the satisfaction of such as these who are neither maliciously nor obstinately wedded to this error I will endeavour to shew both the Personality of the most Holy Spirit and also that he is to be prayed unto and both these by the evidences and precedents of holy writ and by the practice of our of our owne Church and also of the Primitive Christians First That the Holy Ghost is a Divine and distinct Person in the Trinity as well and as truly as either the Father or the Son We find that the Scriptures record and report many diverse actions and operations of the Holy Ghost which must needs be the performances of a Person for He appeared as a Dove And as fiery Tongues He teacheth He leadeth into all truth He brought into the Apostles memories whatsoever Christ had said He decreed in a Council Acts 15. He forgiveth sins by the Apostles by whom he was received and entertained for that purpose Joh. 20. 22. He is an Advocate or Comforter He distributeth gifts He spake by the Prophets and in the Apostles He calleth and maketh Ministers Act. 13. 2. And Bishops Act. 20. 28. where the very Original word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which I know not why our Translators rendred Overseers when in other places they Translated the very same word Bishops which is the very Text word without any alteration but only as it is formed to out English Idiom In a word this Holy Spirit is produced by St. John as a witness that Jesus is the Christ 1 John 5. 6. Secondly for Prayer We say that the Scripture doth evidently set down a Warrant and a Precedent of Prayer to the Holy Ghost which you will finde if you observe the words of St. Paul 2 Cor. 13. 13. The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the communion of the Holy Ghost be with you This is a Prayer and here is not only a mention of the Holy Ghost but indeed all these words Grace Love and Communion do relate principally if not only to the Holy Ghost for the Spirit is the Grace and the Love of the Father and the Son and the grace of Jesus and the Love of the Father are conveyed unto us only by the Communion and Inspiration of the Holy Spirit The Spirit is the Conduit of them and the Cement or Ligament by which our conjunction fellowship Union or Communion is wrought and by which we are joyned and united in one Mystical body or corporation with the whole Trinity and this is the meaning of that saying of St. John Baptist concerning the Baptism of Christ He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost for those that are Mat 3. 11. baptized into Christ are by this Spirit united to him in one mystical body and so become One with him and by this Union with Christ they are united with the whole Trinity and therefore there is mention of the Holy Ghost in the formal words of Baptism because our Union is wrought only by this holy Cement of the Spirit for this reason it is that the Apostle prayeth for the Communion of the Holy Ghost Communion signifieth a mutual union of the Spirit with us and of us with the Spirit Communio is as much as Counio or uni◠cum The Scriptures are so plentiful in precedents of Prayers to the Holy Ghost that you may find them at least in thirteen of St. Pauls Epistles and at the beginning of every one of them for thus we read Rom 1. 7. Grace
nor the Holy Ghost were incarnate we answer that it is true that all the Three Persons equally govern and we further acknowledg that neither the Person of the Father nor the Person of the Holy Ghost are incarnate but only the Person of the Son yet we beleeve that the whole God-head and essence of the Father and of the Holy Ghost is incarnate in the Person of the Son This was affirmed by Christ when he said The Father is in me and I in him Ioh. 10. 38. and John Baptist had said before That God hath given him the Spirit not by measure Ioh. 3. 34. and St. Luke saith that Jesus was full of the Holy Ghost and St. Paul saith Col. 2. 9. In him Lu. 4. 1. dwelleth all the fulness of the God-head bodily whereby it appeareth that the Dominion of Christ doth not in any wise exclude the Dominion of the other Divine persons although St. Jude calls Christ the only Lord God yet this word only doth not barr the Lordship or God-head of the Father and Holy Ghost because as our good rule in Logick teacheth us That Propositio exclusiva non excludit inclusa Next concerning the Priesthood of Christ he is said to be a Priest for ever after the order of Heb. 7. 17. Melchisedech if for ever then he must be a Priest in Heaven but if so then the Socinians tell us that Christ can not be the supream God because the supream God can not be a Priest This cavil I have met with before and answered a Lib. 2. c. 15. out of Arstin That Christ is a Priest only as he is the Son of man as incarnate and Emanuel but not as he is the Son of God or God the Word and so Prosper also resolved this doubt upon those words Thou art a Priest b Prosper in Psal 109. Non quatenus ex patre sed quantenus ex Matre natus est Sacerdos i. e. Christ is a Priest not as he is the Son of his Father but as he is the Son of his Mother But we are further told by the Socinians That Heb. 7. 1. p. â— 16. c. Christ was not a Priest till he was dead and that then his Priesthood began that the expiatory or satisfactory offering of Christ was not performed on the cross or on earth but in Heaven This they affirm because they will not beleeve that our Redemption was wrought by the death of Christ so blasphemously do they vilipend the blood of Christ whereas indeed the ultimate expiation or satisfaction consisteth in the death of Christ answering to the very words of the Covenant viz In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye and therefore the Apostle Gen. 2. 17. Rom. 6. 23. saith The wages of sin is death now if Christ dyed for us on the Cross he there also performed the expiation and paid the ransom for if the expiatory sacrifice were to be performed in Heaven then must Christ have suffered death in Heaven but the Apostle tells us that after his resurrection he dyeth no more This foul blasphemy Rom. 6. 9. is near a kin to that of Origen which St. Jerom reports a Hier. Epist 59. c. 4. That Christ was to suffer in the Air for the salvation of Divels and to suffer in Heaven also because we read of Spirituall wickedness in Heavenly places that so the inhabitants Eph. 6. 12. of al regions might be saved through Christs passions Thus he It being granted that Christ is now a Priest in Heaven it would be inquired of what order or kind his Priesthood is there in this we are certified that it is a Priesthood for ever and that it is after or according to the Priesthood of Melchisedech that is Christ is such a Priest in Heaven as Melchisedech was on Earth and therefore Christ in Heaven doth such Priestly acts as Melchisedech did on earth For Christ whilest he was on earth was a Priest but here his Priesthood was Aaronical i. e. like unto Aarons Priesthood because Christ did offer a bloody sacrifice even his own body and blood on the Altar of the Cross which he gave for a ransom for us Mat. 20. 28. For a propitiation Ro. 3. 25. for our Justification Ro. 5. 9. for our Redemption Eph. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. to bear our sins in his own body 1 Pet. 2. 24. that is to undergo the punishment for our sins paying the ransom of his own self for us 1 Tim. 2. 6. This bloody sacrifice of Christ was typified and only signified by Aaron offering the bodies and blood of Beasts But the sacrifice of Christ on earth was also unlike Aarons because Aaron offered beasts but Christ offered himself Aaron might not offer human blood nor might Christ offer the blood of Beasts whereupon it is said Heb. 8. 4. That Christ on earth could not be a Priest because he could not offer gifts according to the Law that is he could not offer Levitical Sacrifices of Beasts as the Legal Priests did because he was not a Son of Aaron or of the Tribe of Levi. But he might and did offer his own humane blood which was the Substance whereas the blood of Beasts offered by Aaron was but only the shadow Therefore they that tell us that Christ may not be called an Aaronicall Priest because he was not a Son of Aaron may as well tell us that he may not be called The Lamb because he was not literally a Lamb taken out of the Sheep-fold The truth is this As the Lamb was Ex. 12. 5. but the shadow of Christs Passion so the Priesthood of Aaron was but the shadow of Christs Sacrificing Priesthood This Sacrificing Priesthood of Christ ended at his death so that he is not any more to be sacrificed but his Melchisedechical Priesthood and only that order of his Priesthood must continue for ever St. Austin saith of the Iews a Aug. in Psa 109. Iudaei vident jam periisse sacerdotium secundum Ordinem Aaron non agnoscunt Sacerdetium secundum ordinem Melchisedech This reproof toucheth not only Jews but Romanists and Socinians The Iews expect a restitution of their Temple and Aaronical or Levitical Sacrifices Romanists say Christ is daily Sacrificed on their Altars Socinians say that Christ Offereth Sacrificeth himself Com. on Heb. 9. v. 12. p. 168. in Heaven not considering that his Priesthood is only like Melchisedech's now which was not a Sacrificing Priesthood for we find not that any Sacrifice was offered by Melchisedech on earth neither may Christ our Melchisedech be thought in any wise to offer Sacrifice in Heaven But of this more anon If Christ being in Heaven doth there Sacrifice for us it must also be granted that he there prayeth for us because no Sacrifice can be rightly performed without prayer but no good Christian may imagine that the mediation of Christ in Heaven is by way of prayer neither can we find in
