Adversaries to far less purpose For were not Ioseph's dreams and visions true that the Sun Moon and twelve Stars should worship him and all his brothers sheaves should bow to his sheas was not this true I say though his brothers first sold him though he became afterward a slave and long a prisoner in a strange Land before he was so suddenly exalted to be the great Viceroy under Pharaoh King of Egypt Or would you have an Example of a glory afterwards eclipsed and almost extinguished Were not God's first Promises made to the Israelitish Nation That he would make them a renowned Kingdom fully performed in the days of Solomon when there was no kingdom upon the earth like unto it for glory and magnificence though this so great glory lasted not long but began a little to be obscure in the end of Solomon's days and afterwards was quite eclipsed and clouded the Sun but now and then as it were shewing it self through a cloud And what is the Church of the Gentiles or what priviledge have they above the Church of the Iews that the like should not befall it which we are sure besel them and yet nevertheless God always made good his Promises unto them and no word of his mouth failed When we therefore talk of the Churche's Visibility and glory we must distinguish of Times and know that there are Times when the Church is indeed visible but not glorious secondly Times when it is neither visible nor glorious thirdly Times when it is to be both visible and glorious In the Times immediately after Christ's passion or if you will at his Passion I think any man will grant that it was then neither visible nor glorious In the Times of the persecuting Emperors when the Church had taken foot among the Gentiles and the Nations began flow unto it it was a society indeed visible but not glorious I am sure it was not in the tops of the Mountains but the Imperial Mountain of Rome not only overtopped it but ever trampled it under their feet For we must know here that we speak all this time of the external glory for that is the thing whereabout the quarrel is In the Times of Constiantine and thereabouts after three hundred years cruel persecution the Sun seemed as it were to break forth of a cloud and the Christian society became for a while both visible and glorious but presently after even as it was in the end of Solomon's reign this glory of the Church was not only eclipsed but even the visibility thereof in a manner covered and altogether darkned with that thick and universally-overspreading cloud of Arianism And thus far our Adversaries will go with us But we require they should grant us something more namely That this Arian cloud was no sooner blown over but another great cloud of that fore-prophesied Apostasic of the Church began to arise whereby the Churche's glory was not only eclipsed but at length again the Visibility thereof wholly overshadowed with the thick darkness of Idolatrous Antichristianism until that after a long day of darkness and a black night it pleased God even of late somewhat to dispel the cloud whereby the Society of true Believers became again outwardly visible and conspicuous unto the world And we hope when the cloud shall be wholly consumed by the beams of the Sun of the Gospel it shall become not only more visible than yet it is but far more glorious than ever hitherto it hath been when the fulness of the Gentiles as S. Paul speaks shall come in But of this more hereafter In the mean time that you may the better understand what is already discoursed concerning the Visibility of the Church as likewise know what was the State of true Believers when this Visibility was overshadowed take this which followeth viz. That there hath been in all Ages since Christ without interruption a Company or Society of Christian men agreeing or joyned together in the inward and invisible communion of the Faith concerning such Divine Truths as we profess needful to Salvation And for so much of this Faith as was not acknowledged by the rest of erring men called Christians in that respect this Society was a distinct Society from them yet nevertheless for so much of this their true Faith as was still acknowledged by those erring ones we speak of they were a part of the same Society with them For the Apostasie of the Church was not total and therefore in all the sound parts of their Faith our true-believing Society neither was nor is divided from them But if the Question be asked of a Visible Christian Society professing the same Essential Faith with us Whether such a one hath always been First we must know that by Visible Society in this question is meant A society of Christian Believers joyned together in one external Communion of the same publick profession use of Sacraments and Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction or Government For these make the outward Form whereby this Society is discernible from other Societies of men and a Society by this out-side severed and distinguished from other Societies is a Society visible and conspicuous to other Societies of men The Question therefore is Whether that Society of men agreeing together in the Points of our Christian Belief hath been in all Ages in this kind and sort joyned and distinguished from other companies not only of the world but even of Christian men or in shorter terms thus Whether the Society of men of our Christian Belief hath in all Ages been for the out-side a distinct Corporation from all other Societies and States of men My Answer is That for divers of the First Ages as before was shewed it was in that manner visibly distinguished but after an Apostasie had overspread and deformed the beautiful Spouse of Christ then was the Society or Belief as it were covered and involved with the same external mantle with them and as it were hidden in that dark cloud and so not a distinct external Society from the rest But though in the inward communion of the sincerer Faith it was diverse and distinguished yet it still for the most part continued a member of the same external I say external body with them being begotten by the same Sacrament of Baptism taught in some part by the same Word and Pastors still continuing amongst them and submitting to the same Iurisdiction and Regiment so far forth as these or any of these had yet some soundness remaining in them But for the rest whether in Doctrine or Practice that was not compatible with their sincerer Faith either wisely avoiding all Communion with it or if they could not then patiently suffering for their Conscience sake under the hands of Tyrants termed Christians For understanding this take this Simile When good Gold is mixed with a greater quantity of counterfeit metal so that of both becomes one mass or lump though each metal still retains and keeps his nature diverse from the
away from Israel and v. 3. it is said in general and Israel joyned himself to Baal-Peor Again in the same Chap. v. 9. it is said Neither let us tempt Christ as Some of them also tempted and were destroyed of Serpents and verse 10. Neither murmure as Some of them also murmured this Some was a great Some indeed even all the people save Moses Ioshua and Caleb whereof is said Numb 14. 1. And ALL the Congregation lifted up their voice and wept and v. 2. And ALL the Children of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron and the WHOLE Congregation said unto them Would God that we had died c. wherefore they were as largely punished all of them dying in the wilderness Ioshua and Caleb excepted These places of many will suffice to shew that the word SOME in my Text intends not to extenuate the number of Apostates as implying they should be but Few but only shews they should not be All For where the Apostates are but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some there Some also are not Apostates but excepted from the common Defection wherewith the rest were miserably overwhelmed The Observation therefore which this TINE ' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 SOME affords us is That the true Church of Christ was never wholly extinguished nor the light of his Gospel ever quite put out no not in the greatest darkness that ever was to overwhelm it By the true Church of Christ I understand That holy Society and Company of Believers which as they accord and are joyned together in one common Faith of all Divine Truths needful to Salvation so are they also free from the fellowship of such enormous abominations and mortal errors as destroy and overturn it This is that Society whereof by the grace of Almighty God we glory to be the members This that Society which in the Primitive times grew and flourished This that Society which when the times foretold of the Churche's Eclipse came and the Great Apostasie had overspread the face thereof was indeed much impaired indangered and obscured but never was totally extinguished but continued even under the Iurisdiction of the Man of sin yea in Babylon it self where he had this Throne For doth not Christ at length say Apocal. 18. 4. Come out of her my people How could they come out thence unless they had been there or how should Antichrist sit in the Temple of God 2 Thess. 2. 4. unless God's Temple were even there where Antichrist sate As a few living embers in a heap of dying ashes As a little Wheat in a field overgrown with weeds As the Lights of the heaven in a firmament overcast with clouds As a little pure Gold in a great mass of dross and mixed metal such was the faithful Company of Christ in the Apostate body of Christendom the Virgin-Church in the midst of Babylon But will our Adversaries say This is not sufficient to make you the true Church of Christ because some of you have always been but you must prove also that you have alwayes visibly been For the true Catholick Church must not only never have been interrupted or extinguished but it must have been a Society visibly known unto the world and not as Embers in the ashes but as a burning and shining Flame But this Objection deserves no answering because our Adversaries howsoever they would dissemble it do but play upon the present advantage which they think their own Church hath in this point above ours Otherwise when they forget the contention they have with us and are in a calmer mood they can be pleased to deliver other doctrine which if they would be so ingenuous as always to remember we needed not such a stir about the point of the Churche's Visibility For the difference between them and us hereabout is not so great as they would make it seem They themselves and the Fathers also teach That when Antichrist cometh the Visibility of the Church shall be eclipsed nay they affirm more than we usually in that case require For then they say the use of the Sacraments shall cease no Eucharist no Mass no publick Assemblies yea all Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction shall be extinguished But here lies all the difference they hold the glorious Visibility of the true Church to have continued from the beginning unto this present and the overshadowing of the Light and Eclipse of the glory thereof under Antichrist to be yet to come We on the contrary maintain the clouding of the Churche's Visibility under the Man of sin to have been already and some part of the Visible splendor thereof to be yet to come Both agreeing in this that in the fatal Apostasy the Churche's Visibility and Glory should cease but we say That time hath been already they say It is yet to come we say That time of darkness was to continue many ages they say When it comes it shall last but three single years and a half Seeing therefore the whole Controversie lies in the point of Time Whether the Churche's fatal Apostasie be already past or yet to come it would be much the shorter and quicker course for both them and us to decide this Controversie To examine the condition and quality of both Religions by the Holy Scripture where we have also as S. * Peter speaks a most sure word of Prophecie whereunto we shall do well if we take heed as to a light shining in a dark place Now though this Answer be sufficient enough for the Objection of our Adversaries yet for the better understanding and clearer insight into the matter questioned we will further consider Whether and in what manner or measure our Church may be said to have been Visible during the prevailing Apostasie and in what respect again it was not Visible and in both agreeable to the State of the true Church under the frequent Apostasies of Israel First therefore we must know that by A Visible Christian Society in this Question is meant A Society or Company of Christian Believers joyned together in one external Fellowship and Communion of the same publick Profession and Rule of Faith Vse of Sacraments and Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction For these make the outward form and as it were shape of the Church whereby this Society is discernable from other Societies of men So that a Society by this outside severed and distinguished from other Societies is a Society visible and conspicuous to other Societies of men The question therefore is Whether that holy Society of Believers before mentioned who accorded together in one Common Faith with us of all Divine Truths needful to Salvation and kept themselves free from such enormous abominations and mortal errours which we now disclaim as utterly annihilating that Common Faith Whether such a Society as this has been in all Ages joyned and distinguished by such a common out-side from other Companies either of men in general or Christians in special or in shorter and perhaps plainer terms thus Whether the Society of men of our
