THE HUMILIATION of the SON of GOD, BY HIS BECOMING the Son of man, by taking the form of a Servant, and by his sufferings under Pontius Pilate, etc.  
OR THE EIGHTH BOOK OF COMMENTARIES UPON the Apostles CREED:  
CONTINUED BY THOMAS JACKSON DR. in Divinity, Chaplain to his Majesty in ordinary, and Precedent of Corpus Christi College in OXFORD.  
Divided into four Sections.  
LONDON, Printed by M. FLESHER for JOHN CLARK, and are to be sold at his shop under S. Peter's Church in Cornhill. MDCXXXV.   

A TABLE OF THE PRINCIPAL Arguments of the several Sections and Chapters contained in this BOOK.  

SECTION. I. OF the Humiliation of the Son of God, and the end why he did so humble himself in the general. Page 3.  

1. Chap. In what sense the Son of God is said to have humbled himself. 3  
2. That the dignity from which the Son of God had descended, and unto which the Son of man was to be exalted, were testified by many signs and documents during the time of his humiliation. 9  
3. Whether our sins could have been remitted without the humiliation of the Son of God, is a point not determinable by men: That the manner of the remitting our sins by his humiliation, was the most admirable way, which Wisdom, Justice, or Mercy could require. 17  
4. From what beginning the Devil is said by S. john to sin. Whether sin consist in mere privation, or have a positive entity, or a cause truly efficient, not deficient only. 29  
5. Of the first sin of Angels and man, and wherein it did especially consist. 41    

SECTION. II. OF the more special qualifications, and undertake of the Son of God for dissolving the works which the Devil had wrought in our first Parents, and in our nature, and for cancelling the bond of mankind's servitude unto Satan. 51  

6. Chap. Of the peculiar qualifications of the Son of God for dissolving the first actual sin of our first Parents, and the relics of it, whether in them, or in us their sinful posterity. ib.  
7. Of Legal servants, and of the analogy betwixt their Civil estate, and the estate of wicked men. 63  
8. The Son of God was properly a servant to his Father, yet not by birth as he was the son of his handmaid, but by voluntary undergoing this hard condition for the redemption of man. 69  
9 God's servant job the most illustrious Type of the Son of God, as he was invested with the form of a servant. 81  
10. How the Son of God did conquer Satan at those weapons, wherewith he had conquered our first Parents. 89  
11. A parallel between jobs second temptation, and the Son of God's sufferings in our flesh before the hour of his Agony or his Cross. 97  
12. Of Christ's full satisfaction for the sins of men, and whether to this satisfaction the suffering of Hell pains were necessarily required: And of the Circumstances of his Agony. 111  
13. The bloody sacrifice of the Son of God, was all sufficient to make full satisfaction for the sins of the world, without his suffering of any supernatural or unknowen pains. 138  
14. That our Saviour in his Agony (at least) did suffer pains more than natural, though not the pains of Hell or Hellish pains: That the suffering of such pains was not required for making satisfaction for our sins, but for his Conquest over Satan. 152  
15. Christ's suffering of the unknowen pains, or of pains greater than ever any of his Martyrs or others in this life have suffered, requisite for his qualification, as he was to become the high Priest of our souls. 163    

SECTION. III. OF the harmonical parallel between the predictions or types of the old Testament, and the Evangelicall relations, concerning our Saviour's triumphant coming unto jerusalem, and of his entertainment there, until the institution of his Supper. 172  

16. Chap. Of the King of Zion's coming to Jerusalem, and how the manner of his coming was for circumstance of time, prefigured by the Law or rite of the Paschall Lamb; and for other circumstances, expressly foretold by the Prophet Zachary. ib.  
17. A Comment or Paraphrase upon the first eight verses of the ninth of Zachary: And of the connexion betwixt them and the ninth verse, in which the manner of our Saviour's coming to Jerusalem was most expressly foretold. 179  
18. The fulfilling of Zachariah his Prophecy, Cap. 9 ver. 9 recorded by all the Evangelists; but most fully and most punctually by S. Matthew. 196  
19 Of the meaning or importance of [Hosanna to the Son of David.] 213  
20. At what time and upon what occasions the 118. Psalm was composed; And at what solemn Feast especially used. 219  
21. That the Messias was to be proclaimed King of Zion at some one or other of their great and solemn Feasts, was a prenotion or received opinion amongst the Jews. 234  
22▪ That the honour done to our Saviour at his coming to Jerusalem, did (though not in the distinct apprehension of the multitude or of his Disciples) concludently declare him to be the Son of God, or the God of their Fathers. 245    

SECTION. IV. THe Evangelicall relations of the indignities done unto our Saviour by sinful men, and of his patience in suffering them, respectively prefigured and foretold by the Prophets and other sacred Writers: Or a Comment upon the Evangelicall History, from the institution of his Supper unto his death and burial. 256  

23. Chap. Of the betraying of our Saviour, of his apprehension, and dismission of his Disciples: And how they were foretold or prefigured in the old Testament. ib.  
24. Of the predictions or prefigurations of our Saviour's sufferings after his apprehension in the high Priests hall, etc. 270  
25. The unjust proceedings of the high Priest and Elders against the Son of God, were punctually foretold by the Prophets. 284  
26. The false accusations made by the Priests, and Elders against the Son of God, when they brought him before Pilate, foretold by our Saviour himself and by the Prophets. 292  
27. Of such repentance as judas found: of his casting down the thirty pieces of silver in the Temple: and of the difficulties or variety of opinions, by which of the Prophets it was foretold. 301  
28. The clear resolution of the third difficulty proposed: of the fearful end of judas, and how it was both forepictured, and foretold. 317  
29. Of the Harmony betwixt the Evangelists narrations or history [from the time our Saviour was sentenced to death, until his expiration upon the Cross:] and the Mosaical prefigurations or Prophecies concerning his death and sufferings. 327  
30. That the Son of God should be offered up in bloody sacrifice, was condudently prefigured by the intended death of Isaac. 349  
31. That the Son of God should be offered upon a tree or cross, was prefigured by Moses his erection of the brazen Serpent in the wilderness. 355  
32. That the Son of God should suffer without the gates of Jerusalem, prefigured by the sacrifice of the atonement. 364  
33. At what hour of the day our Saviour was crucified, at what hour taken down from the Cross, and of the mysteries ensuing his death. 370    
FINIS.   

PErlegilibrum hunc, [cuì titulus est, The humiliation of the Son of God, etc.] in quo nihil reperio quo minus summâ cum utilitate imprimatur.  
Ex Aedibus Fulham: June 22. Sa: Ba●●er R. P. Episc: Lond: Cap. domest.   

Errata.  
Page 27. line 7. for else be read else there be p. 60. l. 4. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 70. l. 24. for the first way r. the fittest way p. 95. l. 27. for nor r. not p. 283. l. 21. for unto by him r. unto him by   

THE HUMILIATION OF THE SON OF GOD: OR The eighth Book of Commentaries upon the Apostles CREED.  
THat the man CHRIST JESUS was truly and properly the Son of God, not from his conception, birth, or circumcision, but from eternity: That the Son of God was so made man in time, that whilst the man Christ jesus was conceived, borne, and circumcised; He who was the Son of God, and God our Lord from eternity, was conceived, borne and circumcised in our flesh, hath been, though not the entire subject, yet the main scope of a former Treatise. Unto which by the assistance of this JESUS, and his holy Spirit, we now endeavour to annex this present Treatise or Eighth Book of Commentaries upon the Apostles Creed; the subject and scope whereof is to show, that the same God, and our Lord, who was conceived by the holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, etc. did, (according to the Scripture afore extant) suffer under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried, etc.  
Besides that which hath been delivered concerning this jesus and our Lord, all that we are in these Comments to prosecute or meddle with (until we come unto the article of his coming to judge the Quick and the Dead, and the accomplishment of a Treatise already begun, concerning the Holy Catholic Church) will fall under these generals, The Humiliation, The Exaltation, And Consecration of the Son of God to the everlasting Priesthood.  
Of his Humiliation, his death and sufferings: Of his Exaltion, his resurrection from the dead, his ascension into heaven, and sitting at the right hand of God, were the periods, or accomplishments: Of his Consecration to his everlasting Priesthood, his Agony, and bloody death, his rest three days and three nights in the grave, and resurrection thence, were the principal, though not the only parts. To begin with his Humiliation.  

SECTION I. Of the Humiliation of the Son of God, and the end why he did so humble himself in the general.  

CHAP. I. In what sense the Son of God is said to have humbled himself.  
1 ALbeit, the humiliation of the Son of God our Lord be not expressly mentioned in the Apostles Creed, yet is it so emphatically expressed in Canonical Scriptures (whence the Articles of our Creed are taken, by whose rules they are to be interpreted,) that no man which admits the Scripture to be a rule of Christian faith and practice, can deny this humiliation of the Son of God to be a fundamental point of belief, and rule of manners, and practice truly Christian. As to omit other Texts for the present, that one of our Apostle S. 
* Phil. ●. ver. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.  Paul shall suffice, Let nothing be done through strife or vain glory, but in lowliness of mind; let each esteem others better than themselves. Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others. Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men. And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross. If we consider this humiliation of Christ our Saviour in its general or abstract notion, not as restrained unto particular circumstances of his death and sufferings, it is in some sort more peculiar to him as he was and is the Son of God, than the matter of any other article following in this Creed. For when we say (as we must believe) that the only Son of God was borne, was circumcised, did suffer under Pontius Pilate, was crucified dead and buried, these and the like speeches can be no other ways verified of him, as he is God, than per communicationem idiomatum: That is, the matters signified by these and the like speeches had their beginning and real existence in his humane nature. For that alone was really capable of weakness, sorrow, infirmity, and of death: Yet in as much as the whole humane nature itself was but an Appendix of his divine person, (no person distinct from it) whatsoever Christ Jesus did do or suffer in this nature, was done, and suffered by the eternal Son of God. The Son of God was truly humbled, in, and according to this nature in all his natural, and more than natural sufferings, from his birth to his death. Yet may we not say, that this Son of God did humble himself only in these or the like undertake, whereof the humane nature alone was really capable. That exinanition, or nullifying of himself, mentioned by our Apostle (Phil. 2.7.) did not take its beginning from or in the manhood, but in and from the divine person of the Son of God. For it was no physical passion or natural affection, no passion at all, either natural or supernatural, yet a true and proper humiliation more than civil, though better resembled by humiliation civil, than by natural. His obedience did not merely consist in his patient suffering, but in the submission of himself to his Father's will, before he suffered. Most willing he was to take upon him the form of a servant, before he actually took our nature upon him for our redemption; before the Angel Gabriel was sent unto the blessed Virgin; before the 
* Psal. 40. ver. 6, 7, 8.  Psalmist had said on his behalf, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not: but a body hast thou prepared me; in burnt offerings and sacrifice for sin thou hast had no pleasure: then said I, lo I come; in the volume of the book it is written of me: I delight to do thy will, O God. This unconceivable manner of his unexpressible willingness to do his Father's will, was the very life and soul of that most admirable obedience of his humane will to do and suffer whatsoever he did or suffered in our flesh: That, which gave the infinite value, and everlasting efficacy to his everlasting sacrifice, which was offered once for all.  
2. For taking a true, though an imperfect scale (for such is the best that man can take) of his humiliation and obedience, we are to scan the meaning of our Apostle in the forecited place more particularly. He was, saith our Apostle, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the form of God; the original implieth the very essence or nature of God. As much as we are taught to believe in the Nicene or Athanasius Creed, where it is said, He was of one substance with the Father, etc. He was so in the form of God, or so truly God, that he thought it no robbery, (no usurpation of any dignity which was not his own by right of nature) to account himself equal with God. It was no robbery so to account himself, because he knew himself so to be. Yet saith the Apostle, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he did (as it were) empty himself, or sequester this his greatness, and became less, or lower than the sons of men, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by taking upon him the essential state or condition of a servant: being first made substantially man, that he might be for a time essentially and formally a servant. For though every man be not a servant, yet every servant must be a man. Now the Son of God being thus found in the form and garb of a man, and in the formal condition of a servant, He humbled himself yet lower, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross. And that was a kind of death unto which by the Roman Laws, (whereunto he yielded obedience) none but slaves, or malefactors of servile condition were liable. And how ever, many of this state or condition, were put unto this ignominious death; yet none besides the man Christ jesus did ever suffer it out of obedience or willingly, but for want of power to resist or eschew it. Had it been in the power of the most abject slaves that ever did suffer it, to have called in but half so many Roman soldiers to their rescue, as Christ jesus could have commanded of celestial Angels, they would have sold their lives at a dearer rate, than the Emperors did, which were slain in battle or mutiny.  
3. But the man CHRIST JESUS, who was also the true Son of God, and who in that he was the wisdom of God, did better know the horror or pains of a lingering death before he had experience of it as man, than any creature man or Angel, can do: when HE was afflicted and tormented, yet he opened not his mouth; but was brought (unto his Cross) like a Lamb unto the slaughter, and as a sheep before his shearer is dumb, so opened he not his mouth. Isa. 53.7. This far exceeded all obedience of any man whether free borne, or a slave. His patience in all his sufferings did far exceed the patience of dumb creatures, of Lambs themselves, of worms, or meaner sensible passives. For none of them doth dye a violent death without striving or reluctance, without endeavour to annoy such as afflict or torment them: Whereas this Lamb of God, to show himself to be the mirror of patience and obedience, did pray for his persecutors, after the pangs of death more than natural, had seized upon him; after he had been buffeted, spit upon, scourged, and every way most disgracefully abused; whilst he endured the lingering and cruel torments of the Cross, exasperated with bitter scoffs and revile of his unrelenting persecutors, (uncessantly pouring vinegar in stead of oil into his wounds,) gave not the least signification of discontent, either by word or gesture towards God or man; unless some haply will put a sinister interpretation upon that exclamation when he was ready to dye, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? But of the purport of this exclamation, by God's assistance, in its due time and place. In the interim without prejudice to any man's person or authority, I rest persuaded that this speech beareth no character of discontent, much less of despair. To conclude this point, As there never was any sorrow like to his sorrow in his sufferings, so was there no obedience, nor ever shall be any obedience, like to his from the beginning to the end of his sufferings. This did farther exceed all his sorrows, than his sorrows did the pains and sorrows of other men.   