did not for this reason call him the Son of God And although the Scripture doth call him the finger of God because the Spirit doth shew the secret Counsels of God yet in all this Scripture the Spirit is never called the Son of God or said to be begotten And when the Macedonian Hereticks demanded an example or Instance of One begotten and another not begotten yet both to come from one Gregory Naz. answereth them c Naz. Orat. 37. that Eve and Seth were both of them from Adam Seth was begotten and Eve not begotten When an earthly King sends his Embassador to declare his will or desires to another State will any man say that the Embassador must for this cause be called the Kings Son No surely although he be Legatus a latere or Legatus natus as our Archbish of Cant. was once called and a veridicus and no Mendoza as one pleasantly described an Embassador Vin bonus peregre missus ad mentienduÌ„ pro Repub. yet no Son for this neither are the Apostles to be called sons for this although S. Paul saith They are Embassadors for Christ 2 Cor. 5. 20. There are other precences alleadged by the Commenter in this matter but they are frivolous and light and easily discernable by any intelligent Reader to be but vain and are not worth the while to examine This Doctrine of the Eternal Son of God and so of the Holy Trinity of Persons is of such necessity to be retained and beleeved that without it Christians cannot reasonably fancy to themselves any probable way of Salvation because as I have formerly shewed upon this Doctrine is grounded the everlasting Covenant of grace which is also called the Eternal Gospel by which only we can hope for and claim Salvation by and in Christ wherefore to me it seemeth a wonderful blindness of some in these Times by whom the blessed Trinity is not only unbelieved but withal so fouly blasphemed that it is both unfitting yea and dangerous to report their words and therefore in the same case S. Basil in his Book against the Heretick Eunomius wherein he was forced to declare his blasphemous Errors thus prayed d Baz Cont. Eunol ib. 2. Domine in his quae loquimur propitius nobis sis i. e. That God would be merciful to him for his only rehearsing Eunomius his blasphemies God is patient indeed in suffering such abuses both of his Truth and Person and doth therefore permit them because he can extract some good use from them upon this reason S. Paul tells us 1 Cor. 11. 19. There must be Heresies as if there were some need of them which surely is chiefly this That the rising of Heresies giveth occasion to the Church to set forth and explain the true and holy Doctrine more evidently then otherwise it would be But I proceed CHAP. 2. The difficulty of the Doctrine of the Trinity and other Christian Mysteries that it should not discourage us from bileeving nor provoke us to impatience The most learned Philosophers Jews and Christians professing their ignorances THe Ancient Hereticks rejected the Doctrine of the Trinity because they could not by reasoning comprehend it and many now a days neglect it because it is sublime and hard to be understood But this pretence will not serve their turn the difficulties should not hinder but rather quicken our indeavors to find out what we can nor should they impede our faith from beleeving that which we are sure the Scriptures propound to us although we understand it not S. Ambrose saith very truly a Ambr. de Offic. lib. 1. c. 1. Nemo est qui doceri non egeat dum vivit ie The most wise and learned men may still be learners whilst they live Neither doth God require our comprehension of all Christian Doctrine but our apprehension not our understanding but our beleeving it The Articles of faith are tendred to us under the word Credo i. e. to be beleeved though not understood Christ himself calls our Religion The Mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven Mat. 13. 11. and S. Paul The Mystery of godliness 1 Tim. 3. 16. The word Mystery signifieth a thing secret and hidden of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to shut and in another place he calls these Mysteries Riddles 1 Cor. 13. 12. here we see darkly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e in a Riddle The Prophet saith Verily thâ—u art a God that hidâ—st Isa 45. 15. Luc. 10. 21. thy self Christ said That the Father had hid those things from the wise which yet he revealed to Babes So Christ was figured by the Ark which stood in a secret place of the Temple and there was also a Veile before it to intimate that Christ was for a time shut up veiled and hidden and indeed Moses Veil signified the same thing as the Apostle saith of the careless Jews 2. Cor. 3. 15. But even unto this day when Moses is read the veile is upon their heart when it shall turn unto the Lord the Veil shall be taken away i. e. When by faith their heart shall embrace Christ this darkness shall be light For the submitting our carnal wisdom and reason to the word of God will bring a greater evidence to our souls then the profoundest disputes can do Upon these words My sheep hear my voyce S. Basil observeth Audiunt non disputant ie they make no disputes but accept it and the old reading of those words Isa 7. 9 as we finde generally in the Fathers was Nisi credideri is non intelligetis i. e. except ye beleeve ye shall not understand So S Peter puts believing before knowing Joh. 6. 69. We beleeve and are sure it is in the Original we beleeve and know for in these Mysteries faith must lead us to knowledge b Aug. in Joh. Tract 29. Noli intelligere ut credas sed crede ut intelligas i. e. say not I will not beleeve until I understand but first beleeve and then understanding will follow Christ saith If you beleeve not that I am he you shall dye in Joh. 8. 28. your sins blessed be God saith the Expositer that he did not say Except ye understand it Austin reporting the great faith of Christians in his time tells us that it was a common saying among them c Aug. de Tem. Serm. 189. Accepto baptismo dicere solemus fidelis factus sum credo quod nescio i. e. When we are baptized we use to say now I am one of the faithful for I beleeve that which I understand not When Abailardus would needs know the reason why the Son of God would redeem and save mankind by his own blood-shedding which he might have done by his word only S. Bernard returned this answer d Bern. Epist 190. Ipsum interroga mihi scire licet quod ita Cur ita non licet i. e. Ask Christ himself for though I know he did so yet why did he so I may not presume to