4. That I may therefore gather all this Controversie into a short summe I find your Tenet to stand charged with three not tolerable Inconveniences of interpretation The one in the first Vision where you interpret In the days of those Kingdoms to be After the days of them where the matter spoken of will no ways bear it though the Preposition would The second in the second Vision where you will be forced to interpret until the time came the Saints possessed the Kingdom until some 200 years before that time A third is That you are forced for making good your Exposition of the Kingdoms to deprive the Church of those principal passages of Scripture whereon she hath always grounded her faith of the Second coming of Christ. If I found mine charged with any one such I should begin to misdoubt the truth thereof I might add a fourth That besides all these you forsake that Exposition and Application of these Kingdoms which the Church hath universally followed from her infancy And who can easily be perswaded that the Doctors of the Church immediately following the Apostles and while some of the Apostles disciples were yet living should be ignorant of the meaning of so main a Prophecy whereupon depended the demonstration of the verity of Christ's coming and that too whilst those disputes were still hot between the Iews and Christians The Fathers are to be considered here not in respect of greater learning or infallibility of Spirit than ours but as Testes Custodes doctrinae primitus acceptae because it cannot be presumed they could be ignorant of it being so near or would change it being so pious and good Now the inducements which should perswade an Opinion burthened with such inconveniences had need be very powerful But when I examine every thing I find the main and only pillar which you suppose will bear up your building against all assaults whatsoever to be but a weak one namely That nothing was revealed to Daniel which was contained in S. Iohn's sealed Book because none could open that Book but Christ and he opened it not till his Revelation shewed to Iohn That there is a flaw in this illation is apparent because there are two main and principal matters of the argument of that Book which cannot be denied to have been revealed before namely of Antichristâ— persecution and of the Second coming of Christ to judgment the first whereof was revealed to S. Paul though out of another Book the other is plentifully revealed throughout the New Testament before S. Iohn saw his Visions I answered therefore before and answer still That the Subject matter of the Apocalyptical Book is not that which was never in no sort revealed before but never in that order form and particularity of Fates Acts and Circumstances wherein it was revealed then The subject of that Prophetical history is the Roman Empire together with the Church or Kingdom of Christ contained therein the one is equally the subject thereof as well as the other Now it is not denied but the Church or Kingdom of Christ was revealed before both for the Being Quality Fate and Prevailing not to the Apostles only but to Daniel also why not then the Roman Empire In the same sense wherein that which concerned the one was revealed before or remained sealed till now in that sense was that revealed or sealed till now which concerned the other Here you brought a Catalogue of divers particulars concerning the Fourth Monarchy revealed to Daniel but to what purpose I cannot devise unless you could prove there were no other particulars of Succession Fates and Acts which were still to remain sealed until the Lamb should reveal them to S. Iohn For I affirmed not that no particulars of the Roman Kingdom were revealed to Daniel but that not those which were now first revealed to S. Iohn As namely none of the Acts and Fates of this Fourth Kingdom were particularized to Daniel but those of the latter end of it only when the Horn was to rule the rest which concerned the former part of his time were represented to him only in general in imagine confusa the more ample and large decyphering thereof being deferred till Christ himself should come and unfold all unto S. Iohn when also Daniel's most particular part was yet to be revealed much more particularly in the Metropolis quality of Blasphemy degrees and manner of destruction That which I have said of the Roman Empire partly revealed and partly sealed must be accommodated also to the history of the Church or Kingdom of Christ the other part of the subject of this Apocalyptical Book which though it were in some degree revealed before yet never in such order and specification of Fates and Circumstances as now The consideration of the one will easily clear the scruple you make concerning the other And for conclusion you must remember that I yield you all this time your sense of the sealing and unsealing the Apocalyptical Book which you know some interpret to a far other purpose I have a little time and paper enough left I will look over your Papers and answer such particulars more as I think need answering 1. I know not what it is you contend for about the Two States of Christ's Kingdom If you grant the Kingdom of Christ at his Second coming shall be of a different state from that of his First you grant as much as serves my turn and the Kingdom is neither more nor less eternal because some State thereof is not eternal An infant when it comes to be adultus is the same numero still but the stature is not the same but diverse 2. You affirm the duration of the Fourth Kingdom holds proportion with the legs because the three former do with their parts If they do tell me how your Third Kingdom of Alexander and his progeny which lasted but 18 years holds proportion with the belly of the Image I think it will be but a girt belly The Persian Monarchy represented by breast and arms lasted about 200 years that is ten or eleven times as long as your Third Kingdom did If this proportion holds in this Image the breast and arms must be ten or eleven times as long as the belly And if you read belly and thighs the proportion will be a great deal worse For I suppose you make your Fourth Kingdom 280 years long the same proportion therefore which 280 hath to 18 your legs must have to the belly and thighs that is quindecupla 3. Whatsoever time of Messiah's appearing Almighty God pointed out by Daniel's 70 weeks yet I believe not that any Iew before the Event could infallibly design the time without some latitude because they could not know infallibly where to pitch the head of their account until the Event discovered it yet in some latitude they might I think we have as good skill in that computation as the Iews could have and yet you see we yet vary about it
laying an imputation on the Mellenaries as if they dreamed of Earthly Pleasures in this Kingdom of our Lord for he saith that as Dr. Gerhard thinks of the Cerinthians and Iews not of the ancient Fathers how truly I leave it to your consideration and judgment In the Margin of your Notes on Iustin Martyr I noted a place to the same purpose in Lactantius It is in black lead and may easily be wiped out if it be nothing to your purpose Dr. Potter signified in a former Letter that he had a purpose to write to you perhaps he is not yet ready for that which he meaneth to say but if he send his Letter this way I will take care to send it down by your Carrier In the mean while and ever I commend you and your studies to the Blessing of the Almighty and so for this time I leave you Your ever assured Friend Henry Mason S. Andrew's Undershaft Decemb. 10. 1629. EPISTLE XIX Dr. Potter his Letter to Mr. Mason touching the Millenaries Good Mr. Mason I Have read those two large and learned Discourses of Gerhard against the Millenaries and find him as his woâ—t is to be very diligent both in recounting the Opinions of other men and in the establishing of his own By him I see the conceit is ancient among our later Writers and favoured by many ignorant and fanatical spirits which I confess casts much envy upon the Conjecture But yet methinks First the consent of so many great and worthy Lights of the ancient Primitive Church doth more honour and countenance the opinion than it can be disgraced or obscured by these late blind abettors Secondly The Anabaptists and their fellows are confident where Mr. Mede doth but modestly conjecture and that Thirdly upon other and better grounds than their dreaming doting heads ever thought of Lastly The Devil himself may sometime speak truth and so may his disciples with an ill intention or at hazard 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I suppose no Learned man or Christian can deny that the Nation of the Iews shall be once hereafter called by God's mercy to the Faith and that their general Conversion will bring with it a great and glorious alteration in the Church and therefore that Kingdom of our Lord upon earth howsoever in some circumstances it may not answer our hopes which may be ungrounded and deceived yet for substance it seems an indisputable Truth But Prophecies are Mysteries till their accomplishment let us therefore leave them to God and to Posterity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have received Philostrates and Origen c. C. P. EPISTLE XX. Mr. Mede's Second Letter to Dr. Meddus containing four grounds why the First Resurrection Rev. 20. is to be taken literally with some other Observations concerning the difference between the State of the New Ierusalem and the State of the Nations walking in the light thereof as also concerning the time of the Regnum Christi Worthy Sir I Sent the fourth sheet I promised to the Bury-Carrier yesterday with a note therein promising to make some Answer to your Quaere to day to be delivered to the Carrier as he passed through Newmarket but some 4 or 5 miles from the place where I am When I had thus done some hour or two after I received a transcript of another of yours dated August 14 of the conformation of the taking of Wesel But to the Quaere which I must answer but briefly till I have a better and more free occasion to enlarge upon particulars The full resolving thereof depends upon so large an explication of the Oeconomy of God in the restitution of Mankind as cannot be comprised in a Letter And I am somewhat unwilling to discover what I think unless I could do it fully which made me abstain in my Specimina from any explication of that First Resurrection save to name it only But howsoever when at first I perceived that Millennium to be a State of the Church consequent to the times of the Beast I was a verse from the proper acception of that Resurrection taking it for a rising of the Church from a dead estate as being loth to admit too many Paradoxes at once yet afterward more â—etiously considering and weighing all things I found no ground or footing for any sense but the Literal For first I cannot be perswaded to forsake the proper and usual importment of Scripture-language where neither the insinuation of the Text it selfe nor manifest tokens of Allegory nor the necessity and nature of the things spoken of which will bear no other sense do warrant it For to do so were to lose all footing of Divine testimony and in stead of Scripture to believe mine own imaginations Now the 20 th of the Apocalyps of all the Narrations of that Book seems to be the most plain and simple most free of Allegory and of the involution of Prophetical figures only here and there sprinkled with such Metaphors as the use of speech makes equipollent to vulgar expressions or the former Narrations in that Book had made to be as words personal or proper names are in the plainest histories as Old Serpent Beast c. How can a man then in so plain and simple a narration take a passage of so plain and ordinarily-expressed words as those about the First Resurrection are in any other sense than the usual and Literal Secondly Howsoever the word Resurrection by it self might seem ambiguous yet in a sentence composed in this manner viz. Of the dead those which were beheaded for the witness of Iesus c. lived again when the thousand years began but the rest of the dead lived not again till the thousand years were ended it would be a most harsh and violent interpretation to say that Dead and consequently Living again from the dead should not utrobique be taken in the same meaning For such a speech in ordinary construction implies That some of the dead lived again in the beginning of the thousand years in that sense the rest should live again at the end of the thousand years and è contrà In what manner the rest of the dead should live again at the end of the thousand years in that manner those who were beheaded for Iesus lived again in the beginning of the thousand years which living again of those some is called the First Resurrection Thirdly Though the ancient Iews whilest they were yet the Church of God had no distinct knowledge of such an order in the Resurrection as First and Second but only of the Resurrection in gross and general to be in die Iudicii magni yet they looked for such a Resurrection wherein those that rose again should reign some time upon earth as appeareth Wisd. 3. from the first to the eighth verse inclusivè where it is expressely said That the Souls of the Righteous which were departed should in the time of their visitation shine and that they should judge the nations and have dominion over the people