CHAP. 2. That the dignity from which the Son of God had descended, and unto which the Son of man was to be exalted, were testified by many signs and documents during the time of his humiliation.  
1. Unto this admirable lowliness of obedience, God awarded a correspondent degree of exaltation. For so the Apostle inferreth in the words immediately following, Philip. 2.9. etc. Wherefore (or for this cause) God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name; that at the name of JESUS every knee should bow, of things in Heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth: and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. The same Apostle, Rom. 14.9. tells us, To this end Christ both died, rose and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living. As man he was made Lord from his resurrection, but as the Son of God, and a distinct person from his Father, he was Lord from eternity: as to omit other places before cited, our Apostles inference in the 14. of the Romans, ver. 10.11. will make clear to any Christian that can take it into due consideration, We shall all stand before the judgement seat of Christ. How is this proved, or whence had our Apostle himself this revelation? From the Prophet Isaiah Chap. 45. ver. 10. For there it is written, As I live saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess unto God. Christ than not as man, but as God, was that Lord in whose name the Prophet speaketh this, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me.  
2. Had this Lord the only Son of God taken our nature upon him, though adorned even from the first moment of its assumption with such majesty and glory, as now it is; yet the assumption of it would have been an humiliation of the Son of God, not physical, but rather (as I said) civil, or ad modum civilis humiliationis, an incomparable and unparallelled affability, an incomprehensible loving kindness. But for this Lord to be incarnate for us of a Virgin, to take our nature upon him charged with mortality and infirmities, to surcharge our ordinary humane conditions with the extraordinary estate of a servant; to burden this hard servitude with pain and torture, with disgrace and ignominies, more than servitude humane is capable of; This was that unexpressible humiliation and incomprehensible loving kindness towards us miserable men, which our Apostle so emphatically setteth forth for our pattern in submitting our wills to his most holy will, as he did his unto his Fathers. And our Lord himself requireth that we should be humble, as he is humble: not according to the measure of his humiliation, for that is as impossible for us, as to be as perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect, or as holy, as he is holy; Yet must we be truly holy, as our heavenly Father is holy, and sincerely humble as the Son of God our Lord and Saviour was humble. Our humiliation or obedience to his will, though it must be true, not hypocritical; yet in this life at the best, and in the best of men is imperfect in comparison of the obedience of heavenly Angels, though theirs be but finite. But the depth of the humiliation of the Son of God is, as he is, immensurable, truly infinite. Higher than God he could not be, but so high he was in glory and dignity from eternity: yet lower than man, than the most abject of the Sons of men, he vouchsafed for a time to be, that we might be at least made equal to the Angels; even Lords and Kings unto God, of slaves by birth and condition unto infernal Tyrant's.  
3. But could he not have thus advanced us without any depression or humiliation of himself? could not we sons of men be made happy without the misery and sorrow of the Son of God? The answer to this Quaere will find place hereafter. That which for the present deserveth our consideration, is that in all the several degrees of his humiliation, God the Father was still pleased to exhibit some visible documents, or sensible manifestations of that glory and dignity, whereof his Son for a time had devested himself, and of that glory unto which as man for his faithful service done in our nature he was to be exalted. His birth, we know, was mean in the eyes of men, his entertainment at his first coming into the world, (for lodging especially,) more despicable than the lodging or entertainment of poenitentiary Pilgrims. Yet then welcomed into the world by an host of Angels sounding out gratulatory Hymns unto God for the comfort of us miserable men, for whose sakes he who was their supreme Lord, did vouchsafe to descend thus low; and while they congratulate us, they do truly adore him. But seeing the ditties of their congratulatory hymns were heard only by some few, and those men of meaner rank in Jury; God would have his glory proclaimed by those wise and potent men, which had seen his star in the East, and from the glorious appearance or secret significations made to them of it, came in person, first to jerusalem, then to Bethleem, to tender that homage and service to this Infant, which they scorned to perform to Herod, or Augustus Caesar, of whose greatness no doubt they had heard, but did not admire or esteem it in comparison of this late borne King of the Jews. These and other glimpses of that glory which was due unto him perpetually as man, though publicly manifested, did not so much affect the stubborn hearted Jews, as the meanness of his ordinary condition or state of life did offend them. No question but that voice which came from heaven at his Baptism, This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased, was heard by more than by john Baptist, and both testified and proclaimed by him to them that heard it not; and yet forgotten by most within three years' space: so deeply forgotten, that they did not call to memory, at least not lay it to heart, upon the second publication of his glory. For some few days before his sufferings, the like encomiasme of that glory which was due unto him as he was the Son of God, was proclaimed from heaven, upon his prayers to this purpose, when his soul was heavy and troubled with expectation of approaching sorrows, john 12 26. etc. If any man serve me, let him follow me, and where I am, there shall also my servant be. If any man serve me, him also will my Father honour. Now is my soul troubled, and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour. Father▪ glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again. This document of his glory was more public than the former, and the end and scope of it more solemnly avouched by himself, ver. 29.30. The people therefore that stood by and heard it, said, that it thundered: Others said, an Angel spoke to him. JESUS answered, and said, This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes.  
4. Yet even this gleam of his glorious brightness, wherewith the people's eyes were for the present dazzled, was shortly after so overclouded with the ignominies and indignities done unto him at his attachment, arrainment and execution, that his very Disciples had almost quite forgotten it. For so two of them give this and other glorious documents of his dignities for lost, after they had heard the news of his resurrection. We trusted (say they) that it had been he, which should have redeemed Israel. Luke 24.21. And what reason or pretence had they not to trust so still? Only because the chief Priests and Rulers had delivered him to be condemned to death, and had crucified him. ver. 20. A strange drowsiness had fallen upon them, in that they could not foresee that the day of his glorious Reign over Israel thus foretokened by these and the like scattered rays or dawnings, was to be ushered by a troublesome night of sorrows and sufferings; and with this stupidity himself upbraids them. Then he said unto them, O fools and slow of heart to believe all that the Prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to have entered into his glory? Luke 24.25, 26. Now all the sufferings, and other Eclipses of this Sun of righteousness, were as clearly foretold as his future glory; both by express testimony and typical matter of fact. By express testimony, Isaiah 53.1, 2, 3. Who hath believed our report, and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: He hath no form nor comeliness, and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is despised, and rejected, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were, our faces from him. He was despised, and we esteemed him not.  
5. But were those other interposed flashes of this day stars brightness exhibited at his birth or first arising; at his Baptism, and at his passion as clearly foretold as the Eclipse of it in his sufferings? That the Angelical song or service of Angels at his nativity were foretold by the Psalmist, Psal. 97.7, I ever took it, following the paths of the ancient, as a plain case void of scruple, until Ribera stumbled me in my course with a criticism upon the Apostles allegation of this passage, Heb. 1.6. And again when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the Angels of God worship him. So our English, so Erasmus, and some of the most accurate Greek Interpreters according to the sense and meaning of our English. But this learned Commentator renders it thus, (I must confess verbatim according to the original) Et cum iterum introducit primogenitum in orbem terrae; When he bringeth his first begotten again into the world, the words in the original are thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Upon this ground this good Writer takes liberty to descent from the best Commentators that had gone before him, and peremptorily denyeth this place to be meant of the Son of God's first coming into the world. And it cannot be denied, but that this 97. Psalm contains a remarkable Prophecy, that the Son of God, or God of Israel should be made Lord and King, and Judge of the world by peculiar right. This is one of those many places which (as in the former book hath been observed) cannot be meant of any, save only of him who was truly God, and yet could not be punctually fulfilled, save only of God incarnate. But Ribera should have considered that one and the same passage in any Psalm or Prophecy might have been fulfilled in God incarnate at several times, and alike literally refer to several manifestations whether of his glory or of his sufferings. Yea sometimes 
* See the seventh book. cap. 17. §. 5.  one and the same place or proposition may literally and punctually refer both to his humiliation and exaltation, as that of the 8. Psal. ver. 5. Thou hast made him little lower than the Angels; and hast crowned him with glory and honour. Now if one and the same passage or prediction may be punctually fulfilled of God incarnate at several times, or at his nativity, his baptism, his transfiguration, and resurrection, etc. much more may several passages in one and the same Psalm, or other prophecies be respectively fulfilled, some of his Nativity or resurrection; other of his coming to judgement. It is then no concludent proof, which Ribera brings in prejudice of the Ancient to strengthen his own opinion, that the testimony alleged by the Apostle, Hebr. 1.6. out of Psalm 97. cannot be literally meant of our Lord and Saviour's Nativity; because the chief scope of that place, is to foretell his coming to judge the world, when he shall be attended with an host of Angels. For if this attendance and obsequy be performed unto him, as is probable, by the whole host of Heaven; the celebration of his Nativity, or first coming into the world by a band or company of these heavenly soldiers (how many, or how few, God only knows) might be and certainly was a pledge or praeludium. Nor doth the placing of the words in the original necessarily argue but that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may have the same sense that it had in former places, that is, only a repetition of testimonies without express reference to Christ's first or second coming.  
In that 40. of Isaiah 
* In the 7. Book, and 28. Chap.  before expounded, some passages (if not one and the same) literally refer to the incarnation, or first manifestation of the Word in the flesh, others to the declaration of him to be the Son of God at his Baptism, which john Baptist acknowledged to be the end and tenor of his Embassage. Where and in what manner that transcendent glimpse which was exhibited in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his humiliation, joh. 12.28. was foretold, and fore-signified in its proper place. But the former quaere here opportunely presents itself again; seeing such glory as these glimpses did portend, was due unto him perpetually, what necessity or urgent conveniency was there that he should be made so low, and so strangely humbled.   