know and S Austin giveth this good advice concerning the Articles of our faith which may be understood and those also which we cannot understand e Aug. in Ioh. Tract 35. Si potes Cape Si non potes crede i. e. Understand what you can and beleeve the rest for in those great mysteries it is safer to build our faith upon the sure word of God then to depend on a sandy foundation of humane reason and to be firmly assured of this as Epiphaninus saith f Ephiph haer 70. Quicquid Deus dicit verum est licet nos non intelligamus i. e. Whatsoever God hath said it is certainly true although we do not understand it and Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have beleeved Neither should our weakness and want of Joh. 20. 29. knowledge in such high mysteries either discourage us or move us to impatience for we may find in wiser men then our selves as great ignorance who yet were not ashamed to acknowledge it for even in things mundane and natural the wisest Philosopher said He Socrates knew nothing at all but his own ignorance and Themistius Anaxarchus another professed That The greatest part of his knowledg was but the least part of his nescience and another saith he did not know so much as his own wants of knowledge and many others by reason of this professed ignorance were called g Dion lacet in Pyrrhon Sceptici Ephetici Zetetici and Aporetici i. e. Considerers unresolved Seekers Doubters as in a Labyrinth without any passage of Egress Who knows the true manner of the motions of the Stars Men now doubt whether the Sun be moved at all or whether the Earth move or stand still we are not satisfied in the cause of Tides nor do we know the forms of many thousands of Creatures A great Philosopher said Dic formam lapidis Phillida solus habeto Our own soul knoweth not it self nor doth it know by it self what is within that body which it informeth although it is within it and in every part of it as Austin expresseth it h Aug. de Trin. l. 6. c. 2. Tota in Toto in qualibet ejus parte tora nor doth it know the forming of the body in the womb although it is under God instrumentally operative in that work If we patiently indure our ignorance in these things how much rather should we in the deepest mysteries of Religion as Athanasius advised i Atha Cont. Aâ—ian O. 3. Non quaerendam est quomodo Dâ—us gignat nec modum iâ—effabile est and just so doth Basil k Basil hom 25 Filius est Gâ—nitus ne quaeras quomodo dut quando est impâ—ssibilis responsio i. e. God hath a Son inquire not how or when he begot him for it is ineffable and an Answer is impossible the same Father saith that if he thought it possible Cont. Eunom lib. 3. to know all things then perhaps he would be ashamed to confess his ignorance but seeing the greatest Philosophers knew not the nature of a poor little Pismire how shall we be able to comprehend the great Mysteries of Epist 162. God Thus he The most learned of the Jews did not understand the meaning of their own Religion and Sacraments in the old Testament although they were so conversant therein as appeareth by Philo the learned Jew who confessed that he knew not the meaning of those words Gen. 1 26. Let us make man but he thought Philâ— de Mundi Opific p. 15. that God had assumed some other helpers in that work that so the miscarriages of man might be imputed to those other fellow-Creators and not to God Thus he Judaizeth not knowing or beleeving the Trinity So Id. Lib. de Circum pag. 811. again when he desired to shew to what end and purpose God appointed the Sacrament of Circumcision he doth it so poorly that it appeareth evidently that himself knew not the meaning thereof and verily at this day no Jews persisting in the Jewish Religion do understand the intent and meaning of their own Laws and Sacraments but only the bare Letter for if they did truly know to what purpose and signification their Sacrafices and Pascal Lamb were ordained they would not any longer continue in their Judaism and therefore Origen truly affirmeth l De lege Mosis melius quam Judaeus nos respondebinus Orig. Cont. Cels l. 2. i. e. A Christian can render a better reason and account of Moses Laws then the Jews themselves Touching the Obscurity of the Scriptures the Christian Doctors do generally acknowledg it and set down may reasons why the Holy Spirit would haue them so difficult For they say 1. If the Mysteries therein were so easily understood Truth would not so earnestly be sought nor be so pleasant when it is found 2. That these Obscuri ieâ— are prâ—fitable to incite us to a mâ—re ailigâ—nt ïnâ—â—isition 3. Because a gracious truth which wâ— understand not is the more loved and ad dired if it be beleeved 4. That thâ— Obscurity may prevâ—nt our satiâ—ty or weariness of them that they grew not tedious or despicable 5 To abate the pride of the mâ—st proâ—ound wordly Sciolists who may find themselves often posed in them These and many other Reasons are alledged by Divines of Gods ordering these obscurities and because we do not in all places of Scripture understand the word we should ascribe reverence to the Author and reserve humility to our selves and seeing there are truths manifest and sufficient to feed us that we should use the obscurer for our exercise and withal to know that what we cannot understand in the undoubted word of God we should notwithstanding beleeve and then our nescience cannot hurt us Clemens of Alexandria tells us truly m Clem. Alex Stro. l. 4. Difficilia non sunt necessaria necessaria non sunt difficilia i. e. Those things which are too hard to be understood are not necessarily to be understood and those things which are necessarily to be understood are not hard Neither are the profoundest Doctors and wisest men ashamed to acknowledg their ignorance in these high Mysteries Even King Solomon in the Person of Agur Prov. 30. 2. Prov. 30. 2. saith Surely I am more brutish then any man and have not the understanding of a man This he said in respect of his own humane and acquired knowledg but not of that wisdom which was inspired by God S. Basil was for his learning and profound knowledg in Religion called The Great yet he saith to every man n Bas hom 27. Quae ignoras superant cognita S. Hirome saith o Hier. n. 40. in sacris Scripturis pluâ—a nescio quam scio S. Ambrose saith p Amb. hexam lib. 6. libenter fateor me nescire quod nescio Austin the profoundest of them all saith q Aug. Epist 119. de Animae Orig. c. 16. Sanctis Scripturis multa nescio
many Learned Divines to which the learned Readers know how to have recourse and the unlearned will not need them nor indeed could understand them This little Treatise aimeth principally at the information of the ordinary rank of Christians and so of the most of whom Tertullian saith Simplices enim sunt ne dicam Idiolae major pars credentium Tert. cont Prax. That if by Gods assistance I may instrumentally promote their beleeving I have my desire for although they cannot understand the subtile objections of the Adversaries yet a good constant Christian may resolve with that generous Faith of the forenamed Father concerning the Mysteries of Christ which Jews and Heathens esteemed folly and as St. Paul saith The foolishness and the weakness of God 1 Cor. 1. 25. o De. Carn Chri. Natus est Dei filius non pudet quid pudendum est Mortuus est Dei filius prorsus credibile est quia ineptum certum est quia impossibile The Mysteries of the Son of God and the death of this Son of God which others account ignominious foolish and impossible the Christian doth therefore account most honourable credible and certain The same we confidently affirm of this Mystery of the Unity of the God-Head and of the Trinity of Persons therein although to unbeleevers it seem ever so improbable But yet God hath not left us altogether without the helps of humane reason by affording us many resemblances of this great Mysterie both in Nature and Morality As will be shewed hereafter CHAP. IIII. The Doctrine of the Trinity is obscurely delivered in the old Testament but cleerly in the New Why the Septuagint Translators concealed it from the Heathens The Resemblances of the Trinity and Unity in Nature The three Persons and their several Properties and joint Unity Why the Fathers used some words not found in the Scriptures SAint Basil observeth upon those words Bas Hexam hom 9. Gen. 1. 