But enough of this You long you say to hear my Answer to the particulars of your Letter Which do you mean I suppose chiefly that of Fundamental Articles But if such great Prelates and learned Doctors as you mention detrect the defining of the Ratio of a Fundamental Article or designing the Number of them as a matter not only difficult but inconvenient and dangerous Quid ego miser homuncio facerem I confess I am in part guilty of advising Mr. Dury to urge men to think of such a Definition as a ground to examine the points of difference by of what nature they are But I intimated withal how likely they would be to detrect it and wherefore namely lest by that means they might either declare some darling Opinion of their own not to be Fundamental and thereby prejudice their own cause or else exclude out of that number some Articles formerly determined by the Church and so incur a suspicion or be liable to be upbraided with favouring some condemned Heresie But what if to avoid the aforesaid Inconveniences we should go this way to work Make two sorts of Fundamental Articles Fundamentals of Salvation and Fundamentals of Ecclesiastical Communion one of such as are necessarii cognitu creditu ad Salutem simply and absolutely and therefore no Christian soul that shall be saved uncapable to understand them another of such as are necessarii creditu ad Communionem Ecclesiasticam in regard of the predecision of the Church The first not to be of such Truths as are merely Speculative and contained only in the Understanding but of such only as have a necessary influence upon Practice and not all those neither but such as have necessary influence upon the Act and Function of Christian life or whereon the Acts without which a Christian lives not necessarily depend Such namely as without the knowledge and belief whereof we can neither invocate the Father aright nor have that Faith and reliance upon him and his Son our Mediator Iesus Christ which is requisite to Remission of sins and the hope of the Life to come How far this Ratio of a Fundamental Article will stretch I know not but believe it will fetch in most of the Articles of the Apostles Creed And by it also those two main Errors of the Socinians the one denying the Divine Nature the other the Satisfaction of Christ may be discerned to be Fundamental For without the belief of the first the Divine Majesty cannot be rightly that is incommunicably worshipped so as to have no other Gods besides him For he that believes not Christ to be Consubstantial with the Father and yet honours him with the same worship worships not the Father incommunicably which is the Formalis ratio of the worship of the true God from whom we look for eternal Life And without the belief of the Second the Satisfaction of Christ there can be I suppose no saving Faith or reliance upon Christ for Forgiveness of sin After this manner may other Articles be examined Thus much of the first sort of Fundamental Truths measured by the necessitude they have with those Acts which are required to Salvation Concerning the second sort of Fundamentals viz. necessary ad Communionem Ecclesiasticam It is not fit that the Church should admit any to her Communion which shall professedly deny or refuse their assent to such Catholick Truths as she hath anciently declared by universal Authority for the Symbol and Badge of such as should have Communion with her And this sort of Articles without doubt fetches a greater compass and comprehends more than the other as being ordinate and measured by another End to wit of Discipline and so contains not only such Truths the knowledge whereof and assent whereto is necessary unto the being of Christian life but also to the well-being thereof and therefore not needful to be understood of every one distinctly and explicitely as the former but implicitely only and as far as they shall be capable or have means to come to the knowledge thereof This is the Sum of my thoughts concerning Fundamentals If I have not expressed my self so dilucidly as I should I pray help it with some intention of your conceit in the reading For the Book you speak of I like it not I knew by hear-say much of the Author and his condition some years before the High-Commissiâ—n took notice of him and wondred he escaped so long For in every company he came he took an intolerable liberty of Invectives and Contumelies against the Ecclesiastical State when no occasion was offered him Such Books as these never did good in our Church and have been as disadvantageous to their Party who vent them as they have been prejudicial to the common Cause I durst almost affirm that the alienation which appears in our Church of late from the rest of the Reformed hath grown for a great part from such intemperancy and indiscretion as this is and will be still increased more and more if those who seem to be the chief favourers of them go on in this manner He hath too ready a Faculty in expressing himself with his pen unless he would employ it better For who can excuse him from a malignant disposition towards his own Mother thus to publish her faults in Latin of purpose to discover her shame to strangers and to call her Sisters to see it as Cham did his Brothers Think what kind of crime it is for a man that is Civis and a Member to traduce the Rulers of his people among foreiners and what little good affection they are like to expect from ours who are made partisans in such a kind Thus with my best affection I rest and am Your assured Friend Ioseph Mede Christ's Coll. Febr. 6. EPISTLE LXXXIV Mr. Mede's Letter to Mr. Hartlib expressing his Opinion touching Mr. Streso's Book and his distinguishing of Three sorts of Fundamentals Mr. Hartlib I Read over your Streso with some attention and find many learned and considerable passages and discourses therein But for my Animadversions which you look for it were against my Genius for I am one that had rather give my opinion by much though the world hath taught me even there to be somewhat nice than censure another man's But in general I conceive his way to be somewhat ambiguous and intricate more than needs He distinguisheth Three sorts of Fundamentals One he calls Fundamentum ipsum The other two he measures by their relation to it either à parte antè and such he terms Sub-fundamentales or à parte Pòst which may be called Super-fundamentales The one of such Truths quae substernuntur Fundamento the other such as follow by immediate consequence from the same This I take to be the Sum of his opinion Now for that which is his Fundamentum ipsum or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I make no doubt but the acknowledgment of the truth thereof is Fundamental ad Salutem So I believe also are his
openeth the womb shall be called Holy unto the Lord Ergo To be the Lord's and to be Holy are Synonyma's Though therefore the Gentiles Court had no sanctity of legal distinction yet had it the sanctity of peculiarity to God-ward and therefore not to be used as a common place The Illation proceeds by way of Conversion My House shall be called the House of Prayer to all Nations or People Ergo The House of Prayer for all Nations is my Father's House And the Emphasis lies in the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which our Translators were not so well advised of when following Beza too close they render the words thus My House shall be called of all Nations the House of Prayer as if the Dative Case here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were not Acquisitive but as it is sometimes with passive verbs in stead of the Ablative of the Agent for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which sense is clean from the scope and purpose of the place whence it is taken as he that compares them will easily see and I shall make fully to appear in the next part of my Discourse which I tendred by the name of an Observation To wit That this fact of our Saviour more particularly concerns us of the Gentiles than we take notice of Namely we are taught thereby what reverent esteem we ought to have of our Gentile Oratories and Churches howsoever not endued with such legal sanctity in every respect as was the Temple of the Iews yet Houses of Prayer as well as theirs This Observation will be made good by a threefold Consideration First of the Story as I have related it secondly from the Text here alledged for warrant thereof and thirdly from the circumstance of Time For the Story I have shewed it was acted in the Gentiles Court and not in that of the Iews because it is not credible that was thus prophaned It cannot therefore be alledged that this was a place of legal sanctity for according to legal sanctity it was held by the Iews as common only it was the place for the Gentiles to worship the God of Israel in and seems to have been proper to the second Temple the Gentiles in the first worshipping without at the Temple-door in the holy Mountain only Secondly The place alledged to avow the Fact speaks expresly of Gentile-worshippers not in the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only but in the whole body of the context Hear the Prophet speak Esay chap. 56. ver 6 7. and then judge The sons of the stranger that joyn themselves to the Lord to serve him and to love the Name of the Lord to be his servants every one that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it and taketh hold of my Covenant namely that I alone shall be his God Even them will I bring to my holy Mountain and make them joyful in my House of Prayer their burnt-offerings and sacrifices accepted upon mine Altar Then follow the words of my Text For my House shall be called that is shall be it is an Hebraism a House of Prayer for all People What is this but a Description of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Gentile-worshippers And this place alone makes good all that I have said before viz. That this vindication was of the Gentiles Court Otherwise the allegation of this Scripture had been impertinent for the Gentiles of whom the Prophet speaks worshipped in no place but this Hence also appears to what purpose our Evangelist expressed the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 namely as that which shewed wherein the force of the accommodation to this occasion lay which the rest of the Evangelists omitted as referring to the place of the Prophet whence it was taken those who heard it being not ignorant of whom the Prophet spake Thirdly the circumstance of Time argues the same thing if we consider that this was done but a few days before our Saviour suffered to wit when he came to his last Passeover How unseasonable had it been to vindicate the violation of Legal and typical sanctity which within so few days after he was utterly to abolish by his Cross unless he had meant thereby to leave his Church a lasting lesson what reverence and respect he would have accounted due to such places as this was which he vindicated DISCOURSE XII S. IOHN 4. 