CHAP. III. Whether our sins could have been remitted without the humiliation of the Son of God, is a point not determinable by men: That the manner of the remitting our sins by his humiliation, was the most admirable way, which Wisdom, justice, or Mercy could require.  
1 PEremptorily to avouch that God could not have remitted the sins of our first Parents without full satisfaction, nor advanced their sinful seed unto glory without the disgraceful sufferings of his only Son, would by some, and well might be censured for a saucy doctrine: A doctrine, more derogatory from the Omnipotent Majesty, than it would be to prerogatives Royal, to deny Kings or free Princes invested with it, the exercise of that most princely virtue, Clemency, or to grant a prohibition against them in case they should freely forgive offences committed against themselves, or afterwards honour the parties thus freely forgiven upon their extraordinary thankfulness for such gracious favours. This benignity no loyal Subject will grudge or repine at, when it is practised by his liege Lord and Sovereign; and shall we deny the like freedom to infinite Majesty, whereof benignity, and graciousness infinite, is (to speak after the manner of men) a special branch or dimension.  
2. Yet on the other side resolutely to determine that the sins of our first Parents could have been remitted without satisfaction, or their seed advanced to glory without the humiliation of the Son of God; would be a rash, if not an unsound resolution. For albeit we take it for granted, that earthly Princes of the best temper may freely pardon any offences against themselves, and crown this special favour with the advancement of the persons so offending, to higher place and greater honour than formerly they did enjoy: yet will it not hence follow, that the Omnipotent and most just Judge might have done the like. For, he is not of Majesty or of gracious goodness only, but of justice truly infinite; the immutable and indispensible rule of justice and goodness. And he alone who is wisdom truly infinite, can determine whether the remission of men's sins without satisfaction, or the award of glory without some interposition of merits, do not imply some contradiction to the rule of justice infinite, which they do not imply to infinite Majesty or benignity. The greatest Majesty on earth may more justly pardon offences done against themselves, than they can do the like offences against the public Law itself, or the community of men under their government. For earthly Princes how great or good soever they be, are no living laws of goodness, no living rules of justice. This is the prerogative of the Almighty Lord to be both a most righteous Judge, and the very Law or Idaeall rule of righteousness.  
3. Not Princes only, but every private person, or public Magistrate (so they sit not in the seat of Justice) may pardon a crime for its nature capital, if it be only committed against themselves; as if a servant should take his master's purse, not by violence, but unwarily laid aside, and deny the finding, taking, or restoring of it; the master may without wounding his conscience dismiss the party delinquent of his service, without calling his life in question, although the crime be by humane law capital. Nor should the master, I take it, by this clemency incur the danger of the humane Law, if he be as well content to lose the money, as the delinquents service. In this case he may do to the worst of his servants as he desires it may be done to him, if his case or condition were the same. But if of a private master, he should become a public Judge, and show the same favour to him that had been his servant, being arraigned for the like offence committed against another; he should hereby grievously transgress both the Law of God and man. The true reason whereof is not because the former rule [Of doing as he would be done unto] doth hold, as one of late (out of the spirit of contradiction rather than judgement) hath taught; not universally or always, but ad plurimum, for the most part, or now and then, or more certainly in private men than public Magistrates. For they especially are most strictly tied to that fundamental rule of justice and equity of doing as they would be done unto. But seeing, as the great Casuist Gerson somewhere observes, Every Judge sustains a double person; one of his own, as he is subject to the like infirmities with other men; another of the Public Weal, or Community wherein he liveth. Hence it is, or should be, that how merciful or gracious soever he be by natural disposition, or grace; yet when he ascends the seat of Justice, he must lay aside his private person, all private considerations, and arm himself with the public. Now the object of the observance of the former rule, of doing as he would be done unto, is not the person or party accused or arraigned, but the persons whom he wronged, or may hereafter wrong. The greatest Judge in this case must do to the Common Weal, whereof he himself is a member, as he desires is should be done to himself in like case, that is, to right them when they are wronged, and to protect them from further danger, by putting wholesome laws in execution, for cutting off noisome members of public Society.  
4. But what of all this? God is no member of any Community, being in himself far greater, and better than the whole Universe of things visible and invisible; and for this reason not bound to conform himself to any of the former rules; which greatest Princes are by his Law bound to observe. However, he is immutable goodness itself, more than the rule of all those rules of mercy, justice, and goodness which he enjoines us to follow. It is most true, he can do whatsoever he will, yet cannot any thing be willed by him that is contrary to goodness, justice, or mercy. Though his mercies exceed the mercies of the best of men; yet some sins there are which exempt men from participation of his mercies, sins unpardonable to mercy itself: So saith our Saviour, Mar. 3.28, 29. Verily I say unto you, all sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies, wherewith soever they shall blaspheme. But he that shall blaspheme against the holy Ghost, hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation. And S. Matthew more fully, Chap. 12. ver. 31. Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men▪ but the blasphemy against the holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. It is not the sole infinity of that Majesty against which we sin, that makes the sin so unpardonable. For the Father is of infinite Majesty, the Son is of infinite Majesty, and the holy Ghost can be no more: their Majesty and glory is coeternal, and coequal. The sin here meant then cannot be any special sin more offensive against the person of the holy Ghost, then against the person of the Father, or the Son. Nor is it (whatsoever else it be) any one sin specifically distinct from other sins, as murder is from lust, or lust from pride and envy, but rather a confluence of many grievous sins: It always presupposeth a great measure of long continued contempt of God's special favour, gifts, or goodness. Those whom our Saviour in the forecited places forewarns, as being at the pit brink of this infernal bottomless sin, were as S. Mark tells us, Scribes that came down from jerusalem, Mark. 3.22. and as S. Matthew adds, Pharisees too, Matth. 12.24. Both of them had seen or heard our Saviour's miracles which were so pregnant that they could not deny the truth of them. The particular miracle which occasioned this discourse, was the healing of one possessed of a Devil, insomuch that being blind and dumb before, he both spoke and saw; and all the people were amazed, and said, Is this the son of David? And when the Pharisees heard it, (or as S. Mark adds, the Scribes which came down from Jerusalem) they said, this fellow doth not cast out Devils, but by Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils, Matt. 12.22. Mark. 3.24. And S. Mark giving the reason why our Saviour, after he had called the Scribes and Pharisees to him, and debated this controversy with them, did forewarn them in special of this dangerous sin, addeth, Because they said, he hath an unclean spirit, Mark. 3.30.  
5. Into this fearful sin, or rather high measure of sin, of whose danger our Saviour so graciously forewarns these Scribes and Pharisees; those convert Hebrews to whom S. Paul wrote that excellent Epistle, were ready without his like admonitions to fall. It is impossible (saith he) for those men who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the power of the world to come: If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance: seeing they crucify unto themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. For the earth, which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God. But that which bringeth forth thorns and briers, is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing, whose end is to be burned, Heb. 6.4, 5, etc. Others perhaps in those times had either incurred this sentence here denounced, or stood in greater danger than these Hebrews did, of whom our Apostle at this time had good hope; But beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak. For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have showed towards his Name, in that ye have ministered towards his Saints, and do minister, Heb. 6.9.10. Of our Apostles punctual meaning, or sense in these two verses last cited, as of all the rest unto the end of the Chapter, I shall have occasion hereafter to treat. Of the former verses, I have no more for this present, or hereafter (for aught I know) to say, than this; That their meaning, if any be disposed to scan them more exactly, may (I take it) be best illustrated by the type or parallel exhibited in the days of Moses, in those men which were excluded by oath from the land of Canaan, Num. 14.20, 21, 22, 23. And the Lord said, I have pardoned according to thy word. But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord. Because all those men, which have seen my glory and my miracles which I did in Egypt, and in the wilderness, and have tempted me now these ten times, and have not harkened to my voice; Surely they shall not see the land which I swore unto their fathers, neither shall any of them that provoked me, see it. All these, which were all the Males of Israel above twenty years of age, save Caleb, joshua, and Moses, (who was in part involved in this sentence) did bear a true type, or shadow of those who offending in like manner against Christ and his Gospel, we call Reprobates, yet not so true types of such a sin against the holy Ghost, as those which went to search the land of Canaan. And the men which Moses sent to search the land, who returned and made all the Congregation to murmur against him, by bringing up a slander upon she land. Even those men that did bring up the evil report upon the land (after they had seen the goodliness, and tasted the pleasant fruits of it) died of the plague before the Lord. But Joshua the son of Nun, and Caleb the son of Jephunneh, which were of the men that went to search the land, lived still: and many happy days after that time, Numb. 14.36, 37, 38.  
6. Very probable it is, though I will not determine pro or con, that the irremissible sin whereof our Saviour and S. Paul speak, for which there remaineth no satisfaction, was if dot peculiar, yet Epidemical unto those primitive times, wherein the kingdom of heaven was first planted here on earth by our Saviour: and the holy Catholic Church was in erection by the ministry of the Apostles, or in times wherein the extraordinary gifts of the holy Spirit were most plentiful, and most conspicuous. Even in those times, into this woeful estate none could fall, which had not tasted of the heavenly gift, of the good word of God, and of the powers of the world to come, and had not been partakers of the holy Ghost. Nor did such men fall away by ordinary sins, but by relapse into jewish blasphemy, or heathenish Idolatry, and malicious slander of the kingdom of heaven, of whose power they had tasted. God was good to all his creatures in their creation, and better to men in their redemption by Christ: of this later goodness all men werein some degree partakers. The contempt, or neglect of this goodness was not irremissible: the parties thus far offending, and no further, were not excluded from the benefit of Christ's satisfaction, or from renewing by repentance: but of the gifts of the Spirit which was plentifully poured out after our Saviour's ascension, all were not partakers. This was a special favour, or peculiar goodness, whose continued contempt, or solemn abrenuntiation by relapse either into heathenism, or Jewish blasphemy was unpardonable; not in that it was a sin peculiarly committed against the person of the holy Ghost, but because it did include an extraordinary opposition unto the indispensable law of justice, or goodness, which God the Father, Son, and holy Ghost, are.  
7. Some sins then there be, or some measure of them, which being made up, no satisfaction will be accepted for them. It is impossible according to the sacred phrase, that the parties thus delinquent should be renewed by repentance. But whether according to this dialect of the holy Ghost, that grand sin, whereof our Saviour, and the Apostle speaks be absolutely irremissible until death hath determined their impenitency which committed it; or only exceeding dangerous in comparison of other sins, I will not here dispute: much less dare I take upon me to determine either branch of the main question proposed: As [whether satisfaction were absolutely necessary for remitting the sins of our first Parents, or their seed?] Or, [whether the Son of God could have brought us sinners unto glory by any other way, or means than that which is revealed unto us in his Gospel?] It shall suffice me (and so I request the Reader it may do him) to show that this revealed way is the most admirable for the sweet concurrence of Wisdom, Justice, Mercy, and whatsoever other branches of goodness else be, which the heart of man can conceive; more admirable by much than wisdom finite could have contrived, or our miserable condition desired, unless it had been revealed unto us by God himself.  
8. For demonstration of this conclusion, and for deterring all which pretend unto the privilege or dignity of being the Sons of God, from continuance in sin, no principle of faith, or passage in the sacred Canon can be of better use than that 1. joh. 3.8. He that committeth sin is of the Devil: for the Devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the Devil. However, the words which several translations do render, one and the same word in the Original (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) be of different signification in point of Grammar; yet is there no contradiction betwixt them upon the matter. Our later English which I alleged readeth [that he might destroy] the former, that he might dissolve the works of the Devil. Neither of them much amiss, and both of them put together, or mutually helping one another, exceeding well. Some works of the Devil, the Son of God is said more properly to dissolve, others more properly to destroy. Sin itself, as the Apostle tells us, is the proper work of the Devil, his perpetual work; for he sinneth from the beginning. And for this cause the man that committeth sin is of the Devil, the Devil's workman, or day labourer, so long as he continues in known sins. Sin, the best of men daily do. But it is one thing to sin and do a sinful Act, another to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (the phrase used by our Apostle) a worker, or doer of evil, operarius iniquitatis: Such workmen the sons of God, or servants of Christ cannot be, at lest so long as they continue sons or servants.  
The points most questionable in those forecited words of S. john, now to be discussed in this preamble to the manner how the Son of God did dissolve, or destroy the works of the Devil, are two. The first, from what beginning the Devil is said to sin, or to continue in sin. The second, what special works of the Devil they were, which the Son of God did or doth undo, or for whose dissolution, or destruction he was manifested in our flesh.   