26. Let us make man that the Jews denying the second Person said That God talked to himself but what Carpenter saith he being alone would so talk or but with his instruments for if so then he must have said fiat homo i. e. Let man be made but here is faciamus i. e. Let us make which implies another Person and that no creature or Angel because he added In our Image And after our likeness for man was made in the Image of God not of Angels or any other creature Thus he Gregory Naz. also observeth Naz. Orat. 37. That the Old Testament speaketh evidently of the Father but obscurely of the Son And that the Evangelists speak plainly of the Son but darkly of the Holy Ghost because God would not ingage us in this part of Faith until the God-head of the Father and the Son were more cleerly manifested thus by degrees like the Sun-light illuminating man by little and little So Epiphanius noteth against the Pneumatici Epiph. haer 74. who denied the God-head of the holy Ghost that Moses plainly declareth one God and the Prophets two Persons in God and the Apostles a Trinity of Persons And we are told by St. Jerome a Proaem Quaest in Gen. That the Septuagint abstained from revealing the Mystery of Christ and his coming to King Ptolomy who set them on the work of Translation lest he being an Heathen should think that the Jews had two Gods and also because as Basil of Seleucia Bas Seleu. Orat. 9. noteth Gods appointed time for revealing Christ to the Gentiles was not yet come Indeed we finde in after times that both Heathens and Hereticks objected that the Christians had two or three Gods upon a confession of a plurality of Persons For Porphyrius called the Christians Trinity b Aug. de Civ l. 10. c. 29. Three Gods So the Macedonian Hereticks called the Catholicks c Naz. Orat. 37. Tritheitas as if they had three Gods but they were thus answered by Nazianzen That if the Catholicks were so because they confessed Three Persons then must those Macedonians be called Bideitae because they acknowledged two Persons viz. The Father and the Son The Arians confessed Three Persons but they denyed the Vnity of the God-head in them The Sabellians confessed the Unity of the God-head but denyed a Plurality or Duality of Persons therein both these Heresies are refelled by that speech of Christ John 10. 30. I and my Father are one as Prosp. noteth d Prosp Sent. 346. Vnum hoc perculit Arium Sumus hoc Sabellium stravit i. e. in that he saith One this siniteth Arius and in that he saith Plurally We are this confuteth Sabellius This observation he learned of St. Austin who against both those Heresies thus confesseth the Trinity e Aug. de qum que Haeres To. 6. c. 7. Gratias tibi Vera Vna Trinitas Vna Trina Veritas Trina Vna Vnitas For as the Error of Heathens was in beleeving a Plurality of Gods so the error of Jews and Hereticks was in denying a Plurality of Persons in one God Now that it may appear that the Mystery of the Trinity is not so far remote from humane capacity and faith as if to Reason it might seem altogether impossible God hath given us many resemblances thereof which are obvious and easie to be discerned which Similitudes must not be thought fully to correspond in all particulars to the Divine Trinity as we learn in Logick Omne simile est dissimile Nullum simile est idem Similitudo non Currit quatuor pedibus c i. e. Every like is also unlike No like is the same Similitudes do always halt with one foot But it will be enough if we can finde some one particular wherein they are assimulated We see that one man may sustain three several Offices or Persons as One may be a Merchant a Souldier and a Magistrate These are different Offices yet one man is all Marsilius Ficinus in his Preface to the Book of Mercurius Trismegistus tells us that he was therefore called Trismegistus i. e. Thrice Greatest because he was the Greatest Philosopher the Greatest Priest and the Greatest Prince So the elder Pliny tells us that Cato the elder was the best Orator the best Commander and Plin. Hist l. 7. c. 27. the best Senator here is one man is all these though every one of these Offices differ each from other even as the Father Son and Spirit are all but one God yet are Persons distinct one from another Dionysius Areop resembleth the Trinity to Dionis de Div. Nom. c. 2. three Lamps in a Room which though they be several and distinct yet the light of all is but one light Nazianzen compares it with Naz. Orat. 37. the Sun Sun beam and Light and to Fire Heat and Light and to the Spring Well and Stream and to the Arm the Hand and the Finger and to the Root the Body and the Boughs of a Tree St. Ambrose to the three
Peter and S. Paul but said they What if St. Peter and St. Paul be also un-sainted what must we then do They were told that then they should dedicate their Churches to the Trinity which they did and so they stood at that time quietly e De Schism Angl. p. 92. This Story is reported by Nich. Sanders in his Book De Schismate Anglorum I do therefore here exhort both my self and others also that seeing the old Saints and even the Apostles themselves are not now adays vouchsafed the title of Saints although they cannot be unsainted because that is not in mans power and that the Churches named by their names and also by the Appellation of Ecclesia sanctae individuae Trinitatis do for all this suffer wrack and are bereaved of their rights and riches and left Mat. 24. 15. desolate as if the Abomination or Desolation were come upon us and for as much as we see that none of our outward stony Temples are either Persecution-proof or Reformation-proof Let us in the name of God consecrate and dedicate our own little Chapels our private Tabernacles and Temples of our Bodies and Souls to the everlasting Blessed and glorious Trinity that so they may abide firme for ever for then their riches will continue un-sequestrable there where Theeves cannot break through and steal Mat. 6. 19. By what hath been said I trust it appears That in the God-head there are Three Persons all Coequal Coessential and Coeternal and all to be invoked worshipped and glorifyed for see how the Apostle evidently expresseth this truth 1 Cor. 12. where speaking of the diversities of gifts of the Holy Ghost yet calleth the Author of those graces The same Spirit The same Lord. The same God which St. Ambrose also accordingly 1 Cor. 12r Elegantly expresseth thus f Ambr. de Dignit hom c. 2. Ipse Deus Tria est unumquodque horum Trium Deus est omnia Tria non Dii sed Deus est i. e. God is Three and every one of these Three is God and all these Three are not to be called Gods but God To this I must add one consideration more That the constant faith and confession of this Mysterious Doctrine of the Trinity is of such near concernment that without it all our endeavours will be but fruitless Now since God hath so plentifully revealed it under the Gospel as we also read in Origen upon Job if that Book be his g Orig. in Job lib. 1. p. 420. Quicquid fecerint homines si non in fide Trinitatis fecerint sine Causa agunt a quo enim recipient mercedem i. e. Whatsoever any man shall perform except he do hold the faith of the Trinity his labour is lost for who else will give him any reward Most doleful therefore must be the condition of unbeleevers whose labours though ever so morally specious yet they are but like one that runs swiftly in a wrong way as h Aug. in Psal 31. St. Austin thinketh but yet more deplorable is the state of those who do not only not beleeve or dis-beleeve but moreover slight and also blaspheme the holy Trinity with such foul language that I think unfit to publish and which caused Gregory Naz. to break forth into admiration of the patience of God k Naz. Orat. 13. O Trinitas Longanimis quae eos a quibus proscinderis tam diu toleras i. e. That it was admirable Longanimity in the Holy Trinity to endure such blasphemers so long And this impiety is yet more hainous when it is found to be among those that profess Christianity whereas indeed the denial of the Trinity is most truly by St. Austin accounted Judaism Into which l Aug. de Temp. Serm. 194. dangerous infidelity it is to be feared that more Christians will fall then the great endeavours of these times will convert Jews from it And this because so many Scandals or stumbling-blocks are laid in their way of which I take my self to be obliged to give some intimation to the Reader before I conclude this Treatise CHAP. VIII Scandalous practices against the faith of the Trinity by forbidding the worship of the Lord Jesus By dis-use of the Doxologies and of the Creeds in Baptism And by dissolving Episcopacy which is a disparagement of the Holy Ghost by whom Bishops were ordained Of Presbytery That is no sacerdotal Order but only an Office KIng Solomon adviseth Prov. 22. 28. Not to remove the Land-marks which our Fathers have set yet commonly in all prevailing Schisms or prosperous heresies the first act of Reformation is in removing all or very many of the former usances although they be ever so good useful and laudable St. Basil saith that in the Arian Heretical Schism a Basil de Spiâ— Sanc. ad Amphil c. 30. Omnes patrum termini loco moti sunt magna est inclinatio temporum ad Ecclesiae eversionem caligo ecclesias occupat unicus amicitiae finis est Id. Epist 1. 61. 