23. But the hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in Spirit and Truth For the Father seeketh such to worship him THEY are the words of our Blessed Saviour to the Woman of Samaria who perceiving him by his discourse to be a Prophet desired to be resolved by him of that great controverted point between the Iews and Samaritans Whether Mount Garizim by Sichem where the Samaritans sacrificed or Ierusalem were the true place of worship Our Saviour tells her that this Question was not now of much moment For that the hour or time was near at hand when they should neither worship the Father in Mount Garizim nor at Ierusalem But that there was a greater difference between the Iews and them than this of Place namely even about That which was worshipped For ye saith he worship that ye know not but we Iews worship that we know Then follow the words premised But the hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in Spirit and Truth It is an abused Text being commonly alledged to prove that God now in the Gospel either requires not or regards not External worship but that of the Spirit only and this to be a characteristical difference between the worship of the Old Testament and the New If at any time we talk of external decency in rites and bodily expressions as sit to be used in the service of God this is the usual Buckler to repel whatsoever may be said in that kind It is true indeed that the worship of the Gospel is much more spiritual than that of the Law But that the worship of the Gospel should be only spiritual and no external worship required therein as the Text according to some meus sense and allegation thereof would imply is repugnant not only to the practice and experience of the Christian Religion in all Ages but also to the express Ordinances of the Gospel it self For what are the Sacraments of the New Testament are they not Rites wherein and wherewith God is served and worshipped The consideration of the holy Eucharist alone will consute this Gloss For is not the commemoration of the Sacrifice of Christ's death upon the Cross unto his Father in the Symbols of Bread and Wine an external worship And yet with this Rite hath the Church in all Ages used to make her solemn address of Prayer and Supplication unto the Divine Majesty as the Iews in the Old Testament did by Sacrifice When I say in all Ages I include also that of the Apostles For so much S. Luke testifieth of that first Christian society
root nor branch c. he addeth Behold saith the Lord I will send you Elijah the Prophet before the coming of that great and dreadful day of the Lord And he shall turn or restore the heart of the Fathers to the children and the heart of the children to their Fathers lest I come and smite the earth with a curse If we will not admit the Day here described to be the Day of Iudgment I know scarce any description of that Day in the Old Testament but we may elude For the phrase of turning or as I had rather translate it restoring as the LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the heart of the Fathers to the children and the heart of the children to their Fathers the meaning is That this Elias should bring the refractory and unbelieving posterity of the Iewish nation to have the same heart and mind their holy Fathers and Progenitors had who feared God and believed his promises that so their Fathers might as it were rejoyce in them and own them for their children that is he should convert them to the faith of that Christ whom their Fathers hoped in and looked for lest continuing obstinate in their unbelief till the great day of Christ's Second coming they might perish among the rest of the enemies of his Kingdom Therefore the son of Syrach in his praise of Elias the Thisbite paraphraseth this place after this manner Who hast ordained saith he an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or type for so it may be turned for the times to come to pacifie the wrath of the Lord's judgment before it break forth into fury and to turn the heart of the Father unto the Son and to restore the tribes of Israel Ecclus. 48. 10. Which explication also the Angel warrenteth Luke 1. 17. in his message to Zachary concerning his son He shall go saith he before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elias to turn the hearts of the Fathers to the Children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just this is in stead of reducing the hearts of the children to their Fathers to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. For the better understanding of this first Reason we must know That the old Prophets for the most part spake of the coming of Christ indefinitely and in general without that distinction of First and Second coming which we have more clearly learned in the Gospel For this reason those Prophets except Daniel who distinguisheth those comings and the Gospel out of him speak of the things which should be at the coming of Christ indefinitely and all together which we who are now more fully informed by the revelation of his Gospel of this distinction of a Twofold coming must apply each of them to its proper time Those things which befit the state of his First coming unto it and such things as befit the state of his Second coming unto his Second and that which befits both alike as this of an Harbinger or Messenger may be applied to both My Second Reason for the proof hereof is from our Saviour's own words in the Gospel Matth. 17. 10 11. where his disciples immediately upon his Transfiguration asking him saying Why then say the Scribes that Elias must first come Our Saviour answers Elias truly shall first come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and shall restore all things These words our Saviour spake when Iohn Baptist was now beheaded and yet speaks as of a thing future 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elias shall come and shall restore all things How can this be spoken of Iohn Baptist unless he be to come again Besides I cannot see how this Restoring of all things can be verified of the ministry of Iohn Baptist at the First coming of Christ which continued but a very short time and did no such thing as these words seem to imply for the Restoring of all things belongs not to the First but to the Second coming of Christ if we will believe S. Peter in his first Sermon in the Temple after Christ's ascension Acts 3. 19 c. where he thus speaks unto the Iews Repent saith he and be converted for the blotting out of your sins that the times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord And that be may send Iesus Christ which before was preached unto you Whom the heavens must receive until the times of the Restitution of all things which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy Prophets since the world began The word is the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the time or Restoring all things be not till the Second coming of Christ how could Iohn Baptist restore all things at his First If the Master come not to restore all things till then surely his Harbinger who is to prepare his way for restoring all things is not be lookt for till then These are the Reasons which have induced me to think that the opinion which the Church hath held as far as I know from her Infancy of an Elias which should be the Harbinger of Christ's Second coming hath some matter of truth in it But that this Elias should be Elias the Thisbite who was taken up into Heaven I confess I believe not no more than that he should be slain by Antichrist as some fable For that which the Prophet saith Behold I will send you Elijah the Prophet proves no more that it should be Elijah in person than that which is said of Messiah And David my servant shall rule over them proves Christ should be David in person It is much more like if it be one that comes again it should be Iohn Baptist himself who was the Harbinger of the First coming That as Christ himself the Master hath two comings so should his Harbinger have And as it shall be the same Christ which comes the second time that came the first so should his Harbinger be the same And to this both the words of the Angel to Zachary the father of the Baptist and the words of our Saviour in the place before quoted would not be unpliable The Second coming of Christ is the time of the Resurrection and in that respect it would not be unsuitable for the Harbinger thereof to be one risen from the dead But as for Elias the Thisbite's coming I find no ground at all but the contrary Howsoever though I compare probabilities I will not determine any thing lest some perhaps should say that while I reject old fables I coin new ones I rather conclude with that Iewish Proverb Cùm Elias venerit solvet nodos When that Elias comes he shall dislolve hard questions AND thus much of the circumstance of Time when our Saviour first began his solemn prophecy or preaching of the Gospel namely not till his Harbinger Iohn had done and finished his preparation Now I come to the Second circumstance namely of the Place which was Galilee Iesus came into Galilee c. A circumstance curiously noted
unto Him as this Of the practice of Antiquity THAT the ancient Christians worshipped towards the East that is the same way they did their first homage to God in their Baptism is manifest to all that have but looked into Antiquity That their Altars also were usually placed toward the same in their Churches is a Truth that can hardly be questioned It follows therefore that when they worshipped they turned themselves or looked toward the Altar also If it be asked Which of the two they respected in this their posture I answer they respected both and therefore placed the Altar accordingly to the Eastward that both might be observed even as the Iews placed their Altars both of Incense and Burnt-offering toward the West because they worshipped that way But if they could not observe both then they preferred the Altar as in that Church at Antioch where if Socrates say true the Altar or place thereof the Chancel for so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes signifies stood toward the West contrary as he there acknowledgeth to the manner of other Churches Now he that considers well the Custome of Antiquity and remembers that which Gregory Nazianzen testifies of his mother Nonna will not think it credible they should either turn their backs upon the Altar or their faces from the Priest whilest he officiated thereat as then he always did which yet they must needs do if notwithstanding that situation of the Altar they had worshipped toward the East Howsoever if the nature of the things be considered there can be no difference given for the point of lawfulness between the one and the other nor why this should more intrench upon impiety and Superstition than that Thus much we find of the Christians posture in general when they worshipped God But what reverential Guise Ceremony or Worship they used at their ingress into God's House in the Ages next to the Apostles and some I believe they did is buried in silence and oblivion The Iews before them from whom the Christian Religion sprang used as I have already shewn to bow themselves down with their faces toward the Testimony or Mercy-Seat The Christians after them in the Greek and Oriental Churches have time out of mind and without any known beginning thereof used to bow in like manner with their posture toward the Altar or Holy Table saying that of the Publican in the Gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God be merciful to me a sinner as appears by the Liturgies of S. Chrysostome and S. Basil and as they are still known both Laitie and Clergie to do at this day Which custome of theirs not being found to have been ordained or established by the Decree or Canon of any Council and being â—o agreeable to the use of God's people of the Old Testament may therefore seem to have been derived unto them from very remote and ancient Tradition Nothing therefore can be known of the use of those first Ages of the Church farther than it shall seem probable they might imitate the Iews God's people before them or have given beginning to the custome of the Churches after them And if kneeling bowing or inclination of the head could be proved or for want of testimony may be supposed to have been their