CHAP. IU. From what beginning the Devil is said by S. John to sin. Whether sin consist in mere privation, or have a positive entity, or a cause truly efficient, not deficient only.  
1 THe word Beginning, is some times taken universally and absolutely, as it reacheth to the first moment of time, or to the first beginning of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible, which have beginning of being. 
* See the 7 book cap. 26. § 34.  From this utmost extent of the word beginning, S. john in the beginning or entrance into his Gospel strongly infers, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Word by whom all things were made, was truly God, without beginning or end of days, because he was in the beginning, that is, had a true and real existence, when all things whether visible or invisible, which were created by him, did but begin to be. But the beginning mentioned by the same Apostle in the forecited place, 1. john 3.8. may not be stretched so far as to make it pitch upon the first beginning of time, or of all things made or created. First, it is neither certain nor probable that any of the Angelical substances were created, or begun to be before all other creatures. Secondly, it cannot be certainly known whether the blessed Angels which keep their station, and the collapsed Angels, were all created in the same instant: or if it were certain or granted that some of them were created before others, though all of the same day; yet could there be no certainty or probability that the collapsed Angel which is become a Devil (or prince of Devils, who S. john saith, sinned from the beginning) was created before all other Angels, or with the first that were created. Most probable it is (in my opinion) that the Angels were all created in the fourth evening and morning, together with the Sun and Moon, and the Stars of the Firmament, two days before man was created. Thus much those words of God unto job, (Chap. 38. ver. 4.) seem to import. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the world, etc. or when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? If by the sons of God in this place the Angels be meant, than Lucifer, by which name we commonly describe the Devil, was then the son of God, an Angel of light, and did with the whole host of heaven praise, laud, and magnify his Creator: whensoever he was created, God created him righteous and just.  
2. Now albeit he was the first of all Gods visible creatures that became evil: though sin itself did take its beginning from him, yet undoubtedly he had a perfect being before sin did begin to be in him: he did not, he could not sin in the same point of duration in which he was created. Some therefore for this reason refer the beginning mentioned in S. john to the beginning of sin, as if his meaning in their construction were thus: Satan sinneth perpetually from the beginning of sin, which had its first beginning in him. But though this be true, yet if we stretch the beginning of our Apostle thus far, it will not close so well with his collection or inferences: For the Devil in the same place is instiled, a sinner from the beginning especially, if not only, with reference to those works which the Son of God was to dissolve or destroy. But the Son of God did not manifest himself on purpose to dissolve the works which the Devil had wrought in himself, or in the collapsed Angels his associates; but the works only which they had wrought in man. For this cause saith the Apostle, He took not on him the nature of Angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham, Heb. 2.16. As the Devil is a liar, and father of lies since the beginning, so he was a sinner not only in himself, but the beginner or begetter of sin in man. And since he first begot sin in him, he sinneth still as a worker, or foster-father of sins in man's posterity.  
3. Whether our first Parents did sin upon the same day whereon they were created, is to me uncertain: and for this reason I will not dispute either upon the improbabilities or probabilities of the affirmative opinion which is maintained by many, of whose opinion I had rather make some good use, than move any controversy about it. Most certain it is, that the old Serpent and his associates were sinners themselves, before they seduced our first Parents to that first and heinous sin of mankind. Whether one or more of them had possessed the visible Serpent, which Moses saith was subtler than all the beasts of the field, (as the fittest instrument or organ) for accomplishing their design against poor innocent man; his ruin was projected before he or they could accomplish it. Most probable again it is that they had grievously sinned against their God and Creator, if not before, yet at least from the Creation, or first beginning of man, whose estate they envied: yet whether they were irreversibly cast out of God's gracious presence before the accomplishment of this their project against man, is not so certain. More probable to me it is, that the accomplishment of this wicked project, which they could not hope to effect but by slandering their Creator, did make up the measure of their former sins unto an unpardonable height; unto an height more unpardonable than the sin against the holy Ghost is in men during this life. For we read not of any curse or woeful Sentence pronounced, much less peremptorily denounced against the old Serpent and his associates, until God had convented this visible Serpent, and the woman whom he had beguiled. But the curse denounced against that visible Serpent did fall upon the whole Legion of unclean spirits, which had possessed it, or used it as their instrument, though perhaps possessed but by one.  
4. In this seduction of our first Parents (if not before) the Devil committed sin, no less than rebellion or high treason against his maker. In this alone, if not otherwise, he proudly sought to be like God, in that he made man of a servant or son of God, to become his slave, or vassal. He was of julius Caesar's mind, or rather julius Caesar of his; and more affected ro be Lord Paramount over earth and the visible creatures in it, then inferior, or Compeer to any Celestial creature. And no marvel or matter of wonderment it is, if this combination of rebellion against God, and of envy against man, by God appointed the supreme Lord of all visible creatures, did make the breach, of Satan's allegiance to his Creator so irreconcilable, that the true and only Son of God would not vouchsafe to become his Lord Redeemer, as he is of men, whom he seduced. But whether S. john's meaning in the forecited place be, that the Devil sinneth from the beginning of sin in man, or from the beginning of sin in himself: From the one, or from the other beginning, he still continueth to sin against God and man without end or intermission.  
5. But is sin in man in deed and truth the work of Satan? If truly and properly it be a work, it is something or more than something, as being the work of him who doth not busy himself about small matters. It must be a thing either visible or invisible, and if it be comprehended under either part of this division, why are we taught to believe that God the Father Almighty is the Maker not only of heaven and earth, but of all things visible and invisible in them? If all things were made by him, what could be left for Satan to work or make? The appearance of this difficulty moved that acute and learned Father S. Austin sometime to say, that sin was nothing, and oftentimes to allot it a cause deficient only, denying it any true positive efficient. And many good Writers since his time, in our days especially, overswayed with this Father's bare authority, will have sins of what kind soever, to be privations only, no positive entities. But they consider not that the self same difficulties, besides other greater more inevitable inconveniences, will press them no less, who make sin to be a mere privation, or to have a cause deficient only; than they do others who acknowledge it to have a positive efficient cause, and a being more than merely privation.  
6. What then be the special inconveniencies, wherewith their opinions are charged which make sin either nothing, or but a mere privation? First we account it a folly in man, a folly incident to no man, but an Heautontimorymenon to be angry or chase hot for nothing. Hence seeing the Almighty Judge doth never punish either man or Devil, but for sin; we shall cast a foul aspersion on his wisdom and Justice, by maintaining sin to be nothing. But fewer in our times there be, (though some I have heard out of the Pulpit, which under pretence of St. Augustins authority) make sin to be mere nothing. But many there be who hold it to be a mere privation, which is a mean between mere nothing, and a positive entity. Yet admitting, (not granting) the nature of sin to consist formally in privation: mere privations for the most part have causes truly efficient, fewer, causes merely deficient, if there can be any causality in deficiency. Blindness, deafness, dumbness, are privations; and yet more men lose the sense of hearing, sight, or feeling, (in some particular members) by violent blows, or by oppression of raging humours, than by mere defect, or decaying of spirits. And where one man drops into his grave for mere age (as ripe apples do from the trees they grow on to the ground without blasts of wind or shaking) a thousand die a violent, or untimely death by true and positive efficient causes, either external, or internal.  
7. That which either hath deceived, or emboldened many Divines to allot sin a being only privative, is a Philosophical or metaphysical Maxim most true in itself, or in its proper sphere, but most impertinently applied to the point now in question. The Maxim is, Omne ens, quà ens, est bonum: Every entity in that it hath a being, is good. Most true, if we speak of transcendental goodness, or bonum entis: for every thing which hath a true being, is accompanied with a goodness entitative. But the question amongst Divines is, or should be about moral goodness, or that goodness which is opposed to [malum culpae] that evil which we call sin. Now if every positive entity, or nature were necessarily good, according to this notion of goodness: every intelligent rational creature should be as impeccable as his Creator, and we should truly sin, (if to speak untruly be a sin) when we say the Devil is a knave, or any man dishonest. For if every nature, or entity (as such) were morally good, it were impossible any nature or positive entity should be evil qualified, should be laden with sin, that is, with that evil which is opposed to goodness moral, or to holiness; whether this evil be a mere privation, or positive entity. For in as much as the sight, or visive faculty is the property of the eye, or in as much as this proposition is true: Oculus, quà oculus videt; this conclusion is most necessary, [when the eye hath lost the sight, or visive faculty, it is no more an eye, unless in such an equivocal sense, as we say a picture hath eyes, though not so properly.] If a man cannot see (as we say) stime, but with one eye, we account it no solecism to say he hath lost the other. The case in the former instances is more clear: If Satan or man were morally good because they have a positive entity or nature; neither of them could possibly be morally evil, neither of them sinful creatures, albeit we should grant sin to be as mere a privation, as blindness is.  
8. It is a maxim in true Logic (that is, in the faculty or science of reasoning absolutely true) and therefore true in Divinity also (for truth is but one, and it is her property not to contradict herself, though examined in several subjects;) Quicquid convenit subjecto quà tale, non potest abesse sine subjecti interitu. No natural property can cease to be, or perish, but together with the subject which supports it. Whence if that Angel which is now the Devil had been truly good, quà Angelus, or if goodness (moral) had belonged unto him, as he was a positive entity, or rational creature, he had ceased to be either a rational creature, or any thing else, when he lost his goodness.  
9 Of sins of omission, it is most true, that they find place in our nature, rather by deficiency than efficiency; and yet even this deficiency for the most part, is occasioned by some formal positive act or habit. For this cause it is questioned among Schoolmen, Whether there is or can be any sin of mere omission, that is, not occasioned by the commission of some other sinful acts precedent, or linked with some such act present. To deny all sins of mere emission in nature already corrupted, would be more probable than in the first sin whether of man or Angel. Neither of them could possibly have committed sin, or done that which they ought not to have done, without some precedent omission of that which they ought to have done. But of this elsewhere more at large; and somewhat of it briefly in the next Chapter.  
10. Sure I am, that the work which Satan wrought in our first Parents and in our nature, had a cause truly efficient, hath a being more than merely privative. For it was a work so really great and so cunningly contrived, that the strength and wisdom of the Son of God was required (as being only all-sufficient) to dissolve or destroy it; and is it possible that any so great a work could be wrought by deficiency, or a defective worker? Not Satan only, but his instruments are as positive, as industrious efficients, as effectual workers of iniquity, as the best man which ever lived (the man CHRIST JESUS only excepted) was, or is of righteousness. But it is true again, that neither Satan nor his instruments can produce or make any substances or subjects: these are all the works of God whether they be visible, or invisible. What shall we say then, that God did create any naked substances, and leave it free for Angel or other his creatures to invest them with what accidents or qualities they pleased? No; if God had created any substances without accidents, they should have been morally neither good, nor bad: For all other natures besides the incomprehensible Essence, who only essentially is, and whose essence is goodness itself, though they were made actually good, yet their goodness was mutable: it was but an accident or quality, no essential property. What shall we say then to the proposed objection, that sin if it be any thing, either visible or invisible, must be of Gods making, not the work of Satan, seeing we acknowledge God to be the Maker of all things visible and invisible?  
11. The punctual answer is, That this universal, [God made all things visible, and invisible] must be extended only to those things which are properly said to be made or created. Now substances only whether visible or invisible, are the immediate and direct effects and proper object of creation. Accidents had their beginning as appurtenances to their subjects, by resultance only. That goodness which God approved in man, did result from his nature, not quà talis, but as it was the immediate work of God: it had no making or creation distinct from the creation of man. He that moulds a bullet, or makes a material sphere, maketh both round; and yet we cannot say that he makes rotundity or roundness, by any work or action distinct from the making of the bullet or sphere. Factâ sphaerâ simul sit rotunditas: That which the Artificer intends, is a sphere; yet cannot he possibly make a sphere, but rotundity will by resultance arise with it, or from it. In like manner, when God made man, he made him after his own Image and similitude: this was the mould in which he was cast; and being cast into this mould, he could not but be good.  
12. The humane nature, as framed by God, was like a musical instrument exactly made and exactly tuned, both at once; not first made, and then tuned. That body of earth into which the Almighty Creator first inspired the breath of life, was not first a man in puris naturalibus, and afterwards adorned or beautified with original justice. That spirit of life, which God inspired into him, did so tune and season the whole mass or substance, that his reasonable soul or spirit did forthwith hold exact harmony with the Creators will. His inferior faculties or affections, held exact consort with his reason. All this was the work of God, and with this harmony was God delighted; yet this harmony, though most exact, was mutably exact. The goodness or excellency of this sweet harmony in the humane nature became the object of Satan's envy, and the mutability of this excellency became the subject of his temptations: a subject capable of enticements unto evil. The only mark which Satan aimed at, was to deface or dissolve this work of God, and in stead of this sweet harmony to plant a perpetual discord in the humane nature; a discord, an enmity betwixt the soul and spirit of man and his God; a discord, an enmity, or civil war betwixt man's conscience and his affections. Satan then did deface, or dissolve the work of God, and the Son of God was manifested to dissolve his works in man, and to destroy his power.   