65. ad gratiam loqui Erroris similitudo est res firma ad Seditionis societatem Quilibet est Theologus Episcopatus ad homines vernas devenit Patrum dogmata Apostolorum traditiones contemnuntur Recentiorum hominum inventa dominantur Pastores abiguntur Lupi in roducuntur Domus Oratioriae deseruntur Qui maxime blasphemant in populi Ediscopatum eliguntur Gravitas sacerdotum periit Christianorum nomine tecti sunt persecutores Nulla est apud judices iniquos cani capitis reverentia Thus he and much more also to the same purpose Concerning the abuses of those Hereticks in abolshing the good old Doctrines and Disciplines of the Church the abusing of the most Reverend Ministers and in bringing into that holy Office unlearned men and any Quicunque vult of the lowest of the people Now although the dangerous heresies of Arians and Socinians have been discountenanced both by the late Parliaments and also by the present Government and some of their writings condemned to the fire which acts are by godly men esteemed very commendable and are very comfortable unto them yet many Land-marks and excellent parcels of our Christian Religion and those things wherein the Church of England did correspond with the Primitive Church are of late in many places removed and disused as if they were either impious or Superstitious or of very little or no concernment although some of them are of very great use and necessary This is that which occasioneth many weak Christians to be scandalized so far as to be suspicious of the truth of the most high and necessary Doctrine of the most holy Trinity as namely First Concerning the God-head of Christ it might stagger the faith of many weaker Christians when they find it was commanded by order of a great and wise Council that No Declarat of the Commons in Parl. Sept. 9. 1641. Phil. 2. 10. man should bow his knee when the Name of Jesus was named
although the Apostle had said that In the name of Jesus every knee shall bow for who could imagine that Christians should be forbidden by Christians to worship their God Or what plain man would beleeve the Incarnation of Christ were the Incarnation of the most high God or that the Incarnation were of such great concernment and joy when great men in Authority and prudent and professing godliness and zeal shall forbid the solemn memorial and celebration thereof as if it were in opposition to the Apostles and to the practise of our own and of the primitive Church and moreover to force it to be a day of fasting and so of sorrow We read that our Father Joh. 8. 56. Abraham rejoiced to see that day i. e. his Incarnation and Birth although it was not revealed to him what day of the moneth it should be nor what year nor indeed in what century of years The holy Priest Zachary at the news of it and the blessed Virgin-Mother also expressed their joyfulness saying Blessed be the Lord God of Israel And My soul doth magnifie the Lord and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour The blessed Angels sing for joy although the benefit thereof belonged principally to men but their charity was like themselves heavenly rejoycing at pâ—ace on earth and good will towards men even those men who are sullen on the day of the memorial thereof even to working and fasting as if Christs coming in the flesh did no more concern them then it did him who said What have we to do with thee thou Jesus of Nazareth art Luk. 4. 34 thou come to destroy us The primitive Church ordained by Ecclesiastical Canon that if the Festival of Christs Nativity should fall on the Quarta or Pro-sabbatum i. e. on Wednesday or Friday which were kept as fasting-days through the whole year except only the fifty days of Penticost yet that on this Festival the Fast should not be kept as we read in a Epiph. cont Haer. lib. 3. To. 2. Epiphanius The other Eastern Fathers called that day b Basil n. 16. The universal Feast of all Creatures c Athan. n. 25. The principal of all the Lords Festivals d Chrys n. 11 and the Metropolis of all holy-days Secondly Another shrewd Scandal is given by the late omission and disuse of the Doxologie or glorification of the Trinity which now a days is by most incumbents quite left as if the Doctrine of the Trinity were not true although the ancient Christians and this Church of England so often used it as a confession of the true Catholick faith and in detestation of the infidelity of Jews Samosatenians Arians and Macedonians for although some of them did use a form of glorification of the Three Persons both privately and publickly even almost as often as they fetcht their breath as a Basil de Spirit c. 25. St. Basil saith yet it was with a disparagement both of the Second and Third Persons so as is shewed before therefore the Church Catholick was necessarily moved to glorifie all the Three Persons equally according to that form of words which Christ appointed in Baptisme But now we seldom hear the Ancient Doxologie at all rehersed in most Congregations and which is worse the rehersing of it is accounted to be prejudicial and dangerous to the reherser and it hath been confessed by one in mine own knowledge who is learned and Orthodox that although he approved of the Doxologie yet he abstained from rehersing it or from appointing it to be sung when others desired it so as it is set down in many places of those Hymns which are joined with the singing Psalmes which are yet in use amongst us more then the Liturgical reading Psalmes are although those singing Psalmes and Hymns were never authorized by any Legislative power and this he did not for any dislike thereof but for fear of offending some Reformers and thereby indangering his livelyhood Thirdly Another block of obstructions is That the Symbols of faith the Creeds are in most Congregations quite disused wherein the confession of our faith in the Trinity and our assent to all the necessary Doctrines of Christianity is expressed yet this is now omitted and even in Baptism also where it is most needful for although we finde not that the Creed was used in the primitive Church in their general Liturgies yet it was never with them omitted in the administration of Baptism G. Cassander observeth b Cassand in Liturgicis That the Nicene Creed in the days of Basil and Chrysostom was rehearsed at the time of the Eucharist only where none were present but only the Fideles i. e. Communicants So that Creed which we call Apostolical was always used at Baptism St. Ambrose tells us that at the three dippings in Baptism which was the custome in his time at Millan the person to be baptized was thrice asked c Ambr. de Sac. l. 2. c. 7. r. Credis in Deum Patrem Then Credis in Dominum Jesum And again Credis in Spiritum Sanctum To these three questions he answered to each severally Credo and so was at every several answer dipped thereby confessing his Faith in the Trinity and wee are informed by Saint Austin that the general custome of the Latine Church in his time was d Aug. Confes lib. 8. c. 2. That the Pâ—râ—ty to be baptized did himself openly in the Church if he were at age rehearse the Creed and declare his assent to the Articles of faith therein so that it was esteemed a sign of insolency and pride if a man would have another to rehearse it that so he might only signifie his assent and not rehearse it by himself personally And to this purpose he tells a story of one e Aug. Epist 67 Gabinianus who had a long time deserred to be baptized this man had one only Daughter and she fell sick her father then bound himself by vow to be baptized if his child recovered she did recover yet he performed not his vow then himself was struck blind and thereupon vowed again and received his sight and was baptized But would not then at Baptism rehearse the Creed by himself then he fell into a grievous Palsie which hindred his speech and was in a Dream admonished that this calamity fell upon him because he omitted the rehearsal of the Creed in his Baptism Then because he could not speak he gave up the Creed under his hand writing and was restored to the use of his Limbs but not of speech Thus he Surely the confession of faith ought not to be omitted at Baptism because Baptism is our submitting and restipulating to the Covenant of Grace which Covenant cannot by us possibly be performed but only through faith in Christ by which faith instrumentally we are united to Christ and in him to the whole Trinity So that the principal branch of this Baptismal Covenant is to be a faithful beleever I marvel