gesture at their ingress surely there were no reason why we should not believe they bowed kneeled or inclined their heads the same way then which they used to pray and worship at other times In the Latin Church this gesture of bowing towards the Altar may seem to have been proper to the Clergy in their approaches to it and recess from it at least to such as came into the Quire the Laity at their first entrance into the Church kneeling only Card. Bessarion a Greek in his Epistle to the Tutor of the Sons of Thomas Palaeologus instructing them how to carry and behave themselves among the Latines In Ecclesiam Latinorum saith he cùm ingredientur in genua procumbentes preces dicant ut Latinis mos est When they shall enter into any Church of the Latines let them kneel down and say their prayers as the manner of the Latines is For in Greece as is aforesaid their manner was to bow Yet whether they used not some other gesture in Spain would be enquired because of those words of Isidorus Hispalensis De Ecclesiasticis officiis lib. 1. c. 10. concerning those that came into the Church after the Service or Lessons were begun Si superveniat quisque saith he cùm Lectio celebratur adoret tantum Deum praesignatâ fronte aurem solicitè accommodet If any shall come into the Church when the Lesson is a reading let him only adore God and crossing his forehead attend diligently to what is read I will add here two the most ancient Testimonies I think extant of a Reverential respect used to be given to the Holy Table or Altar and that as I conceive if not both of them one at least of a more direct nature than that wherewith the same is honoured by being made the term only of our posture when we worship God One is out of Dionysius called Areopagita or whosoever were the Author for sure ancient he is Ecclesiast Hierarch cap. 2. De mysterio Baptismi where he saith That after the Hymn accustomed was sung the Priest or Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having saluted or kissed for either way may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be rendred the Holy Table he goes thence and questions the party to be baptized c. The other is of S. Athanasius in fine Sermonis adversùs eos qui Humanae in Christo Domino Naturae confessores spem suam in Homine defigere dicunt Edit Commel tom 2. pag. 255. in these words Quid quòd nunc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui ad sanctum Altare accedunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illúdque amplectuntur cum timore laetitia salutant velosculantur non in lapidibus aut lignis sed in Gratiâ per lapides aut ligna piis commemoratâ animo insistunt Understand here by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or GRATIA the holy EVCHARIST for so the Fathers are wont to call it See Casaubon Exercit. 16. § 46. The meaning therefore is That those who when they approach the holy Altar do with fear and joy embrace and kiss it as the manner then was attend it not as wood and stones but as that whereby the Body and Bloud of Christ is commemorated to his holy Ones CONCIO AD CLERVM DE SANCTUARIO DEI SEU DE SANCTITATE RELATIVA LEVITICI 19. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sanctuarium meum reveremini QUALEM Philosophi Virtuti sedem posuerunt ab Extremis utrinque remotam talem quoque Sacrae Scripturae stylus Pietatis laudat semitam Viam nempe mediam quâ neque dextrorsum iter neque sinistrorsum Hanc qui tenent viam rectam insistere perfectè coram Deo ambulare qui
Authors and furtherers thereof they should be such as had their consciences seared who forbad marriage and meats Where before I go any further I must give an account of thus translating these latter words which I make the second part because they are commonly translated otherwise viz. intransitively as referring the words of the two latter verses to the persons mentioned in the first viz. those Some who should Apostatize and give heed to erroneous spirits and Doctrines of Devils as they usually translate it So that the words of the second and third verses should be the expression by particulars of that which was before generally comprized under erroneous spirits and doctrines of Devils which should consist partly in forbidding lawful marriage and partly in commanding abstinence from meats But this interpretation seems very unlikely For first since S. Paul intendeth here to describe that great Apostasie of the visible Christian Church as is evident by the pointing out of the time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the latter times who can believe that he who aimeth at this would instance only in the smaller and almost circumstantial Errours omitting the main and fundamental which the Scripture elsewhere telleth us should be Idolatry or Spiritual fornication Secondly As for Errours about Marriage and Meats they were not proper to the last times but found more or less in the Apostles own times as may be gathered by some passages of their Epistles Why should then our Apostle here speaking of the Apostasie of the latter times instance only in those things which the first times in some measure were never free from Lastly which I take alone to be sufficient The Syntax of the words will not bear it to have them so translated For the persons in the first verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are expressed in casu recto whereas the persons in the verses following 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are in the genitive now by what Syntax can these be construed intransitively how will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. agree with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. without breach of Grammar unsampled in our Apostle's Epistles If any say they may be referred then and agree with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that indeed would be a strange sense and nothing to their purpose to say that Devils lie have seared consciences and forbid marriage and meats But to construe it transitively and to make all these genitive cases to be governed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and take the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie Causam or Modum actionis as is most usual in Scripture this as it keepeth the Syntax true so I hope to make it appear hereafter to be the very meaning and the Event most answerable thereunto when you shall hear proved out of story That the Apostasie of the visible Church came in by lying wonders and all deceiveableness of unrighteousness managed by those who either professed or doted upon Monastical hypocrisie the affectation and errours whereof at length surprising the body of the Church is that which S. Paul 2 Thess. 2. 10. calls not the Apostasie it self but Aâ—not-love of the Truth for which God gave them over to strong delusions that they might believe a lye But this is out of its place only I have anticipated thus much lest you should be too long in suspence of the grounds of this novelty in translating And yet this difficulty concerning the Syntax hath stumbled many of our latter Interpreters as amongst others Beza who solves it only by saying That the Apostle more regarded the matter than the construction which for my part I cannot believe CHAP. II. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Scripture imports Revolt or Rebellion That Idolatry is such proved from several passages in Scriplute By Spirits in the Text are meant Doctrines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are to be taken Passively viz. for Doctrines concerning Daemons Several instances of the like form of speech in Scripture I Return now unto the First part of my Text The Description of that solemn Apostasie where I will consider the five parts or points thereof as I have propounded them though it be not according to the order of the words And first in the more general expression as I called it in the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as much as to say They shall make an Apostasie Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Scripture's use when it looks towards a person signifies a Revolt or Rebellion when towards God a spiritual Revolt from God or Rebellion against Divine Majesty whether Total or by Idolatry and serving other Gods For the Seventy whence the New Testament borrows the use of speech usually translates by this word the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to rebel and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rebellion both which when they have reference to a spiritual Sovereignty mean nought else but Idolatry and serving of other Gods as may appear Iosuah 22. 19. where the Israelites supposing their brethren the Reubenites and Gadites in building another Altar upon the banks of Iordan had meant to have forsaken the Lord and served other Gods they said unto them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you have rebelled against the Lord and presently Rebell not against the Lord nor rebell against us where the Seventy hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in vers 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rebellion is translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the words the Lord God of gods he knoweth if it be in rebellion or in transgression against the Lord. Also Numb 14. vers 9. when the people would have renounced the Lord upon the report of the Spies Iosuah and Caleb spake unto them saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rebel ye not where the Seventy hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Be not Apostates from the Lord. So Nehem. 9. 26. in that repentant confession which the Levites make of the Idolatry of their Nation they were disobedient say they 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and rebelled against thee where the Seventy hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Daniel in the like confession Chap. 9. vers 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Seventy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we have rebelled against him So the Idolatry of Ahaz 2 Chron. 28. and Chap. 29. is by the same Interpreters called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 revolted greatly from the Lord. I will not trouble you with the places where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used for Treason and Rebellion against earthly Princes which are many It is sufficient to gather from what we have quoted That Apostasie having reference to a Sovereignty and Lordship betokens a withdrawing of service and subjection there-from which if the Sovereignty and Majesty be Divine is done by Idolatry and service of other Gods as well as if the Majesty of the true God were renounced altogether The use of the