CHAP. V. Of the first sin of Angels and man, and wherein it did especially consist.  
1 WIth the nature of sin in general, or according to that extent proposed in the beginning of the former book, I meddle not in these present Commentaries, but have reserved them to another work already begun in a Dialect more capable of such school niceties or disquisitions, than our English is. About the nature or specifical quality of the sin of Lucifer (so it hath pleased the Ancients to style that prince of the collapsed Angels) some question there is amongst Divines, and the like about the quality or nature of our first Parent's sin: as whether one or both of them were pride or infidelity. But infidelity in its proper use and signification, is rather a symptom, or concomitant of many sin's precedent, than any one sin; a distrust of God's mercy for pardoning sins committed. It is to my capacity unconceivable how the first sin of what creature soever should be infidelity; or how the first degree of infidelity could find entrance into man or Angel, without some positive forerunning sin. But if by infidelity those Divines, whose expressions in this point I cannot approve, mean no more than incogitancy or want of consideration, we shall accord upon the matter. For without the omission of somewhat which they ought to have done, neither man nor Angel could have sinned so positively and grossly, as both of them did. Both were bound to have made the goodness of their Creator in making them such glorious creatures as they were, the choice and most constant object of their first thoughts and contemplations. But through want of stirring up that grace of God, which they received in their creation, or by not exercising their abilities to reflect upon the goodness and greatness of their Creator, they were surprised with a desire of proper excellency, or of greater dignity than they were capable of. By this means that sin which was begun by incogitancy, or want of reflection upon the true object of their bliss, was accomplished in pride. For pride naturally results in men from too much reflection upon their own good parts. And whilst they compare themselves with themselves, (as our Apostle speaketh) they become unwise, or which is worse, whilst they compare their own good parts with others mean parts (whether such indeed, or to their apprehension) they slide without recovery into that soul sin of hypocrisy. All men by nature, (that is from the unweeded relics of our first Parent's pride) are prone to overvalue themselves, and to thirst after greater dignities than they deserve, or are qualified for. This pride or ambition in the Angels was presently seconded with envy (as soul a vice, as pride itself, and its usual compeer and companion) against the new and last-made visible creature man, and envy did as speedily bring forth that malicious practice against our first Parents, which (as was said before) in probability did make their sin more unpardonable than the sin of our first Parents was.  
2. But admitting both their first positive sins, to have been for nature or specifical quality, desire of proper excellency, whose branches are pride and ambition: this position admitted, will beget a new question or disquisition, to wit, What manner of proper excellency, or what degree of pride it was, for which their just Creator did punish them? Some are of opinion, that the height of that proper excellency, at which the Angels (at least one Angel) did aim, was personal union with the Son of God or God himself. But this opinion, without prejudice to the Authors or abettors of it, is very improbable, because the mystery that the Son of God should become a creature, or take any created substance into the unity of his person, was not for aught I have read, or can gather from any passage in Scripture, revealed either explicitly or implicitly before the fall of man, or before his convention for his Apostasy from God; which was not until the first day of the second week at soon, when the world was (as we say) in facto, not in fieri only, as it respectively was in the first week, or seven days. When this opinion, that the assumption of any creature into unity of person with the Son of God, or with any person in the blessed Trinity, was either known or probably conceived by man or Angel before the fall of man, shall be sufficiently proved, I shall yield assent to their opinion as probable, who think the first sin of Lucifer was a desire or longing after personal union with the Son of God or God himself. No question but the old Serpent had sinned more grievously in the same kind than our first Parents did, when the woman by his cunning and malice, and the man by her prevarication did taste the forbidden fruit, in hope or expectation to be made thereby like to Elohim, or God himself.  
3. But was it possible that either the collapsed Angels, or man by their suggestion, should attempt or desire to be equal with God, or to be Gods Almighty? To be in all points coequal with God, was perhaps more than Lucifer himself did desire: yet that even our first Parents desired to be in some sort or other equal with God, is probable from the Apostles character of the Son of God [He being, saith he, in the form of God, thought it no robbery to be equal with God.] This to my understanding implies, that the robbery or sacrilege committed by our first Parents for which the Son of God did humble and engage himself to make satisfaction, was their proud or haughty attempt to be equal with God, at lest in knowledge of good and evil. And yet, as was said before, the collapsed Angels had doubtless sinned more presumptuously, before they tempted our first Parents to the like sin. Neither man nor Angel could have affected equality in any one attribute with their Creator, much less in all or most, so they had made his glory, power, or majesty, the chief or principal object of their first contemplations. But how far the previal sin of omitting this duty, might let loose their strong and swift imaginations unballanced with experience, or what entrance it might work for that desperate and positive sin of Ambition, or seeking to be equal or like to God for power and wisdom; God, and they only know, if haply they now know, or perfectly remember the manner of their first transgressions. Many things, many learned and wise men do, and attempt more, through incogitancy, want of consideration (or ad pauca respicientes) which by men of meaner parts would be suspected for a spice of madness, if they had taken them into serious consideration before.  
4. There is no Christian man, I am persuaded, this day living (unless he be stark mad) who if this interrogatory were propounded unto him in express terms; [whether do you think yourself altogether as wise, as God the Father, Son, and holy Ghost,] but would answer negatively, I am not. And yet how many writers in our time, through forgetfulness to put this or the like interrogatory to themselves, when they set pen to paper, have continued for many years together grievously sick of our first Parents first disease, whatsoever that were; yet not sick of it in explicit desires or attempts to be every way equal with God, but in implicit presumptions that they are altogether equal with him in wisdom and knowledge, at lest for the governing of this universe from the beginning of it to the end, and for the dispensing of mercy and justice towards men and Angels, before they had any beginning of being, and for ever, even world without end after this visible world shall be dissolved. To give a true and punctual answer to all their presumptuous contrivances, or to accept their challenges in this kind, would require more skill in Arts than most men are endowed with, and a great deal more time than any wise man or skilful Artist can be persuaded to misspend. It would be a very hard task for the cunningest needle woman or other Professor of manual or finger-mysteries, to unweave or dissolve a spider's web, thread by thread, after the same manner which she did wove it: And yet a mean housewife or child may with a wing or bosom in a moment undo all that the spider hath wrought in a whole year. And so may every Novice in Arts unbuble all, that some great Clerks or Schoolmen have been twenty or thirty years in contriving or working, (as in setting forth maps or systems of the manner of God's decrees before all times, or disputes about election or reprobation, as they are immanent acts in him) with that common but useful exception, aut nihil, aut nimium. Their conclusions might (for aught I know) be unanswerable and sound, upon supposition that they are every whit as wise as God. But this being not granted them, or the contradictory being granted, [that the omnipotent Creator is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wiser than they are:] the most elaborate and longest studied Treatises, which it hath been my hap upon these Arguments to see, afford no document of greater strength or cunning than is exhibited in the spider's web. The Authors of them tell us only (and herein we believe them) what they themselves would have done, if they had been delegated to make Decrees or Acts for the government of men and Angels, or what God should have done if they had been of his privy counsel, when he made all things visible, and invisible. But what God doth, hath done, or will do according to the sole counsel of his most holy will, that, they show us not, nor go about to show, whilst they run the clean contrary way to that which God our Father, and the Church our mother hath prescribed us to follow. Now the way which the English Church from the warrant of God's word, to this purpose prescribes, is to admire, not to determine the equity of God's Decrees before all times from contemplation of the manner of their execution or sweet disposition of his providence in time. It is a preposterous presumption to determine the manner how they have been, or shall be executed, by prying into the projection or contrivance of the Almighty Judge, before man or Angel or any thing besides God himself had any being.  
5. He sinned grievously that said in his heart, or secret unexamined thought, similis ero altissimo (whether this be meant of Nabuchadnezzar or some other earthly Tyrant only, or literally of one or more of them, and mystically of Lucifer.) But they sin no less for the act, which say in their hearts, or presuppose in their implicit thoughts altissimus est similimus mihi: the most high God hath determined nothing concerning men or Angel, otherwise than we would have done, if we had been in his place. They preposterously usurp the same power which God in his first Creation did justly exercise who though not expressly, yet by inevitable consequence, and by implicit thoughts make a God after their own image and similitude. A God not according to the relics of that image wherein he made our first Parents, but after the corruptions or defacements of it, through partiality, envy, pride and hatred towards their fellow creatures. But of the original of transforming the Divine nature into the similitude of man's corrupted nature, I have 
* In the 5th. book of Commentaries upon the Apostles Creed, or a Treatise containing the original of unbelief, etc. See the former Treatise, chap. 44.45. etc.  elsewhere long ago delivered my mind at large. And I would to God some (as I conjecture) offended with what I there observed (without any reference or respect either to their persons or their studies) had not verified the truth of my observations in a larger measure, than I then did conceived they could have been really ratified, or exemplified by the meditation or practice of any rational man. This transformation of the Divine nature, which is in some sort or degree common to most men, is (in the least degree of it) one of those works of the Devil, which the Son of God came into the world to dissolve by doctrine, by example, and exercise of his power. But what be the rest of those works besides this? All (I take it) may be reduced to these general heads. First, the actual sins of our first Parents. Secondly, the remainder or effects of this sin whether in our first Parents, or in their posterity, to wit, that more than habitual, or hereditary corruption which we call, sin original. Thirdly, sins adventitious or acquired, that is, such vicious acts, or habits, as do not necessarily issue from that sin which descends unto us from our first Parents, but are voluntarily produced in particular men, by their abuse of that portion of freewill which was left in our first Parents, and in their posterity, and that was a true freedom of will, though not to do well, or ill, yet at lest inter mala: to do less, or greater evil, or to do this or that particular, ill, or worse. Original sin is rather in us ad modum habitus, than an habit properly so called. All other habitual sins or vices are not acquired but by many unnecessitated vicious acts: But to distinguish between vice and sin, or between vicious habits and sinful habits, is (to my capacity) a work (or attempt rather) of the same nature, as if one should go about to divide a point into two portions; or a mathematical line into two parallels.  
6. Nor are these sins enumerated, nor sin itself formally taken the only works of the Devil which the Son of God came to destroy, but these sins with their symptoms, and resultances. For the Devil sinneth from the beginning in continual tempting men to sin, although his temptations do not always take effect. He sinneth likewise in accusing men before their Creator, or soliciting greater vengeance than their sins in favourable construction, deserve. Now that neither his temptations, nor accusations do always find that success, which he intends, this is merely from the mercy and loving kindness of our Creator in sending his Son to dissolve the works of Satan. The general symptom or resultance of all sin original, or actual, is servitude or slavery unto Satan, and the wages of this servitude is death: not this hereditary servitude only, but death which is the wages of it, is the work of Satan. Yet a work which the Son of God doth not utterly destroy until the general resurrection of the dead. Nor shall it then be destroyed in any, in whom the bonds of the servitude and slavery unto sin have not been by the same Son of God dissolved, whilst they lived on earth. He was first manifested in the flesh and form of a servant to pay the ransom of our sins, and to untie the bonds and fetters of sin in general. He was manifested in his resurrection to dissolve or break the reign of sin within every one of us. For as the Apostle speaks, He died for our sins, and rose again for our justification. And he shall lastly be manifested, or appear in glory utterly to destroy sin, and death. CHRIST (saith the Apostle) was once offered to bear the sins of many, and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation, Heb. 9.28.    

SECTION 2. Of the more special qualifications, and undertake of the Son of God for dissolving the works which the Devil had wrought in our first Parents, and in our nature, and for cancelling the bond of mankind's servitude unto Satan.  

CHAP. VI Of the peculiar qualifications of the Son of God for dissolving the first actual sin of our first Parents, and the relics of it, whether in them, or in us their sinful posterity.  
1. THe qualifications or undertake of the Son of God for dissolving or remitting such actual sins, as do not necessarily issue from our first Parents, and for bringing them and us unto greater glory than they affected, do challenge their place or proper seat in the Treatise designed to his exaltation after death, and his consecration to his everlasting Priesthood. We are now to prosecute the points proposed in the title of this Section, and in the first place such points as were proposed in the title of this Chapter.  
2. The rule is universally true in works natural, civil, and supernatural, but true with some special allowances, Vnum quodque eodem modo dissolvitur, quo constituitur. Though the constitution and dissolution of the same work include two contrary motions, yet the manner or method by which both are wrought is usually the same; only the order is inverted. And we should the better know how mans first transgression was dissolved by Son of God, if we first knew how it was wrought by Satan, or wherein the sin itself did properly consist. Infidelity or disobedience it could not be, for these are symptoms of sins already hatched. Whatsoever else it was, the first transgression was pride, or ambitious desire of independent immortality. Now the Son of God begun his work where Satan ended his; dissolving this sin of pride, by his unspeakable humility. And to take away the guilt of man's disobedience or infidelity, which were the symptoms or resultances of his intemperate desires; the Son of God did humble himself to death, even to the death of the Cross, reposing himself in all his sufferings upon God. The first man was the only Favourite which the King of kings had here on earth, the only creature whom he had placed as a Prince in Paradise, a seat more than royal or monarchical, with hopes of advancement unto heaven itself. It was a plot as malicious, as cunning, in Satan to dispossess man of his present dignity, and to throw him down from this height of hope to hellish slavery; to make him a creature more miserable than the earth, water, or other inferior element, harboured any. Yet was his misery if we found the very depth of it, not commensurable to the excessive measure of his pride. The ground or bottom of his pride was lower than the lowest part of the earth, as low as nothing: the height of it reached above the highest heavens. Man, who as St. Augustine saith, was but terrae filius, & nihili nepos, the son of the earth, and nephew of nothing. Man, who if he had looked back to his late beginning, might have said to the silly earthworm, Thou art my sister, and to every creeping thing, Thou art my brother; became so forgetful of his original, that he sought (by the suggestion of Satan) to become like his Almighty Creator, who out of the same earth had made him so much more excellent than all earthly or sublunary creatures, as they were than nothing. But let the first man's pride, or Satan's malice in hatching it, and the rest of that sinful brood, receive all the degrees of aggravation which the invention of man can put upon them: yet the medicine prepared by the Son of God, will appear more ample, than the wound is wide; and more sovereign than it is dangerous. Satan's cunning in working man's fall doth no way equalise the wisdom of the Son of God in dissolving this work. It is not probable, as was observed before, that Satan could so far infatuate the first man as to make him affect to be every way equal with his God, but only to be like or equal unto him in some prerogative, as in the knowledge of good and evil; and probable it is he did desire, that his immortality and sovereignty over other creatures might be the one independent, and the other supreme. Now these and all other branches of pride, whereof we can imagine the humane nature by the Serpent's suggestion to be capable, are more than countervailed, every way overreached by the first degree of the humiliation of the Son of God. He was not only like but equal to the Father, not in some one or few, but in all the prerogatives of the Divine nature. He was (saith the Apostle) in the form of God, and (therefore) thought it no robbery to be equal with God. Yet he vouchsafed to become, not like to man only, but truly man, more than equal to other men in sorrows and sufferings.  
3. Whatsoever equality or similitude with God it was, at which the first man's pride through incogitancy did aim, it was not effected, but affected only, by way of trial. He could not out of a deliberate choice or settled resolution assure himself that he should become such as he desired to be. But the Son of God, who was truly God, out of unerrable, unchangeable, infinite wisdom, determined with himself to become truly man. How man, whilst man, should become more than man, truly God: neither the wit of man, nor the subtlety of the Serpent could have devised; although (by divine permission or grant) they had been enabled to accomplish, whatsoever to this purpose they could devise or imagine. But the Wisdom and Son of God found out a way, by which he might still continue God, and yet become as truly man as he was God: a way by which the diversity of these two natures might still remain unconfused without diversity of persons or parties. Though man's ambition had reached so high, as to aspire from that condition of being wherein God had estated him, to be absolutely equal with God: yet his ambition had not been equal to that humiliation which the Son of God did not only affect, but attain unto. For although he became a man of the same nature that Adam was of, or any man since hath been, yet was he a man of a lower condition; of as low condition as any earthly creature could be: for as the Psalmist in his person complains (Psal. 22.6.) He became a worm and no man, the reproach of men; one whom the very abjects amongst men did think they might safely tread upon with scorn.  
4. For the Son of God to be made man, to be made a man of this low estate or condition (whencesoever he had taken his humane substance) was a satisfaction all-sufficient to the justice of God for man's pride; a dissolution most complete of the first work, that our first Parents suffered the Devil to work in our nature; if we respect only the substance of it. But that no part of Satan's work, no bond or tie of circumstance wherewith he had entangled our nature, might remain undissolved: the Son of God was made of a woman; and this was to secure the woman, or weaker sex, that he came to dissolve the works which Satan had wrought in them. For as the Apostle saith; The first woman was in the transgression, not the man; the man at lest not so deep in the same transgression as the woman. She alone (for aught we read) committed the robbery, in taking the forbidden fruit from off the tree, her husband was the receipter only: And by swallowing it by the Serpent's suggestions she first conceived and brought forth death, without her husband's consent or knowledge. Her transgression was twofold: Trust, or confidence in the Serpent's promise: want of credence (through pride) to God's threatenings. To dissolve this work of the Devil, so far as it was peculiar to the woman; the Son of God was conceived of a woman, without the knowledge or consent of man. Satan used the Serpent for his proxy to betrothe himself unto our nature: the holy Ghost by the ministry of an Angel wins the blessed Virgins assent or accord to become the mother of the Son of God. Seeing the first woman became the mother of sin whilst she remained a virgin, though then a wife; the Son of God would have a virgin for his mother, yet a virgin wife; a virgin affianced to a man. And thus as the first woman, being not begotten but made of man, did accomplish Satan's plot in working his fall, and corrupting our nature: so the Son of God being made man of a woman, doth dissolve this work by purifying what she had corrupted, and by repairing what the first man, and woman had undone.  
5. There is a tradition concerning the Messias conception, and his mothers, fathered upon an ancient Jewish Rabbin by Petrus Galatinus, but as I conjecture, rather a Commentary upon his own fancy, or some Monkish Legendary whom he was pleased to grace. The abstract of this Legend, with his Comment upon it, is thus. There was one special part of Adam's bodily substance privileged from the contagion of the first sin, and this propagated by one special line unto posterity, until it came to the mother of the Messias, who from the virtue of this preserved portion of Adam's nature, was conceived without original sin, as being made out of this substance after such a manner as the Messias or Son of God was made of a virgin. Sit fides penes Authorem. We know the blessed Virgin was the daughter of Abraham, and the daughter of David, but not by any portion of Abraham's or David's body altogether exempted from such alterations, as the Elementary virtues of which all men's bodies are made, are subject unto. Nor was the body of the Messias to be made of any such portion of Adam perpetually exempted from the contagion of sin original, unto the time wherein the blessed Virgin was affianced to joseph. The first exemption of any portion of the humane nature, or substance of Adam after his fall, was granted and wrought by the immediate hand of God in the conception of his Son by the holy Ghost, which was immediately upon that sweet assent of the blessed Virgin unto the Angel Gabriel, Ecce ancilla, etc.  