therefore how it can seem reasonable to any man that understandeth Baptism and especially to our learned Teachers that one should enter a Covenant in Baptism of beleeving when the things to be confessed and beleeved are not at all rehearsed or mentioned And yet more strange it is that although they have changed the old form of singing with the signe of the Cross into singing with the signe of the Covenant yet the words of the Covenant are not at all by them rehearsed Whereas it is evident in Scripture that a confession of faith and so a Covenant of beleeving is required in Baptism for when the Noble Eunuch desired Baptism he was first required to beleeve and thereupon made a confession of his faith thus I beleeve that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and Act. 8. 37. so he was baptized As for the reforming of great Fonts into little Basons and the like lesser matters wherein how much the amendment is better then the supposed fault or defect we dispute not but we are heartily sorry that in many Congregations the Incumbents do often refuse to baptize at all except it be the children of the Rich of their own fraternity Fourthly We have also lost the grave and venerable Order Episcopal which may justly seem to argue a dis-belief or a disparagement of the Holy-Ghost of whom it is said Acts 20. 28. Spiritus sanctus posuit Episcopos for if it be indeed beleeved that the holy spirit did plant or place them it must also be believed that some contrary Ghost or Anti-spirit it is that supplanteth them Our Lord Jesus himself now since he sate at the right hand of God in Heaven yet there sitting is called a Bishop 1 Pet. 2. 25. The Shepherd and Bishop of our souls and the chief Shepherd 1 Pet. 5. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the great Shepherd of the sheep Heb. 13. 20. The Appellation of Pastor belonged only to Bishops in the Primitive Church but but now every young Curat though but an intruder will write himself Pastor too arrogantly St. John in his Revelation saw four and Rev. 4. 10. twenty Presbiters so is the original fall down before this great Bishop but our new Revelations have shewen us twenty four Bishops falling before Presbyters I suppose that the greatest adversaries of Episcopacy will not deny the Title of Bishop to be a scriptural word as it is and not an extraordinary or temporary word or appellation as some others are but a positive and fixed name and office and if it be indeed so planted by the Holy Ghost in the holy Scriptures men should be afraid to raze it out if they consider that Moses charged his Israelites neither to add nor diminish ought from the word that he had Deut. 4. 2. taught them and so St. John at the very close of the Gospel hath left a terrible threatning which surely extendeth to all holy writ If any man shall add to it God shall add plagues to him Rev. 22. 18. And if any shall take away from it God shall take away his part out of the book of life The greatest Sticklers and Dogmatical opposers and enemies to Episcopacy for I meddle not with Authoritative power are those men who would have Presbyters to be the Supream Sacerdotal order but I firmly beleeve that in the Scripture the word Presbyter was not intended to signifie any order at all of Sacerdocy but only to signifie a jurisdictive Authority annexed to the two only Orders of Bishop and Minister for Bishops are therefore called Presbyters in the Scripture because of their jurisdiction only Presbyter is an appellation of the Office or work of a Bishop but not of his Order as St. Paul doth evidently distinguish them 1 Tim. 3. 1. If a man desire the Office of a Bishop he desireth a good Work Here is 1. The Office or Work 2. The Order 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Afterwards inferior Ministers were called Presbyters and that very early in the Primitive Church And now all Ministers are generally called Presbyters which is improper and abusive except there be first a faculty of some part of the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction annexed to the Minister which jurisdiction in due form should be derived on them by grant of the Superiour Order of the Bishop for although it is very true that in the Primitive Church a new Order was set up and called Presbyters and placed between Bishops and Ministers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet this Order was onely Ecclesiastical but not Scriptural For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Presbyter in Scripture is promiscuously used to signifie both Ecclesiastical and civil Governours because it signifieth only a jurisdictive Authority and not a sacerdotal Order In the new Testament Presbyters of the people Mat. 21. 23. and 26. 47. and 27. 1. are mentioned And Presbyters of the Church Act. 15. 4. 6. and 1 Tim. 5. 17. And Tit. 1. 5. in all which places our English renders the word Elder But Beza varies in in the Translation of it for when it is said of the Laity he renders it Seniores i. e. Elders But when it is said of Ecclesiastical persons there he renders it Presbyteri i. e. Presbyters In the old Testament we find but two Sacerdotal Orders viz. 1. The High-Priest Aaron and his Successors 2. Inferior Priests called the Sons of Aaron So in the new-Testament we finde but two Orders of Sacerdocy viz. * Bishops the inferiour Ministers or Presbyters are both called Sacerdotes by St. Augustin de civ l. 20. c. 10. 1. Bishops 2. Ministers who are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So St. Paul reckons them more then once as Phil. 1. 1. The Bishops and Deacons and so 1 Tim. 3. 2. 8. So St. Jerome in that Epistle to Evagrius which hath been so tugged and stretched to make it speak for the Presbyterian design doth propound this sure rule concerning Ecclesiastical Orders a Hier. Epist 84. To. 2. Sciamus traditiones Apostolicas sumptas de veteri Testamento i. e. What the Apostles have delivered or written concerning Ecclesiastical Orders was by them taken from the patterns of Sacerdotal Orders in the old Testament which certainly is true because the same Immutable God is the Authour of Orders both in the old and new Testament St. Jerome goes on thus b Id. ibid. Quod Aaron filii ejus atque Levitae in Templo fuerunt hoc sibi Episcopi Presbyteri Diaconi vindicent in Ecclesia i. e. That which Aaron and his Sons and the Levites were during the Temple The same may Bishops Presbyters and Deacons claim in the Church But every learned man knoweth that the Levites were not Priests therefore those that St. Jerome calls Presbyters must needs be the same that St. Paul calls Deacons or Ministers Now if Presbyters must be the highest Order in the Church by the same proportion Aarons Sons sholud have been the High-Priests in the Temple but
shall begin his reign until his apearing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in flaming fire mentioned 2 Thes 1. 8. which assertion I conceive to be exceedingly injurious against the divine and humane Nature of Christ and also contrary to the Holy Scriptures For to deny the Kingdom of the Son or Word considered before or without his incarnation in his pure Divinity is all one as to deny his God-head for who can doubt but that he who is the Creator and the only and eternal God both doth reigne and hath reigned from the beginning of the World and shall reigne until the end thereof and after also to eternity and that he hath and doth govern all things in Heaven and Earth working together with the Father as himself saith The Father Ioh. 5. 17. worketh hitherto and I work and both these work by the Holy Ghost which is the Spirit of both The Kingdom of the God head is by divines thus distinguished 1. The Kingdom of power which even Heathens acknowledged in their supposed God O qui res â—ominumque Deumque Virg. Aen. â— Aeteruis Regis Impâ—riis fulmine terris 2. The Kingdome of grace whereby he reigneth in the hearts of the people inclining them to obedience by the Scepter of his Spirit against their carnal inclinations either lucriferous or voluptuous for this wee dayly pray Thy Kingdom come thy wâ—ll be done as on the contrary Satan or Sin is said to reign in the disobedient drawing them to evil 3. The Kingdom of Glory in Heaven in respect whereof the Son is expresly called The Psal 24. 7. King of Glory This I presume no Christian will deny But our question now is not concerning the Son as he is in his single and pure divinity or as he is God the Word or the Son of God But we must now consider him as he is The Son of Man and since his incarnation as he is Emanuel or the Word made flesh or the Anoynted of God or Christ for the pure God-head can not be anoynted because it is the anoynting neither could the Son of God be called Christ until he was incarnate nor can Christ be said to reign until he was made Christ that is until the Son of God by his humane nativity became the Son of Man For though the Son of God hath been a Son from eternity yet he was not Christ or Anoynted from eternity but his unction and title Christ began then as the Apostle saith Gal. 4. 