Sacrifice is sanctified or offered and the Place where it is eaten Every Sacrifice was to be offered and sanctified at the Altar where the Bloud was sprinkled and the Memorial burned but that done it was eaten in another place those which were eaten only by the Priests in the Chambers of the Temple those which the people were partakers of as the Peace-Offerings out of the Temple Of this nature was the Passeover the Lamb being first to be offered and slain in the Temple and the Bloud sprinkled on the Altar according unto the Law Deut. 16. and the practice 2 Chron. 35. 1 2 6 10 11. that done to be eaten where they would provided it were in loco mundo in a clean place And thus was the Paschal Lamb whereof our Saviour ate prepared and sanctified yea by proportion of all other Sacrifices the Bread and the Wine whereof the Holy Supper was instituted for they were the Minchah or Meat and Drink-offering of the Passeover such as all other Sacrifices had annexed unto them And to what end else was the Law so strict that they should bring all their Sacrifices and Offerings unto the Place which the Lord should chuse to put his Name there but that they might be sanctified and hallowed at the Lord's Altar before they feasted with them whence perhaps that custom of the ancient Church was derived to offer the Bread and Wine unto God upon the Holy Table before it was consecrated to be the Body and Bloud of Christ because they supposed that at the first institution they had been so offered at the Altar in the Temple But as the Iews used not to eat their Sacrifices where they offered them no more did the ancient Christians think themselves bound to eat the Eucharist where it was consecrated insomuch that they carried it sometimes to their houses and ordinarily sent it to those which were absent And if it be well observed in the practice of our own Church there is a difference commonly between the place of consecration and the place of eating though both be in the Church True it is that at the first Institution though perhaps not the first hallowing of the Bread and Wine for the Passeover yet the consecration thereof to be the Symbols of the Body and Bloud of Christ was in a common room and that out of the necessity of the connexion which the materials thereof had with the viands of the Passeover Yet I suppose not the House to have been of the condition of our Inns but only for such Sacred entertainments as this was of which sort Ierusalem must needs have had very many for the accommodation of such as came to feast before the Lord as the whole Nation was to do three times in a year If all that hath been yet said will not satisfie this Objection yet I hope what I shall now say will do it fully What needed there any Altar or Place of relative presence where the Son of God the Heavenly Altar and Holy of Holies was himself present in person Is not the Temple of God there where he is and what Altar was so holy as his Sacred hands 5. Why in the posture of our adoration of the Divine Majesty more respect should be had to the Altar or Holy Table than either to the Font or Pulpit seeing they are also Places of God's presence as well as the other Suppose they be so yet when there are many why should not that which hath the principality draw this respect unto it A man is present where any part of him is yet when we salute him or speak unto him we are wont to direct our selves unto his Face as that wherein his presence is most principal and erected not to his Backer parts or to his Shoulders though the organ of hearing be that way Perhaps it was this principality which that Doctor or whatsoever he be whom you mention intended when he said that Hoc est Corpus meum was more with him than Hoc est Verbum meum But I think for my part first that the comparison of the Pulpit with the Sacraments and their places is heterogeneal Secondly that neither the Pulpit nor the Place of the Sacrament of Baptism are in this point or for this purpose we speak of of the same nature with the Altar For it ought to be considered though it be a thing now-a-days in a manner quite forgotten that the Eucharist according to the meaning of the Institution is the Rite of our address unto God the Father in the New Testament wherewith we come before him to offer unto his Divine Majesty our thanksgivings supplications and praises in the Name of his Son Iesus Christ crucified for us that is It is not only a Sacrament but as the ancient Church used to speak a Sacrifice also For that Sacrifices were Rites whereby they invocated and called upon God is a Truth though perhaps not so vulgarly taken notice of yet undeniable as on the Gentiles behalf may be seen in Homer in divers places where he describes the manner of offering Sacrifices on the Iews behalf by that speech of Saul 1 Sam. 13. 12. when Samuel expostulating with him for having offered a Burnt-offering I said saith he the Philistins will come down upon me to Gilgal and I have not made supplication to the Lord. I forced my self therefore and offered a Burnt-offering See also 1 Sam. 7. 8 9. Ezra 6. 10. Baruch 1. 10 11. 1 Mac. 12. 11. 2 Chron. 7. 12 sequentia Hence of Abraham and Isaac it is said when they built Altars that there they called upon the name of the Lord but Altars were the place for Sacrifice In stead therefore of the slaughtering of Beasts and the Sacrifices offered by fire and incense whereby they called upon the name of God in the Old Testament the Fathers and primitive Christians believed that our Saviour ordained this Sacrament of Bread and Wine as a Rite whereby to give thanks and make supplication to his Father in his Name in the New The mystery of which Rite they took to be this That as Christ by presenting his Death and Satisfaction to his Father continually intercedes for us in Heaven so the Church on earth semblably approaches the Throne of Grace by representing his Death and Passion to his Father in these holy Mysteries of his Body and Bloud Veteres enim saith Cassander in hoc mystico Sacrificio non tam peractae semel in Cruce oblationis cujus hîc memoria celebratur quà m perpetui Sacerdotii jugis Sacrificii quod in coelis sempiternus Sacerdos offert rationem habuerunt cujus hîc Imago per solennes Ministrorum preces exprimitur This that reverend and learned Divine Mr. Perkins once Fellow of our Society saw more clearly or expressed more plainly than any other Reformed Writer that I have yet seen in his Demonstrat Problem titulo de Sacrificio Missae Veteres inquit Coenam Domini seu totam coenae
Dominus docuit offerri in universo mundo purum Sacrificium reputatum est apud Deum acceptum est ei c. The evidence of this was such as forced Hospinian Hist. Sacrament lib. ◠c. 6. to say Iam tum primo illo seculo viventibus adhuc Apostolis magis huic Sacramento quà m Baptismo insidiari ausus sit Daemon homines à prima illa forma sensim adduxit and Sebastianus Francus Statim post Apostolos omnia inversa sunt Coena Domini in Sacrificium transformata est Now Sir if I was loth to pass so harsh a censure as some do upon the First Fathers and Church Christian and could not be perswaded but that which the Catholick Church from her infancy conceived of the Eucharist should have some truth in it and accordingly endeavoured to find out that ratio Sacrificii therein such as might be consonant both to the Principles of the Reformed Religion and unto the Scripture of the New Testament yea perhaps found therein not quoad rem only but quoad nomen also did I merit to be irrided for having found out I know not what Mystery of a Sacrifice now-a-days a Mystery in my sense to all the Christian world When all men are at a seek and one cries I think I have found it shall he be chidden therefore Sir I can remember when you understood me more rightly and interpreted my freedom with much more candour To tell you true therefore I am somewhat suspicious lest the air of Cambridge did you some hurt But let that pass That which I wrote to you concerning this Mystery especially in my Second Reply was for the most part little other than Testimony of matter of Fact If it were false testare de mendacio if true cur caedor Yet one thing more It is no time now to slight the Catholick consent of the Church in her First ages when Socinianism grows so fast upon the rejection thereof nor to abhor so much the notion of a Commemorative Sacrifice in the Eucharist when we shall meet with those who will deny the Death of Christ upon the Cross to have been a Sacrifice for sin Verbum intelligenti There may be here some matter of importance Lastly You may remember how much I desired to be spared from any farther writing or answering upon this argument because I knew it was a nice and displeasing theme and such as I should have no thanks for Now I see I am become a Prophet and that when I looked not for it And thus I have done with this business which hath made me so much work The Censure I gave of the Declaration of the Palsgrave's Churches was not in respect of the matter but the manner of handling as the term of laxe shewed And before I had seen it I heard that Censure given of it by one that wishes the Palsgrave's Churches and their Doctrine as well as I know any Is I erred in my judgment there is an end I use not to be often faulty in rashness that way And this shall teach me to be more wary hereafter If I had had any suspicion of misconstruction I could in this kind have held my tongue with as much ease as any man What my Lord of Armagh's opinion is of the Millennium I know not save only that I have not observed him neither when I gave him my Synchronisms nor in discourse thereabout after he had considered them to discover any opposition or aversation to the Notion I represented thereabout The Like Mr. Wood told me of him after he had read his papers nay that he used this complement to him at their parting I hope we shall meet together in Resurrectione prima But my Lord is a great man and thinks it not fit whatsoever his opinion be to declare himself for a Paradox yet the speeches I observed to fall from him were no wise discouraging He told me once he had a Brother si bene memini who would say He could never believe but the 1000 years were still to come Now for Mr. Potter's Discourse I confess I came to the reading thereof with as much prejudice as might be having been cloyed with so many vain and fancisul Speculations about that mystical Number that I had no stomack to any more of them Which was the reason to tell you true that I shewed no more desire or eagerness to have a sight of your Exscript notwithstanding your commendations and offer of the same For I was loth to be put to give my Censure which I doubted according to former experience must be in sequiorem partem But when I was a little entered thereinto◠and began to perceive the Grounds whereon he meant to build I found my self presently to altar and to anticipate in my mind with much content what he aimed at before I could come to read it and longed not a little to find it well proved and to fall out accordingly That which wone me was the way to reduce Ezekiel's and S. Iohn's so differing measures of the New Ierusalem unto the same and so as both should allude to the Measures of the Ierusalem that was in being As soon as I found this I was not a little glad to see that made fecible which I before took for desperate and as it is ill halting with Criples I began presently to wish O that the Number of the Beast might have the like success for the designing of his See of Rome Concerning which and the compleat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of both Numbers when I found such Testimonies produced you may guess how I was affected namely That if it be not a Truth which I was very willing to believe it is the most considerable Probability that ever I read in that kind And thus with many thanks for your kind communication thereof unto me even when you had found me not to long for a sight of it I commend you and your learned meditations to the Divine blessing and so I rest Christ's Coll. Aprill 1637. Yours Ioseph Mede Diversum sentire bonos de rebus iisdem Incolumi licuit semper amicitiâ Eusebius De laudibus Constantini p. 492. Edit 1612. Quis praeter Christum Servatorem cunctis totius Orbis terrarum incolis sen terrâ seu mari illisint praescripserit ut singulis septimanis in unum convenientes Diem Dominicum sestum celebrarent I know not whether the Tractators of this argument have observed this passage or not Graeca sic habent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See the Vanity of man's life When I began this Letter Dr. Whaley your good and religious Friend was in health Before I had finished intermitting some few days I heard he was fallen suddenly sick and soon after that he was recovering Now when I was about to seal my Letter upon the opportunity of a Friend 's going to London I hear he is departed this life and the Bells are yet ringing out for him I expected not to have been the
Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified against Macedonius This is the Creed we say at the Communion in our Church That of Athanasius yet more enlarges that of Nice as doth that of Chalcedon also the Article of the Son against Eutyches Were it not fit therefore that we should tread in their steps and frame our Confession or Symbolum in like manner to wit not making the Form of our Confession wholly new but taking the former Creeds or some of them for our ground to enlarge their Articles with such further additions and explanations as the state of the Times requires that so our Confession might be the Creeds of the Ancient Church specified only to the present condition of the Churches and no other Thus we should both testifie to the world our communion and agreement with the Ancient Catholick Church a matter of no small moment that we may not seem to have made a new Church or Religion as we are charged and yet withal distinguish our selves from the Sects Heresies and Apostasies of the Times To which end it were fit the words of the Ancient Creeds should be retained as much as could be and for the more easie reception thereof that the additions and insertions should be made in the express words of Scripture as near as the nature of the composure would suffer it and not otherwise As for the meaning of them their application to the several Articles would specifie it as far as were needful to the end aimed at by such a Confession Compare the Creeds of Nice Athanasius and Chalcedon with that of the Apostles and you will understand my meaning And consider that in such a business as this we must not be too much in love with Methods of our own devising though perhaps they seem better but follow that which all the Churches will most easily yield unto and cannot except against I believe our own as may by some passages be already guessed would hardly be brought to subscribe to any other Form than of such a mould Take this also before I conclude That my meaning is not we should do as the Council of Trent hath done by adding Twelve more Articles to the Creed but that our Additions should be inserted into the several Articles of the Ancient Creed as subordinate to them and farther Explanations of them Which those of Trent indeed could not well do those which were added being the most of them incompatible and inconsistent with the former Articles according to the true and original meaning of the same and therefore not to be incorporated with them I send you home the Consultation I will keep the Discursus a while longer For Comenius his Praeludium I thank you but I have not had leisure to consider so much of it as were needful to give a censure I believe such a thing is fecible but for the way Hic labor hoc opus est So with my best affection I rest Christ's Colledge Aug. 14. 1637. Your assured Friend Ios. Mede EPISTLE LXXXIX Mr. Hartlib's Letter to Mr. Mede for a sight of his Papers about the Millennium Worthy Sir I Had occasion to exchange some Letters of late with Dr. Twisse In his last he writes thus unto me As for Regnum Sanctorum Christi in terris Resurrectic prima c. Passages there have been between me and Mr. Mede thereabouts and I am but his Scholar therein and I know full well you are so well acquainted with him that you may have any thing from him who is my Master in this I have yet no liberty to take into consideration the matter of Fundamentals neither have I any affection to it as finding no sure footing in that argument Thus far he I pray let me reap the fruit of his confidence in the enjoying of those Papers which have passed between you on the fore-mentioned Subject Truly I shall count it a great favour if you shall be pleased to communicate them and having perused them I will be careful to return them safely into your hands with my hearty thanks Thus craving pardon for my freedom I take my leave remaining always Worthy Sir London Octob. 19. 1637. Your most assured and willing Friend to serve you S. Hartlib EPISTLE XC Mr. Mede's Answer with his judgment upon a Discourse arguing from some Politick Considerations against the composing a Fundamental Confession Mr. Harlib I Answered not your first Letter because I had not wherewith to satisfie you For that which Dr. Twisse says he had of me concerning the Millenary opinion the grounds and stating thereof was only in Letters between him and me whereof I kept no Copies and now it would be tedious to me to renew what I then wrote In conference I could do it with ease but writing is very tedious to me and my notions and wit too die presently when I intend my mind to express them by writing Concerning the Paper you now send what judgment should I give but that I like it not It favours methinks of too much averseness from that business I believe you think so The Gentleman whosoever he be seems himself to be one of those he speaks of that hath in his eyes to preserve his own opinions from iudemnity But if every man do so what hope of conciliation Besides the matter aimed at in this business is not that either side should presently relinquish their opinions of difference but only take notice that notwithstanding these differences both sides do so far agree in other Points that they may and ought to acknowledge each other as Brethren that so their Affections being united and exasperation abolished they might be the better disposed and fitted to judge of the Points of difference between them And whereas he objects That such Points being declared not Fundamental would lose part of their strength and be shaken this inconvenience would be recompensed in that the Opinions of the opposite party will suffer as much and so what we lose at home we should gain abroad Howsoever it seems to me no very warrantable policy That for the better strengthning and propagating a Truth men should be born in hand that the belief thereof is Fundamental when it is not that is that a Truth should be maintained by a Falshood I cannot believe that Truth can be prejudiced by the discovery of Truth but I fear that the maintenance thereof by Fallacy may not end with a blessing I would know whether the Author of this Letter thinks that the Lutherans and Calvinists agree not in so much as is necessary unto Salvation If they do would not a Confession composed of such things wherein they agree contain all things necessaria cognitu ad Salutem and yet no necessity that this or that particular Tenet should be defined by such Confession to be or not to be Fundamental I would know also whether he thinks it fit that particular Churches should have particular Confessions whereunto their Members should profess their assent
Anno Christi 486. which is presently after the deposition of Augustulus in whom the Empire of Western Rome expired And this comes much nearer the point than 792. Howbeit far be it from me to affirm any thing thereof or of the verity of the Samaritan Computation or to prefer it in the general before our Hebrew though some things be found therein which dissolve a knot or two which make our Chronologers at theiâ— wits end As one for example How Abraham could come into Canaan after the days of his Father as S. Stephen says and yet be but 75 years old Gen. 12. 4. whenas his Father Terah lived 205 years and himself was born in the 70 year of his age Gen. 11. 26. But the Samaritan saith chap. 11. 32. That the days of Terah were but 145 years which is just for then Abraham was 75 years old at his Father's death and Moses and S. Stephen are reconciled which yet no man can imagine that the Samaritan Scribe ever thought of But the thing â—aim at in representing these differences and would propound to the consideration of the pious sober and judicious and with due reverence to the Divine Writ is Whether there may not be some secret disposition of Divine Providence in this variety of Computation to prevent our Curiosity in counting the exact time of the Day of Iudgment and second appearing of Christ. And that as the ambitious Tower of Babel was hindred by the Confusion of Languages so our Curiosity in this particular be not by a like Providence prevented by such a diversity of Computationsâ— For these things concern not matter of Salvation We know the first Ages of the Church followed the Computation of the Seventy altogether though it were most wide of truth and the chiefest Doctors the Church then had through ignorance of the Hebrew for a long time knew not or believed not there was any other Computation But for contents of Faith and the way of Salvation over such the Providence of God watcheth with a careful eye though man be heedless wicked and careless of preserving the integrity of that precious treasure committed to their custody Besides I nothing doubt if our Books be in any such particular as we speak of deficient or corrupted but that the true reading is yet extant in some of the two named or some other Copy some-where preserved by Divine Providence though we cannot yet know and discern which those righter readings be The Iews having a saying Cùm Elias venerit dissolvet nodos And without doubt when they shall be called and meet together from all places of the world which must be before that great Day cometh strange things will be discovered which we little dream of Now if any man ask if such a corruption of Computation be suppoâ—ed where it is most like to be I answer Not in those generations before the Floud where the Hebrew Computation being the middle between the excess of the Septuagint and defect of the Samaritan seems to be crucified as our Saviour between two Thieves but in the generations immediately after the Floud 1. Because in those the Seventy and the Samaritan for the most part agree which argues their difference from our Bibles not to have been voluntary 2. Because S. Luke in the Genealogy of our Saviour inserts as the Seventy do the generation of Cainan immediately after Arphaxad which our Bibles have not who knows what it means or whether it argue not a defect thereabout in the Hebrew Copies Time may discover the meaning thereof 3. Because Peleg at whose birth the Scripture seems to say the Earth was divided was born according to our Copies but 101 years after the Floud which troubles our Chronologers as seeming too small a time for eight persons to multiply unto such a number as may be presumed to have been at the building of the Tower of Babel and at their dispersion thence which will be much holpen if either Cainan be to be inserted to whose generation the Septuagint allow 130 years or if any of the other generations of Arphaxad Salah and Eber be to be read as both the Septuagint and Samaritan have them To conclude if the years of but three of those generations between the Floud and Abraham as of Arphaxad Salah and Nahor should prove to be as the Septuagint and Samaritan agreeingly read them and the generation of Cainan mentioned by S. Luke and four times by the Septuagint also to be added unto them the duration of the World hitherto will have been 350 or 360 years more than we count of If therefore such Suppositions as these may be admitted which I determine not but leave to such as are able and fit to judge Apagite indocti prophani then that Tradition of the Seventh Thousand year to be the Day of Iudgment and of the glorious Reign of Christ will in respect of those Septenary Types of the Old Testament have good probability of Truth Otherwise I cannot see how possibly it can be admitted 1 Thess. 5. 21. Omnia probate quod bonum est tenete I. M. CHAP. IV. An Explication of Psal. 40. 6. Mine ears hast thou bored compared with Hebr. 10. 5. A body hast thou prepared me PSalm 40. v. 6 7. Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not have mine ears hast thou bored Burnt-offering and Sin-offering thou hast not required Then said I Lo I come in the volume of the Book it is written of me I delight to do thy will O my God In which words an allusion is made to a Custom of the Iews to bore the ears of such as were to be their perpetual Servants and to enroll their names in a Book or make some Instrument of the Covenant Sacrifice and burnt-offering thou wouldst not have but because I am thy vowed Servant bored with an awl and enrolled in thy Book I said Lo I come I delight to do thy will O my God These words of the Psalm are alledged by S. Paul Heb. 10. But the first of them with a most strange difference For whereas the Psalmist hath according to the Hebrew Verity Sacrifice and burnt-offering thou wouldst not mine ears thou hast bored or digged 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Paul reads with the LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A body thou hast prepared or fitted me What Equipollency can be in sense between these two This difficulty is so much the more augmented because most Interpreters make the life of the Quotation to lie in those very words where the difference is viz. That the words A body thou hast prepared me are brought by the Apostle to prove our Saviour's Incarnation whereunto the words in the Psalm it self Mine ears hast thou bored or digged or opened take them how you will will in no wise suit I answer therefore That the life of the Quotation lies not in the words of difference nor can do because this Epistle was written to the Hebrews and so first in the Hebrew tongue