Capnio.  
Vellem expressius audire, an veteres He● braeorum senserint matrem Messiae in peccat-originali concipiendam non fuisse. Galatin. Quamvis ex his quae diximus, satis (utarbi tror) apertè colligatur, hanc priscorum Iudaeorum fuisse fidem, nedum opinionem: hoc tamen manifestius ex verbis praedicti Rabbenu haccados habetur: qui eodem in libro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gale razeia, cum ad septimam Antonini Consulis urbis Romae petitionem inter caetera dixisset, propter matrem verò ejus scil: Messiae ait David, Psal. 80. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc est, & a●acum quam plantavit dextratua. Dixissetque ei Antoninus, Curio mater Dei comparatur abaco, curve dicit, eam a dextra Dei plantatam? Respondit sic Ille, Similis facta est abaco mater Dei. Quandoquidem sicut a●acus est armarium, quod Principes conficiunt ad coll●canda vascula auri & argenti, ut gloriam suam, atque opes omnibus ostendant; Ita mater Regis Messiae erat armarium, quod Deus construxit, ut in eo sedeat ipse Messias ad ostendendam gloriam Maiestatis suae cunctis mortalibus. Per id autem quod ait plant●tam esse a dextra Dei, ostendit eam primam esse creaturam Dei in genere humano: sicut dictum est, Micheae. Cap. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est, Et egressus eius ab aeternitate, & a diebus seculi. Dicit enim egressus numero multitudinis. Qui● sunt duo Messiae egressus. Vnus Divinitatis, quae est aeterna ideoque dicit ab aeternitate. Alter humanitatis, quae in sue matris extat substantia, quae creata est ab hora creationis mundi. Haec ille, quem Iudaei Magistrum nostrum sanctum nuncupant. Ad quorum declarationem notandum est. Quod opinio quorundam veterum Judaeorum fuit, matrem Messiae non solum in ment Dei ab initio, & ante secula creatam fuisse, ut paulò superiùs dictum est: verùm etiam materiam eius in materia Adae fuisse productam, ipsamque gloriosam Messiae matrem principalem extitisse, cum eius amore (ut dictum est) mundus creatus sit. Nam cum Deus Adam plasmaret, fecit quasi massam ex cuius parte nobiliori accepit intemeratae matris Messiae materiam, ex residuo vero eius & superfluitate Adam formavit. Ex materia autem immaculatae matris Messiae facta est virtus, quae in nobiliori loco & membro corporis Adae conservata fuit. Quae postea emanavit ad Seth, deinde ad Enos, deinde succidaneo ordine ad reliquos usque ad sanctum jehoiakim. Ex hac demum virtute beatissima mater Messiae formata fuit. Et idcirco eam Zach. cap. 4. suae prophetiae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc est petram primariam, recte appellavit. Ex qua ut antiqui Judaeorum exposuerunt, excidendus erat Messias. Neque quidem abs re, cum tempore, gradu, & excellentia primaria futura esset. Ex qua quidem opinione apertè concluditur, carnem gloriosae matris Messiae non fuisse peccato originali infectam, sed purissimam a divina providentia praeservatam. Quocirca nec anima eius hujusmodi peccatum in conceptione▪ contractura erat. Petrus Galatinus. lib. 7. per totum caput tertium.   
6 If it were lawful to moralise such fables (as I take this of Galatinus to be no better) the best moral I can make of it, would be this. However there had been many intermediat generations (as many as S. Luke relateth if not more) between our father Adam and the conception of the Son of God: yet was our Saviour in some respects the immediate Successor of Adam, the only second Adam: His immediate Successor not in sin, but of that purity of nature wherein the first Adam was created; and yet withal immediate successor unto that curse which Adam by transgression had incurred, but was not able to expiate nor to bear, save only by the everlasting death of himself and his posterity. And for this reason (if I mistake not) the Son of God doth call himself, as no son of Adam before him did, The Son of man, by peculiar title. Yet was this a title, as 
a Mihi verò ratio cur ita sese vocaverit, duabus ex rebus p●tenda esse videtur: altera quòd solus ipse & Ezechiel, (imo Daniel etiam aliquando) ita vocetur, ut Irenaeus, lib. 3. cap. 18 notavit: altera quòd solus ipse se ita vocet. Nam alij in novo Testamento nunquam cum filium hominis appellant. Ex priore re intelligimus posse eâdem, aut simili de causâ, quà Ezechielem filium hominis appellari. Cur autem Ezechiel ita vocatus sit, cum multas illic opiniones reconsuerimus, illam R. Abraham maximè probavimus, vocari ●um filium hominis, quia semper cum Angelis l●quebatur; qui eum, ut a se, qui homines non erant, sed videbantur, distinguerent, fi●um hominis appellabant. Nec enim ipse, sed cum Angeli ita vocant. Simili fortasse ratione Christus, quia Deus erat, & filius Dei, quasi a●it●esi quadam cum de se, ut homine, loquitur, fi●ium hominis vocat. Non quod al●u●, sed quod aliter filius Dei, quia Deus, & fili●s hominis, quia homo esset, quemadmodum Augustinus indicavit. Exposteri reprobabilem conjecturam ducimus ●um se non honoris, sed abjectionis ca●á● ita vocare, sicut apud Prophetam vermem & opprobrium hominum appellat, Psal. 21. ver. 7. Nisi enim nomen abjectionis esset, alij etiam eum aliquando eodem modo vocavissent. Sed observamus Ezechielem nunquam a se, sed abalus: Christum nunquam ab aliis, sed a se fil●um hominis appellari. Ideo ergo se filium hominis appellat, ut significet se, cum in forma Dei esset, nec rapinam arbitraretur se esse aequalem Deo, exina●●sse tamen semetipsum, formamque servi accepisse, & habitu inventum, ut hominem, Phil. 2.6, 7. Maldonat in cap. 8 Matthaei ver. 20.  Maldonat well observes, not of honour, but of abjection; of greater abjection than the like title given to Ezekiel not by himself, but by the Angels: And yet Ezekiel is called by the Angel not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of the difference betwixt these two titles which are both exorest in our English by Son of man, I refer the Reader to the 49. Psalm ver. 2. and the Commentators upon it. As the Son of God was immediate Successor unto Adam, so he was the immediate heir unto the blessing promised to Abraham, more than heir, the Author and foundation of it: He was likewise immediate Successor unto David, and his kingdom: the only body in whom the shadow of God's mercies unto David for the good of Israel, and Judah was to be fulfilled. If he had been immediate Successor unto David only, this might have occasioned some suspicion or distrust, that he had been the Redeemer of the Jewish nation only, or of the sons of jacob. Had he been immediate Successor unto Abraham only, this might have occasioned the like surmise or fancy, that he had been manifested only to dissolve the works which Satan had wrought in Abraham's seed according to the flesh, which was much more ample than the seed of jacob. But in as much as the Son of God did in time become the son of man, the immediate Successor unto Adam, the only second Adam (though not the first, or second man from Adam,) This giveth us to understand that he was the next of kindred to all men, as they were men, whether Jew's or Gentiles. He to whom the redemption of all mankind did by right of kindred, without partiality, or respect of persons, equally belong. And for this reason he did not take any created party or person into the unity of his divine person, but the mere nature of man, or seed of Abraham, as sequestered from all personal respects or references.  
7. Thus was the Son of God to be qualified that his undertake for mankind might be universally beneficial. But the Basis of his humiliation and undertake in our flesh, That, from which (being annexed to the dignity of his person) the intensive infinity of the satisfaction for the sins of the world, and our redemption from the servitude of Satan did result, was the form of a servant, which he voluntarily took upon him. A mystery not much looked after, much less into, by any Divines, whom it hath been my hap to read. The most do scarce make it so much as a comely metaphor, or significant expression of somewhat more than the state or condition of a man. But that the form of a servant was a qualification of the Son of God distinct from his manhood may thus be concludently proved. The nature and essential form of man did arise, and doth remain in him since his resurrection from death: so did not the form or condition of a servant; that, lies dead and buried for ever. By his resurrection from death, he did not only of a mortal man, become immortal; but from the estate or condition of a servant, (without the interposition of aught besides his death) was made both Lord and King of all things created by him. It will therefore be no digression to treat of the form of a servant more at large in this method and order. First, wherein the essential state or condition of a legal servant, doth consist. Secondly, of the exact correspondency or identity of form between legal servitude, and servitude to sin and Satan. Thirdly, of the formal identity betwixt the state and condition of the Son of God, whilst he was in the form of a servant, and the two other forms and conditions of servants, to wit, legal servants, and slaves to sin. The only difference betwixt these three sorts of servants, is in the matter of their servitude: the form or essential condition is one, and the same in all three. Of the state of legal servants, and of our servitude unto sin, I have after a popular or vulgar way more copiously discoursed upon several occasions. The brief or extract of so much of these discussions, as to my present memory is pertinent to this instant Treatise, must be the subject of the next discourse.   