4. When the fulness of time was come God sent forth his Son made of a Woman By this double consideration of Jesus wee may perceive the reason why the Scripture distinguisheth between God and Christ as 2 Tim. 4. 1. I charge thee before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and why we so often read The Lord Christ and the Christ or Anoynted of the Lora as Act. 4. 26. Ps 2. 2. The Lord Jesus in respect of his God-head is called Christus Dominus and the same Lord Jesus in consideration of his humane nature assumed is called Christus Domini i. e. he is both the Lord Christ and The Christ or the Anoynted of the Lord. So that we may truly say The Son of Man is the Christ or the Anoynted of himself as he is the Son of God These considerations being premised Our Question of Christs Kingdom is thus to be stated QUESTION Whether our Lord Iesus Christ ever yet had or now hath any Kingdom in and over this World FOr if it may appear that Christ formerly had and still hath a Kingdom here there will be no need of his corporal descending from Heaven in this fag end of the World to take possession of that which he had before and still retaineth Answer The answer to this question is That Christ now reigneth on earth and hath so done ever since he was Christ that is from the time that The word was made flesh that he reigneth in this world though his Kingdom is not of this world because it is not a visible reigning after a worldly way but in a heavenly manner he beareth not the Sword Material but a Spiritual Sword he raiseth not Armies of men but commandeth Legions of Angels his strong hold is Heaven his prison is Hell as 1 Pet. 3. 19. his Jaylors Divels his executioners Plagues Famines Winds Storms Serpents Wild-beasts evil Angels Sicknesses Deaths Temporal and Eternal his Laws are mild written in Milk the easie yoak of the Gospel his tribute and taxes are faithfulness and obedience his Kingdom doth not invade or disturb other worldly Kingdoms but establisheth them for he refused a worldly Kingdom when it was offered and refused to judg or arbitrate in a petty title of inheritance between two brethren much less will he in this world judg the grand titles of Monarchies and great possessions to be taken from the rightfull possessors to the use of Pretended Saints Let us see what the Scriptures say concerning the Kingdom of this Emanuel here on earth Isaiah saith of Christ as of a child born whom Isa 7. 14. he called In manuel which must needs be meant of the Son of God considered as incarnate That the government shall be upon his shoulders of the increase of his government and peace there shall Isa 9. 6. 7. be no end upon the throne of David and upon his Kingdom to order it from henceforth for ever Surely Davids throne must be upon this earth although it signifie the Church whilest it is Militant Consider we next what David himself saith concerning this Son of David in that memorable passage Psal 89 I have sound David my servant Psal 89. 20. 27. 29. 36. I will make hiâ— my first born higher then the Kings of the earth his Seed will I make to endure for ever and his Throne as the dayes of Heaven and as the Sun before me The David here meant must needs be this Son of David that is Christ who is often called David as Jâ—r 30. 9 They shall serve the Lord and David their King whom I will raise up and Ezech. 34. 23. My servant David shall feed them so Hos 3. 5. The children of Israel shall seek the Lord their God and David their King These Prophecies must needs be meant of Christ because the old David was dead before any of those Prophets were born Christ is called David because he was to be the Son of David and so is called by his Fathers name as o her children now are and the prophecies must needs be understood of the Man Christ because by his manhood only he is the Son of David and not otherwise nor can these sayings be verified of any other seed or Son of David Besides These speeches can not be meant of any worldly temporal Kingdom of David for that was taken of Davids posterity long before the birth of Christ and this David himself foresaw and confessed in the same Psalm But thou hast cast off thine Anoynted Thou hasi
Hoc praestat timor Dei ut alios timores contemnamus and St. Ambros speaking of the burning of the Martyr Laurentius saith e Ambr. Serm. 19. n. 41 Maâ—or slamma intrinsecus est The fear of God overcometh all humane fears and the fire of Gods Spirits within us wherewith our hearts burn is more ardent then the flames of Tyrants as cruel Antiochus was told by a Martyr f Ioseph de Macab Ignis tuus frigidus est O Magister crudelitatis i. e. That the Tyrants fire was but cold in respect of this Heavenly flame Thus doth the Scepter and Kingly power of Christ appear most in our weakness and this is the method of his Kingdom in this world But of the carnal domineering insulting ruffling and ranting Kingdom which Millinarians dream of Christ saith My Kingdom is not of this World SECT III. Of Christs Kingdom and Acts in Heaven of his Melchisedechical Priest-hood there The manner of his intercession Advocate-ship and Mediatorship for us in Heaven That it is not by sacrificing or praying for us there What Priestly act he there performeth WE are next to inquire whether Christ since his ascensioÌ„ hath any Kingdom or Dominion in HeaveÌ„ what he hath done there all this while for the English Socinian Commenter on the Hebrews tells us that this Epistle is a The Preface a. 3. the History of Christ in Heaven which is true in part although himself have depraved it but so are also other parcels of Scripture as may thus appear in his ascension he was attended and proclaimed King by Angels as Justin. Origen Jerom. Ambros and Chrysost understand these words Ps 24. 7. Lift up your Psal 24 heads O ye gates or O ye Princes and the King of glory shall come in for although as he is the Son of God or God the Word he was in Heaven before yet his humane nature was not there before his ascension as is well expressed by b Ruf. in Symb. apud Cyp. Ruffinus Ascendit ad Coelos non ubi verbum Deus ante non fuerat sed ubi verbum caro factum ante non sedebat being there he is said to have a Throne and that for ever and Heb. 1. 8. ever Ps 45. 6. a Throne is Kingly but this Throne is also on the right hand of God so it is the highest Throne thence he is said to give gifts unto men Eph. 4. 8. as The Holy Ghost at Pentecost was by him shed Act. 2. 3. So he gave Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastors and Teachers Eph. 4. 11. to those more gifts are added Gifts of healing helps in government diversities of tongues 1 Cor. 12. 28. besides many other sanctifying graces to holy men and women He â—hewed himself to be in Heaven and at the right hand of God to the Protomartyr Act. 7. 56. out of Heaven he spake to Saul and restrained him from persecuting Act. 9. He is called a Priest an High-Priest and a Bishop he maketh intercession for us in Heaven Rom. 8. 34. Heb. 7. 25. He is our Advocate with the Father 1 Joh. 2. 1. And our Mediator 1 Tim. 2. 5. c. What Act of Priest-hood and what kind of intercession Christ performeth for us in Heaven and what is meant by his session at the right hand of God we will inquire anon but first his Kingly authority is to be shewed After the Passion and Resurrection of Christ and before his ascension he said All power is Mat 28. 18. given unto me in Heaven and in Earth These words are weighty The giving is meant only of a gift to his humanity thus That all power in Heaven and Earth which was naturally in the Son or Word before his incarnation is now by the God-head even his own God-head communicated to his humane nature being personally united with his divine nature so that now the Emanuel or Christ or the Word made flesh hath all power in Heaven and Earth the whole power of the God-head is in him There is nothing done by God either in Heaven or Earth but what Jesus Christ doth because there is none other God but that God which he is for he is the one and only God The Father and the Spirit are with him but one God whatsoever the Father doth he doth it by the Son and whatsoever the Son doth he doth it from the Father and by the Spirit and whatsoever the Spirit doth he doth it from the Father and the Son Christ saith The Ioh. 5. 