City taken by Totilas and a third part thereof demolished and the rest left for a while memorandum Fortunae ludibrium without an inhabitant and lastly the Ostrogothish Kingdom which a while as a blaze continued the light of the dying Caesars in Italy by Narses utterly extinguished WOE WOE WOE The Fifth Trumpet is the First Woe and brings the Saracen Locusts upon the world proceeding out of the smoaky and darkning Seduction of Mahomâ—t conjured up by the Angel of the bottomless pit who though a warlike people and well armed yet had not power to destroy either the State of Caesars in New Rome or the Papal Principality sprung out of the Empire 's ruine in the Old but only Scorpion-like to torment and vex them as their Tail or hindermost Troups out of Africk did Italy and Western Rome 150 years The Sixth Trumpet is the Second Woe and brings upon the Roman Provinces the barbarous and dreadful â—nâ—ndation of the Turks loosing them from the great River Euphrates where they had been long before prepared and now let go as a plague for the Idolatry of Christians 〈◊〉 only as the Saracen Locusts to plague and torment the Roman State buâ— in part tâ— utterly slay and destroy it as they have done in the Empire of Greece which the Saracens had no power to do The Seventh and Last Trumpet is yet to come the entrance whereof is the Last Woe wherein all the Reliques of the Roman Beast with the last Principality of the City of Rome yet surviving shall together with the rest of the enemies of Christ be utterly abolished in the Great Day of Armagedden that all the Kingdoms of the world may become the Kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ. Ch. 11. 15. Note that when the Angel comes at the Seventh Trumpet because the Event thereof is the common issue to both Prophecies he therefore suspends it a while till he hath fetch'd up Chap. 11. a transcurrent and through-running Vision of the Second Prophecy unto it and then joyns them together in one and the same close The Kingdoms of the world are become the Kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ. The Second Prophecy The Opened Book containing Fata Ecclesiae I. By the Inmost and Measured Court of the Temple I understand the Church in her Primitive Purity whenas yet the Christian Worship was unprophaned and answerable to the Divine Rule revealed from above By the War between Michael and the Dragon about the Woman 's manly Off-spring contemporary with the Measured Court I understand that long and bloudy Combate which Christ our Lord animating with his Spirit his undaunted Souldiers fought with the Devil possessing and reigning in the Ethnick Roman State that is the Times of the Primitive Persecution by the Heathen Emperors a War lasting long and costing the lives of many a valiant Martyr yet at 300 years end when a Christian was installed in the Imperial Throne the old Dragon was dismounted and overthrown and the Souldiers of Christ our Lord prevailed For they overcame him by the bloud of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony and loved not their lives unto the death Note that the Description of this Vision is double in the Text 1. more General The Dragon's endeavour to destroy the Woman's Off-spring from ver 1. to the 7. verse 2. more Particular of his Battel with Michael the Woman's Champion For that these two Descriptions are of the same thing and same time is manifest in that one and the same Event The Woman's escape into the Wilderness is the Consequent to them both II. 1. By the Second or Outward Court trampled by the Gentiles and not to be measured I understand the Apostasie under the Man of Sin when the Visible Church being possessed by Idolaters and Idolatry like that of the Gentiles became so inconformable and unapt for Divine measure that it was to be cast out and accounted as prophane and polluted For the Apostasie of the Church is Ethnicismus Christianus 2. By the Witnesses in sack-cloth I understand the mournful Prophecy of God's true Ministers during all that time who when toward the end of their days of mourning they should be about to put off their sack-cloth and leave their lamentation seeing the Truth they witnessed beginning to take place by publick Reformation the Beast which ascends out of the Abyss shall slay them and rejoyce over them as dead three days and an half that is so many years 3. By the Woman in the Wilderness Ch. 12. I understand the condition of the true Church in respect of her Latency and Invisibility to the eyes of man As the Israelites when they had escaped the rage and gotten out of the reach of the Egyptian Pharaoh yet lived a long time after but in a Wilderness an infrequent and barren place where they could not have lived without being extraordinarily fed with Manna from Heaven Such was the condition of the Apostolical Woman and Church of Christ when she had escaped the rage and fury of the Dragon persecuting in the Seven-headed Empire 4. By the Virgin-Company of the 144000 Sealed ones I understand the opposite State of the unstained Church unto the Kingdom of Apostasie in their sincerity of Service and faithful adherence to their Lord and Master whilst the rest worshipped the Beast and his Image These are those who when the Trumpets were to sound were secured by the Mark of Divine protection lest their Society should have been extinguished in those Calamities which then fell upon the Empire How could this Holy Company else but have perished in such Confusions In that place they were represented by the Tribes of Israel for the present Church of the Gentiles is but Israel surrogatus and so by God accounted until the Fulness of the Gentiles come in 5. By the Seven-headed Ten-horned Beast the Two horned False-Prophet and Babylon the Mother of Harlots I understand the State and Kingdom of Apostasie according to three subordinate parts thereof 1. The Body 2. the Head 3. the Seat For Kingdoms especially of the ancient form consisted of three parts Regnum Rex Metropolis Regni So in the Kingdom of Apostasie for such it was to be are Regnum Apostaticum Rex Apostaticus Metropolis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Kingdom of Apostasie was to be the Roman Empire upon a deadly wound of the Caesarean Sovereignty shivered into a Plurality of Kingdoms yet all joyntly as one Body anew acknowledging the Motherdom of the Roman City This is that Seven-headed Beast with Ten crowned Horns upon the Seventh Head whereof S. Iohn speaks Chap. 13. whose description there I understand as if he had said I saw a Beast with Seven Heads and Ten Horns with Diadems which upon the recovery of a deadly wound in one of his Heads arose out of the Sea and succeeded in the Throne Power and
the Sea there are Islands to be met with which are commodious for habitation fruitful and well watered and accommodated with convenient harbors and ports for those who are distrestat Sea to repair to for their safety so is it in the world which is a very troubled Sea tempestuous and tossed by reason of sin God hath here providâ—d Synagogues or Holy Churches as we call them wherein the Truth is diligently taught and whither they repair who are lovers of the Truth and desire in good earnest to be saved and to escape the judgment and wrath of God * Clâ—m Alex. in Opere Quis fit ille dives qui salvetur apud Euseb. Hist Eccl. lib. 3. â— 17. Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Also in this Century undoubtedly were extant those Fabricks in the Cemeteries of S. Peter in the Vaticane and of S. Paul in via Ostâ—nsi which could be no other thaâ— some Christian Oratories whereof Gains speaks in â—usib and calls Throphaea Apostolorum lib. 2. cap. 24. Ab Anno 200. ad 300. a All the day long shall the zeal of Faith speak to this point bewailing that a Christian should come from Idols into the CHURCH that he should come into the HOUSE OF GOD from the shop of his enemy that he should lift up to God the Father those hands which were the mothers and makers of Idols and adore God with those very hands which namely in respect of the Idols made by them are adored without the Church viz. in the Heathens Temples in opposition to God and that he should presume to reach forth those hands to receive the Body of our Lord which are imploy'd in making Bodies that is Images for the Demons That according to the Gentiles Theology Images were as Bodies to be informed with Demons as with Souls see the Treatise of the Apostasie of the latter Times chap. 5. in Book III. b The house of our Dove that is of our Dove-like Religion or the Catholick flock of Christ figured by the Dove c In short The Dove is wont to point out Christ. d Plain without such a multiplicity of doors and curtains e In high and open places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril Hier. * Luke 1. 78. * Lib. 2. c. 57. al. 61. a Let the House be long and built Eastward * Apol. c. 16. * De Spect. â— 25. ad Vxoâ— l. 2. c. 9. De coâ—on miâ—t cap. 3. De velandiâ— virginiâ—us c. 3 13. b Coming to the Water to be baptized not only there but also somewhat asore in the CHURCH under the hand of the Bishop or Priest we take witneâ—s that we renounce the Devil and his Pomp and Angels and afterwards we are drenched thrice in the Water c The Temples of God shall be as common and ordinary Houses Churches shall be utterly demolished every where the Scriptures shall be despised d The Sacred Edifices of Churches shall become heaps and as a desolate lodge in an Orchard there shall be no more Communion of the precious Body and Bloud of Christ Liturgy shall be extinguished Singing of Psalms shall cease Reading of the Scriptures shall no more be heard * Ex Psal. 79. 2. caelesis similibus â—uâ—ta LXX IIebr in â—cervâ—â— seu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 desolationes Cap. 49. e The Christians being in possession of a certain publick place and challenging it for theirs and on the other side the Taverners alledging that it belong'd of right to them the Emperor's Rescript in favour of the Christians was this That it was better that God should be worshipt there after what way soever than that it should be delivered and given up to the Taverners a 1. Weeping the first degree of Penance was without the Porch of the Oratorie where the mournful sinners stood and beg'd of all the Faithful as they went in to pray for them 2. Hearing the second degree was within the Porch in the place called Narthex the place where these penitent Sinners being now under the Ferula or censure of the Church might stand near to the Catechumens and hear the Scripture read and expounded but were to go out before them 3. Prostration or Lying along on the Church-pavement These Prostrate ones were admitted somewhat further into the Church and went out with the Catechumens 4. Standing or Staying with the people or Congregation These Consistentes did not go out with the Catechumenes but after they and the other Penitents were gone out stay'd and joyn'd in prayer with the Faithful 5. Participation of the Sacraments b How that by becoming all things to all men he had in a short time gained a great number of Converts through the assistance of the Divine Spirit and that hereupon he had a strong desire to set upon the building of a Temple or Place for Sacred assemblies wherein he was the more encouraged by the general forwardness he observed among the Converts to contribute both their moneys and their best assistances to so good a work This is that Temple which is to be seen even at this day This is that Temple the erection whereof this Great person being resolved to undertake without any delay he laid the foundation thereof and therewithal of his Sacerdotal i.e. Episcopal Prefecture in the most conspicuous place of all the City c Whereas all other Houses whether Publick or private were overthrown by that Earthquake this Gregorian Temple alone stood firm without any the least hurt He was made Bishop Anno 249. lived until 260. d The Lord's House e The Church f Thinkest thou O Matron which art rich and wealthy in the Church of Christ that thou dost celebrate or commemorate the Lord's Sacrifice that is that thou dost participate the Lord's Supper worthily as thou oughtest who dost not at all respect but art regardless of the Corban who comest into the Lord's House without a Sacrifice or Offering nay who takest part of the poor mans Sacrifice feedest on what he brought for his Offering and bringest none thy self Script â—n 253. a What then remains but that the Church should yield to the Capitol and that the Priests withdrawing themselves and taking away the Altar of our Lord Images and Idol-Gods together with their Altars should succeed and take possession of the Sacrary or place proper to the sacred and venerable Bench of our Clergy b The Altar of our Lord and the place for the sacred and venerable Bench of the Clergy c Idol-Gods and Images together with the Altars of the Devil d might enter into the House of God e The Emperour C. P. L. Galienus to Dionysius Pinnas Demetrius and the rest of the Bishops Greeting What I have been pleased graciously to do for the Christians I have caused to be published throughout the world viz. That all men should quit the Worshipping-places for the Christians use And therefore you may make use of the Copy of my Letters to the end ye may be secured from any future attempts to disturb you