CHAP. VII. Of Legal servants, and of the analogy betwixt their Civil estate, and the estate of wicked men.  
1 OF legal servants there were two sorts, one whom we call hired servants or apprentices, whom a Latinist would rather call Famuli then Servi. Others were Servi, servants properly so called, such as we would properly term slaves or bondmen. Of slaves and bondmen, their Lords and Masters had a fuller power or dominion than any Master hath over his hired servants. Not the actions only or bodily employment, but the persons of slaves or bondmen are at their Master's disposal; they had the same right of dominion over them, which men have over lands which they hold in see simple, a power to alienate, to sell or set them to any other. And for this reason a slave or bondman is in Scripture called the Inheritance of his Master. Of hired servants the actions or employments only are at their Master's disposal, their persons are free: nor are their actions or employments perpetually at their Master's disposal, but only so long as the Covenant lasteth, and so far only as is covenanted between them. The greatest interest that their Masters can have in them is only such as a man hath in lands and grounds which he renteth of others: the fruits are entirely his which renteth the grounds: the soil or inheritance is the Lords or owner of it. The labours or employments of an hired servant are his Masters only, his person is in nullîus bonis, it is not the goods or chattel of another: What he can earn or get is his own, so that he is as much a free man, as a servant. The true and original difference between both these kinds of servants, and a free man, is this: A free man hath power to dispose of his actions or employments for his best advantage: A servant (whether by Covenant, or a bondman) albeit he hath a reasonable will to desire his own good or preferment, yet hath he no power or right to dispose of his own actions, or employments, for compassing that good, which as he is endued with reason, he could project and forcast. For of his employments or expense of time, he must give an account unto his Master. In respect of legal or civil freedom, that usual definition is warrantable; Liber est qui vivit, ut vult: He is legally or civilly free which may employ his labours or expend his time, as he pleaseth, for his own good, without the control or check of others. And he is a legal servant qui non vivit, ut vult, which cannot bestow himself or time according to his own desire or will, but as his Lord or Master shall appoint. His Master by legal right may impose a necessity upon him, either of not doing that which he desireth to do, or of doing that which he desireth not to do. A servant may desire to pleasure himself or his friend by his day labour, or other expense of time, but if this he do without his Master's consent or approbation, he wrongs his Master, who if he please, may constrain him to do his business, and neglect his own, or his friends. Again, a servant may have a desire or resolution, not to gratify or pleasure another (suppose his own, or his friend's enemy) by his service or employments, and yet if he be his Master's friend, he may compel him to do that party whom he mislikes, that good office, or service, which he would not. Briefly, every servant hath a freedom of will in matters civil, but no arbitrium, no freedom of power, or right to dispose of himself, or of his actions for accomplishing that which he may freely will: he must frame his course of politic or civil life ex arbitrio Domini.  
2. From this difference of estate, or condition of a free man, and a servant, the Heathens did by light of nature rightly infer; that every vicious man (though a Lord, though a Prince, or Monarch) was a true slave to his own lust, or lewd desires: that every wise, and temperate man, though a bondman for his legal state and condition, was a true free man. The Roman Orator in his Paradoxes (as he entitles them) to this purpose, was an Orthodox. And the Arguments which the Slave in the Satirical Poet brings to prove his Master to be a greater slave than himself, are unanswerable, Tune mihi Dominus, rerum imperiis hominumque Tot tantisque minor; Are you a Lord, and I a slave, when as you may be commanded by more men, and by more desires, than I am subject unto? The slave acknowledged no more Masters than this one, whom if it would please but to say the word, his freedom might without difficulty be obtained, if the Praetor of the City would but vouchsafe (by his Master's leave) to lay his white rod upon him, and cause him to be turned once or twice about with some few other Ceremonies, he could be turned out of a slave into a free Citizen, in the space of an hour: whereas, if his Master had been turned round, (till his senses had failed him) in case the Praetor would have laid his rod an hundred times upon his head, he could not have wound himself out of those bonds of servitude wherein his lusts had ensnared him. This slave had observed, that his Master would often commend the frugality and temperance of the ancient Romans, and often desire that he, and other modern Romans, might live as they did: yet if any great man, or good neighbour would invite him to a luxurious feast, or if any foolish pleasures, with whose excess he had been formerly stung, should proffer themselves, he had not so much power to resist or restrain them, as this slave had to neglect his designs or commands, when they did displease him. And for his Master to be drawn thus every day to do that which in his retired and sober thoughts he did most dislike and condemn, was in his judgement a greater slavery than any bodily servitude. If the reasons which these and other Heathens often used to prove vicious men to be the only true slaves, had not been the dictates of the law of nature written in our hearts, or reasons unanswerable; the Apostles of Christ, yea Christ himself would not have used the like. Know ye not (saith S. Paul, Rom. 6.16. as if it were a shame in this point to be ignorant) that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey: whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness. And S. Peter tells us of some, who whilst they promise liberty unto others, they themselves were servants unto corruption,: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought into bondage, 2. Pet. 2.19. So our Saviour saith, joh. 8.34. Whosoever committeth sin, is the servant of sin. And of him no doubt our Apostle S. john learned that doctrine; He that committeth sin, is of the Devil: a servant of his.  
3. But albeit the wiser sort of Heathens did by light of nature know, that every vicious man was a slave or servant to his own lusts or desires: yet the greatest danger which they apprehended from the servitude, was but fear of satirical censure for preposterous baseness in subjecting reason, to sensuality. That their own desires, lusts, or affections, were maintained and cherished by a foreign enemy, as so many rebels to wage war against their immortal souls, or that their consciences being subdued by lust, should be everlastingly subject to so cruel a Tyrant as the Devil is, were points wherein the Prince of darkness had blinded the eyes of the wisest Heathen. And would to God we Christians, to whom the Lord hath revealed thus much, could see or hear so much concerning this doctrine, as would make us perfectly understand, or lay to heart the inestimable danger wherein we stand, whether in respect of the fast hold which this Tyrant by our corrupted nature and custom hath got of us, or of the miserable usage which will follow, if he and sin finally prevail against us. But this is a common place, for which every man may find a fitter Text in his own heart, than any other man can choose for him, and matter of more ample and pertinent discourse upon it, than reading of many books can suggest unto him. All that I have here to say concerning this point is, to request the Reader to examine his own heart, and calculate his non-performances of what (I presume) he often seriously intended, and perhaps hath vowed. His duty it is to open the wounds of his conscience, either to God alone in secret, or to such as God hath appointed for the Physicians of his soul and conscience. My purpose is to prepare the plaster or medicine, and to inform him how to apply it.   

CHAP. VIII. The Son of God was properly a servant to his Father, yet not by birth as he was the son of his handmaid, but by voluntary undergoing this hard condition for the redemption of man.  
1 TO free us from this miserable servitude unto sin, (which alone doth wound our conscience) the Son of God did freely and voluntarily take upon him the form of a servant. The parts of his peculiar service were in general two: The one, to conquer Satan, who was by right of conquest our Lord: The other, to reconcile us to grace and favour with God; to make us first servants, than sons, and lastly kings and priests to his, and our heavenly Father. These two parts of his peculiar service unto his Father, (for unto him alone he was a servant) exhibit the most admirable pattern of justice, mercy, and loving kindness, as well in God the Father, as God the Son, that the wit of man or Angels can contemplate. First it was a pattern of justice, never after to be paralleled for God the Father to exact satisfaction for our sins, at the hands of his dear and only Son. Unto this unmeasurable act, or exercise of justice upon the Son of righteousness, his mercy towards us miserable sinners was fully commensurable. For whatsoever he suffered for our sakes, was from his Fathers and his own mercy and loving kindness towards us. Again, so infinite was the justice of our gracious God, that even whilst he showed his mercy, and loving kindness towards us, he did vouchsafe to give (as we say) the Devil himself his due, and to observe the law of Arms or Duel with this Prince of Rebels, his subject by right of Creation, but professed enemy by resolution. Albeit this grand Rebel after his revolt from God, had conquered man, and made him (by treachery) of God's servant and son, a mere slave unto himself; the righteous Lord would not deprive this mighty Lion, and greedy Wolf of his prey, by any other means, than by right of conquest gotten over him by man. He did not arm a legion of Angels, nor summon the whole host of visible creatures against him, nor use his omnipotent and absolute power to destroy or annihilate him, or as then to shut him up in the everlasting prison. The exercises of such power whether immediately by the omnipotent Creator himself, or by his creatures, had been more than Satan's matches, upon equal terms, or weapons. Exercise of strength was not the first way in the wisdom of God to conquer pride, ambition, or vain glory, though these must be quelled with the power and strength of the Son of God, whom it pleased the Father at the first onset to weaken, by laying our first Parents infirmities, and their posterities upon him. These were the weapons by which he foiled the old Serpent, and obtained the victory by managing our weakness and infirmities, better than our first Parents did those great abilities, wherewith their Creator had endowed them to resist temptations. The weapons which the old Serpent used in the conquest of our first Parents, and by which he retained their posterity in continual slavery, were their own desires and affections; these he improved so far that they became unweeldy. And he having gotten (as we say) the better end of the staff, did wrest our wills at his pleasure, to do those things which God forbids us to do, and make us furious executioners of his cunning contrivances against our own souls. The particularities of his sleights or cunning for bringing us into thraldom inextricable, (unless the Son of God set us free) are elsewhere deciphered. These two are the main generals: First, the extension of our natural desire of things within their bounds good and pleasant. Secondly, the improvement of our fear of things distasteful to nature, as of death, disgrace or torture. Now that the Son of God might thus beat him at his own weapons, it was necessary that he should first take upon him the form or essential condition of a servant: for without this, first voluntarily undertaken by him, the rule of justice could not possibly have suffered him, to have suffered so much as he did, for our redemption. Wherein then did the state, or condition of a servant, which he took upon him formally consist? Or when did he first become a servant? from the first moment of his birth or conception?  
2. I cannot brook their opinion, who think our Saviour was by birth a legal servant, as being filius ancillae, the son of an handmaid or bondwoman. This gross heresy hath been well refuted by some late Schoolmen, whose names I now remember not, nor the names of the Authors or abettors of this opinion. The mother of the Son of God was indeed ancilla, an handmaid, but to him only whose service is perfect freedom. So the Psalmist in the person of the Son of God (to be manifested in our flesh) or as his type, directs his prayer, Psal. 116.16. O Lord truly I am thy servant, and the son of thy handmaid. CHRIST (as all Christians grant) was the Son of God's Handmaid, after such a manner, and in such a sense, as never any man besides him was. For he was the promised woman's seed, and the son of a woman in such a sort, as he was not the son of any man. Again, he was the servant of God, after such a peculiar manner, as neither man or woman had been, or ever shall be. But how doth this peculiar service of his fit our servitude unto sin? Even as the medicine doth the disease, or as the plaster doth the wound for which it is prepared. In the Son of God made man there were two distinct wills; the one truly Divine, the other truly humane. To deny this distinction of wills in Christ, were to revive the heresy of the Monothelites so called, because they held but one will in Christ; to wit, the Divine. An error into which they haply fell (as many since their time have done into a worse) by not distinguishing between voluntas, and arbitrium. Our Saviour CHRIST whilst he lived here on earth, had a reasonable will of the same nature, or quality our will is of (sin excepted.) And by this will he could not but desire his own particular good; as health, welfare, and other lawful contentments of the humane nature, which are requisite to true joy or happiness. But in as much as the Son of God from the beginning of man's servitude unto Satan became our Surety, & to make satisfaction for our sins did in the fullness of time take our nature upon him: he did wholly submit his reasonable will, all his affections and desires unto the will of his heavenly Father. And in this renouncing of the arbitrement of his will, and in the entire submission of it unto the will of his Father, did that form of a servant, whereof our Apostle speaks, formally consist. For unto the essential definition, or constitution of a servant, these two only concur. First, the use of reason. (for fools, infants, or reasonless creatures cannot be servants) Secondly, Carentia arbitrii proprii, want of right or arbitrary power to dispose of their bodily actions or employments, according to the desire or lawful choice of their reasonable will. So then the general definition, or abstract form of a servant is univocally the same, 1 in legal servants, 2 in servants to sin, and 3 in the Son of God, during the time of his humiliation here on earth, or whilst he became hostage for our Redemption, But the service of these three sorts of servants is in the concrete most different. And the difference ariseth from the matter or subject in which they are respectively deprived of proper right, or arbitrary power to dispose of themselves, or of their actions. A legal servant wants power to dispose of his employments or bodily actions in matters temporary concerning this life. Servants to sin (such all the sons of Adam are by nature) want power to dispose of their actions, or course of life in matters moral, spiritual, or such as concern their consciences. All, and every one of us have a desire to be happy, and yet all of us until we be freed by the Son of God from this natural servitude, are by the prince of darkness usually diverted from this straight way which leads to happiness, unto the crooked by-paths which tend to death, and inextricable misery. The Son of God although according to his humane nature, he had a reasonable will and desire of happiness, which could never in any particular become exorbitant, or diverted from that which is most holy and just: yet even he in the days of his humiliation wanted power to reap the wages of righteousness, or fruits of holiness. Though joy and comfort was as pleasant to him, as to any man beside, though complete happiness was due unto him, as he was a most just and righteous man personally united to the Son of God: yet having taken upon him the form of a servant he did with unspeakable patience, and obedience, bear all the griefs and sorrows which Satan and his instruments, by divine permission, could invent against him, and cheerfully undergo the heaviest burden which his heavenly Father was pleased to lay upon him for our redemption.  
3. From this peculiar condition of a servant which the Son of God did voluntarily take upon him, that main objection which some modern Arrians or Photinians make against the absolute satisfaction of our Lord Redeemer, for our sins, may easily be answered, or rather will dissolve itself. God (say these men) could not without tyrannical injustice require full satisfaction for the misdemeanours of all wicked and naughty men from one most just, and holy man. To slay the righteous with the wicked, that be far from thee, O Lord, was the saying of Abraham to God, Gen. 18.25. But farther surely it is, and always hath been, from the Judge of all the world, (who is the eternal living rule of justice itself) to put the innocent and righteous, to the lingering and cruel tortures of an ignominious death, for redeeming wicked and cruel men from deserved death; or to purchase not the impunity only, but the advancement of wilful rebel, by the severe punishment of his dear, and only obedient Son. 
The 7. book of the Commentaries upon the Creed. cha. 25. §. 3, 4, etc.  This objection (as was in the former Treatise intimated) would pierce deep, if we were disarmed of those Christian principles which these modern heretics have cast aside, to wit, the plurality of persons in the Trinity, and the Oneness of person in the Son of God, CHRIST JESUS, God and man; even whilst he was invested with the form of a servant. We believe, and confess as they do, there is but one God; and yet in this God, we acknowledge as they do not, unum & alium, one person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the holy Ghost, such a distinction of capacities that the Father, not the Son exacts satisfaction for man's violation of the eternal and indispensable rule of equity and justice: that God the Son, not God the Father, did become man's surety, and undertake to make full satisfaction for all his sins.  
4. Now he that will make satisfaction to another must have somewhat to give of his own, so his own, as it is not the others to whom it is given. What then had the Son of God to give by way of satisfaction unto God the Father, or to the holy Ghost, which was so his own, as it was not theirs? Only that part of our nature which he took from the substance of his mother into the unity of his Divine person. In all other parts of our nature, over all other parts of this universe, God the Father, and God the Holy Ghost had the same interest, or right of dominion with the Son. Now this part or our nature being thus assumed into the unity of the Second Person: The Son of God, and the Son of the blessed Virgin do not differ, as party and party. There is unum & aliud, one nature of the Godhead, another of the manhood, non unus, & alius, not one person of the Godhead, another of the manhood. The Divine nature in the person of the Son, is the only party which undertook our redemption: the humane nature assumed into the unity of his Person, was but his qualification, an appendance, or appurtenance, no true part of his Person. And (as heretofore hath been observed) albeit the flesh of the man Christ Jesus was Caro humana, non divina, 
The 7. book of Commentaries upon the Creed. Chap. 30. § 10. etc.  flesh of the same nature and substance with our flesh: yet were his flesh and blood more truly the flesh and blood of the Son of God, than of the man CHRIST JESUS: the humane body more truly and properly his own, than our bodies are ours. Now our flesh, and bodily parts are said to be our own, not so much because they are parts of our nature, as because they are appurtenances of our persons, or because we have a peculiar personal right or power so to dispose of them, as to make them no parts of our nature. We account it no unnatural part in wise men to cut off any rotten or putrified member, rather than suffer the whole body beside utterly to perish. In some certain cases, public Societies, or Communities of men (none of which have the like peculiar authority over the meanest free private member, as every owner of a body natural hath over his teeth, his toes, his fingers, or other less principal part necessary for some uses only: not for the preservation of the whole) have by public consent designed sometimes some principal members of the Community, sometimes members less principal, not condemned of any crime, as sacrifices for redeeming others from present danger, or for securing posterity from servitude, or oppression. And when outrages have been committed by great Armies, the Authors or principal Incentives of the mutiny being unknown, or not convicted by legal proof, the expiation hath usually been made by decimation. Every tenth man hath by wholesome discipline of war been punished according to the demerits of the crime committed. But albeit every tenth man since Adam had been by him and his successors consent devoted to death, or lingering torture far worse than death: their execution could have made no expiation, no satisfaction unto God for the transgressions of the whole Community. The attempt of the medicine would have increased the malignity of the universal disease. Yea albeit the Son of God could have been by man entreated to practise this cure which is used by private wise men for preservation of their natural bodies, or by great Commanders for preventing mutinies or loss of Armies: all this had not been sufficient to have redeemed the world, or the whole Community of men from utter ruin and destruction; or (which is worse than both) from everlasting servitude unto Satan. Men by art, or rather Artists, by the guidance of God's providence, have found out remedies against venomous diseases by medicinal confections of venomous ingredients. The poisonous bitings of the Scorpion are usually cured by the oil of Scorpions: and of the flesh of some Serpents, Physicians make sovereign antidotes for preventing poison, or for curing venomous diseases. But the venom which the old Serpent had diffused, not through the veins only, but through the whole nature of man, was not curable by this course of physic. The old Serpent was to be destroyed, but not to become any ingredient in this Catholic medicine, whereby the humane nature was to be cured. That, by the wisdom of God was taken out of the nature and substance wounded, not from the substance which did wound or sting. But this part of the nature wounded, which was to be the medicine for the rest, was first to be perfectly cured, and throughly purified by personal unition to the Son of God. And being thus purified, and cleansed from all spot of sin, it was disfigured and mangled that the blood of it might be as a balsamum, and quintessence to heal the wounds, and sores of our corruption. If it were the will and pleasure of the Son of God to submit his most holy body unto the good will, and pleasure of his most holy Father; if with his consent and approbation it were bruised, and mangled: here was no wrong done to any man, but on God's part rather a document of his unspeakable love unto mankind: Love unexpressible on God the Father's part that would suffer his only Son to take upon him the true form of a servant, and undergo such hard service for us: Love unexpressible on God the Son's behalf that did so willingly expose his humane body to pain and torture for our redemption. Here was no wrong at all either to the Son of God from God the Father, or to the humane nature of Christ from the Godhead, or Divine person of the Son; rather all indignities, and harms which were done unto the man CHRIST JESUS by Satan, and his instruments did redound unto the Son of God. The humane nature was the only subject of the wound and pain. The Son of God was the only subject (if we may so speak) of the wrong, the only party or person wronged by Satan and his instruments; but no way wronged by the Father, much less by himself, as having free power to put that part of our nature which he assumed, unto what service soever his Father would require. Concerning this last qualification of the Son of God, I have nothing more to say in this Treatise, save only how it was foretold, or foreshadowed. The predictions that the Son of God, or the Messias, should become a servant, are frequent in the old Testament, and will here and there interpose themselves in some ensuing discussions of his undertake for dissolving the works of Satan. The next inquiry is, how it was foreshadowed, or typically foretold.   