17. Father worketh and I work this because the works of one are the works of both He saith again I can of my self do nothing 30. this he said because the Father and the Son are one therefore the works of the Son are the works of the Father also This is to be understood of the Essential or Absolute works of the God head but not of the Personal or proper works of each several person he saith again The Son can do nothing of himself but what he 19. seeth the Father do This is not so to be understood as if the Father did first perform a work to be as a Sampler or pattern for the Son to work by and then the Son after him should perform such another work but that the very same individual work of the Father is also the work of the Son for example The Father made the world so did the Son make the same world If this work be not the one and self same work of the Father and the Son then as Austin argueth a Aug. in Ioan. tract 20. Da mihi alterum mundum quem fecit Filius you can not shew me two worlds one of the Fathers making and another of the Sons making Indeed before the incarnation of the Son all the power in Heaven and earth was in the pure God-head residing in the Father Word and Spirit But since the Word or Son was incarnate all that power is communicated by the same God-head to the Son incarnate who is thereupon called Christ and Emanuel There is now none other King of glory but that God which is in Christ St. Iude calls him both The only Lord God and our Lord Iesus Christ Iude 4. Ioh. 5. 22. 27. therefore himself saith That the Father hath committed all judgment to the Son that is to Christ and this Son shall therefore in the end in his assumed and visible nature judg the world If it be said that his humane nature is a creature and therefore must always be subject to his God-head we answer that it is true but nevertheless the Emanuel i. e. The Divine and Humane Nature joyntly govern all things for so the body of a King is subject to the soul or will of the King yet the King consisting of a Body and Soul with both ruleth If it be said that the Father and the Holy Spirit do also reign and govern all things as well as the Son though neither the Father
r. Deor. p. 34. l. 8. r. hom 46. 31. p. 46. l. 6. r. Ascet p. 131. l. 1. r. Ioh. p. 147. l. 1. r. 118. p. 149. l. 6. r. haer THE DOCTRINE OF THE Holy Trinity CHAP. I. How Christ is the Son of God peculiarly by Eternal generation and not only by his Miraculous humane Birth How he is the first begoâ—ten and the Only-begotten Son That the Holy Ghost cannot be called a Son nor any Creature so as Christ is Why Heresies are permitted TO this Discourse following I am led by our Commenters inconsiderate if not malicious Exposition of that place Heb. 1. 2. Where it is said He hath spoken to us by â—or in his Son upon which words Heb. 1. 2. he tells us that Christ is therefore called the Son of God Because he was wonderfully born of a Virgin without the co operation of man and only by the miraculous Power of God 2. Because he was appointed to reveal the will of God c. This he learned of the old Arians who did just so expound those words as we find related by a Ath. de Decret Nic. Concil Athanasius Thus he wilfully leaveth out the grand and most principal reason of Christs Son ship and fasteneth on such shifts as are but frivolous in respect of the main and indeed are not proper to Christ but common to divers others For how is the Creation of Adam and Eve less Miraculous and Divine then this that the Commenter affordeth to the Son of God Is it not as wonderful to make a man of earth as of a woman And as much a Divine work to make a woman of a man as Eve was as to make a man of a Virgin And truly as much may be said of Isaac and Jâ—hn Baptist both conceived by Divine Power by such Parents as were naturally disabled from child-bearing both by age and sterility for Sarai was barren Gen. 11. 30. and she was ninety years old before she conceived Gen. 17. 17. So Elizabeth was both barren and stricken in years Luk. 1. 17. that is naturally indisposed for child-bearing so that their child-bearing must be confessed to be miraculous by Divine Power as well as Christs humane generation By this reason the Heathens might have called meer men the Sons of God for they affirmed that the first men did grow out of the earth or that they sprang from Trees and are therefore called by them Autecthones Aborigines indigenae and Terrae-filii as is expressed by the Poet. Juvenal sat 6. sat 13. Qui rupto robore nati Compositique luto nullos habuere parentes And Quondam hoc indigenae vivebant more Pers sat 3. Diodor. Sic. lib. 1. lib. 3. And another alluding to this fiction calls a lazy young Boy Vdum molle lutum Of which Heathenish error we read much in Diodorus who seriously and Historically affirmed the first men to have grown out of the earth and this in Ethiopia And to make this report credible he tells us that some Ethiopians must needs be so bred because they were seated in such a place as was inaccessable by any Forrainer and without any possibility of egress by the Inhabitants by reason of the steep Rocks and Sea wherewith this Land was inclosed when they had not any Boats or Ships for Ingress or Egress Therefore these Heathens upon this conceit might as well boast themselves to be the Sons of God as either Adam or Christ if we will beleeve this Commenter yet they ascribed the Original of men only to nature not to God And indeed our ordinary forming in the Womb and natural Births are as much to be accounted the Work of God and Wonderful as was the forming of Christ or our first Parents and would be so esteemed if it were not so common and ordinary The Psalmist Psal 139. 16. saith I am wonderfully made and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth The like may be said of the whole world which was so wonderfully created by God yet we call not the world the Son of God The Scriptures call Christ Priâ—ogenitum the first begotten Son of God because by his Eternal and Ineffable Generation he was before all the other Sons of God whether men or Angels who are also call'd the Sons of God The same Scriptures call Christ Vnigenitum The Only begotten Son of the Father because none other were so begotten as this Eternal Son of God was being by this Generation of the same Essence Nature Substance and Godhead that the Father is God of God Even as the sons of men are of the same specifical humane Nature and Essence with their Progenitors But men are not so the Sons of God as they are of their natural Parents because they are not of the same Essence and Nature with God for if they were then it must follow that man should be and properly be called God just as a son of man is called man To the second Reason That Christ is the Son of God because he was appointed to râ—veal the wâ—ll of God We say this is a so common to others for so Moses was Appoiâ—ted and did reveal the will of God so did the holy Prophets and after them the holy Apostles did the same And S. Paul who was most signally so appointed from Heaven tells the Asians Acts 20. 27. I have nâ—t shunned to declare unto you all the Councell of God Angels also declared and revealed the will of God and so doth the Holy Ghost as fully as ever the second person did and rather more because the Revelation of the will of God is by Christ himself referred and respited until the Holy Ghost should come and teach it as we read But the Comfoâ—ter Joh. 14. 26. 16. 13. which is the Holy Ghost whom the Father will send iâ— my name he shall teach you all â—hings and He will guide you idto all truth Yet Angels are not for this cause to be so called the Sons of God and to say that the Holy Ghost is the Son of God the Father or God the Son was long ago adjudged Heresie as we are told by Athanasius a Athan. Epist ad Serapion Hâ—retici aiunt filium spiritumâ—e â—e fratres quod pater est avus spiritus est nâ—pos patris filius fiâ—i quia spiritus a filio est filius a Pater â—e Hereticks say that the Son and the Spirit are brethren and that the Father is the Grand-Father of the Spirit and the Spirit is the Son of the Son and such conceits are by Epiphanius said to be Heresies of the b Ephiph haer 19. haer 53. Osseni and the Sam saei Finally those Anti Trinitarian Hereticks who heretofore taugâ—th the same which this Commenter doth although they would afford no better appellation to the Holy Ghost then to call him Ministâ—um Apostolum and Mâ—ttendarium i. e. a Minister an Embassador and Emissary of God yet they