CHAP. IX. God's servant Job the most illustrious Type of the Son of God, as he was invested with the form of a servant.  
1 THe form of a servant which the Son of God did take upon him, was foreshadowed by all those holy men (Prophets or other) which are by sacred Writers instiled the Servants of God. A title not usually given to many Kings or Priests, not once (I take it) by God himself unto Abraham; though he were the greatest of holy men, which were but men; the father of the faithful, whether Kings, Priests, or Prophets: the only Prophet, Priest, or other, which (to my remembrance) was instiled the friend of God. Moses, Aaron, and David, are sometimes instiled the servants of God, by God himself. Yet were these three (respectively) more illustrious types of the Son of God, as he was to be made King, Priest, and Prophet, than of him as he took the form of a servant upon him. Of CHRIST JESUS as he was in a peculiar sort the servant of God, job the most remarkable pattern of patience (before this Son of God was manifested in the flesh) is the most exact type or shadow; not for his qualifications only, but in his undertake. jobs conflicts with Satan, and wrestle with temptations are more expressly recorded, and more emphatically expressed, than any man's beside, before the only Son of God became the Son of man, and servant to his heavenly Father. Satan by special leave obtained from God (but so obtained by God as challenger) did combat or play his prizes with this servant of God, at two the most prevalent weapons, which his cunning and long experience upon all advantages, which the weakness of men (from the fall of Adam) did afford him, could make choice of. And these two weapons were; [hope of good things, and fear of evils temporal] which this great usurper did presume were at his disposal, either by right of that conquest which he had gotten over the first man, or could obtain by God's permission to ensnare the first man's posterity. The direct and full scope of all our hopes is felicity; and so is misery the period of all our fears. Unto felicity three sorts of good things are required, Bona animae, bona fortunae, bona corporis. The endowments and contentments of the reasonable soul; health with ability, and lawful contentments of the body; competency of means or worldly substance, which are subservient to both the former endowments and contentments of soul and body. No misery can befall man, but either from the want of some one or more of these three good things which are required to happiness (as the Philosophers conceived it) or from their contraries. All the evils which men naturally fear, are either evils incident to the body; as sickness, pain, torments, death, want or loss of goods, or worldly substance, loss of good name, disgrace or ignominy, imputation of folly, which are no less grievous to the rational part of man, than pain or grief are to the part sensitive; more grievous by much to ingenuous men, than loss of goods, than want or penury. For as an heathen Satirist well observed; 
Nil habet infoelix paupertas durius in se,  
Quam quòd ridiculos homines facit.  The shrewdest turn that poverty can do to any mortal creature, is to expose him unto contempt or scorn. By fear of all these three evils Satan driveth most men into his snare of servitude; as many, if not more, as he draws into the same snare by hope of good things. By every one of these three evils, by the very lest of them, if we take them single, he had caught so many as he thought sufficient to make up this general induction: [That none could escape his snares or springs, so he might be permitted by God to take his opportunities for setting them.]  
2. job was a man as happy as any man before him had been, according to that scale of happiness which Philosophers could hope for in this life, or could make any probable ground of better hopes for the life to come. There was a man (saith the Text) in the land of Us, whose name was job, and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil. This is a fuller expression than any Philosopher could make of the principal part of happiness, that is of a mind richly endowed with all kind of virtues moral; and more than so, with spiritual graces. And there were borne unto him seven sons, and three daughters; these were more than bona corporis, more than parts of his personal constitution, which besides these was exceeding good. His substance also was seven thousand sheep, and three thousand Camels, and five hundred yoke of Oxen, and five hundred she Asses, and a very great household (or husbandry, great store no doubt of servants which were part of his worldly substance) so that this man was the greatest of all the men of the East. Here was a great measure of those things which Philosophers call bona fortunae, goods of fortune, or (as we now say) goodly means, fair revenues. job was a richer man for those times in respect of others, than any man this day living is in respect of our times. Yet this goodly Cedar in his full height was sound within, and strait without, unshaken by any blasts of former temptations, until the Lord himself appointed him to be a Dueller with Satan. The challenge made by Satan is very remarkable. There was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them. And the Lord said unto Satan, whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. And the Lord said unto Satan. Hast thou considered my servant job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? ver. 6, 7, 8. Satan would not believe the Lords commendations of this righteous man: for he answered the Lord, and said, Death job fear God for naught? Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? Thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. After the Lord had permitted Satan to try the utmost of his skill at this first weapon [loss of goods, and loss of children.] job by his Antagonists confession came off with honour: he still continued Gods faithful servant. He arose (saith the text) upon the heavy news of his universal loss of goods and children) and rend his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell down upon the ground, and worshipped and said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away: blessed be the Name of the Lord. In all this job did not sin, ver. 20, 21, 22. Yet is not Satan his Antagonist daunted with this baughle, but craves leave to try his skill at another weapon; for so it follows: Again, there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the Lord, etc. And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without a cause. And Satan answered the Lord and said, Skin for skin, yea all that a man hath, will he give for his life. But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face. And the Lord said unto Satan, Behold he is in thine hand, only save his life, Chap. 2. ver. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6. Having this licence granted him, he foreslows no time for putting it in speedy execution. So went Satan forth from the presence of the Lord and smote job with sore boiles, from the sole of his foot unto his crown: and he took him a potsherd to scrape himself withal, and he sat down among the ashes, ver. 7, 8.  
3. In the first temptation (which was loss of goods) job did not sin so much as in word. So far he was from sinning in word, so far from murmuring at this sudden change, that he setteth a copy not of patience only, but of thanksgiving for temporal crosses or calamities. In the second temptation, which was more terrible, he so far a while resisted, as if he had purposed to make an atonement for Adam's sin, in rashly yielding to his wife's suggestion. For when jobs wife did seek to misperswade him, Dost thou still retain thy integrity? Curse God and die; he thus replied: Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? Shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? ver. 9, 10. Yet that job in the continuance of this second temptation did not sin, is more than the word of God will warrant us to avouch. Certainly he was a sinner, and did actually sin in this temptation, though not in so high a degree, as his miserable comforters supposed him to have sinned, long before this misery did befall him. They thought the excess of his afflictions in respect of the ordinary afflictions which other men did suffer, did presuppose an excess of sin in him, and that his present sufferings did convince him of former hypocrisy, which is the worst of sins. Yet some ground they had of this persuasion or suspicion: for few or none within their memory, or before their times had fallen into such a depth of misery, as job now had done, without some excessive height of sin in some one kind, or other. Yet jobs friends in the extent of their collections did if not grossly sin, yet foully err in their particular application. For jobs case was extraordinary: his temptations were without all former example. In respect or order of time, he was the first and most remarkable pattern of patience, which the Scripture hath proposed unto us. No righteous man, or true servant of God before him had been so afflicted either in body, in loss of goods, or esteem with men, with friends especially, as this most upright and faithful servant of God was. The titles given him by God himself of perfectness and uprightness extraordinary, if we compare them with his extraordinary temptations and grievances, do argue, that he was the servant of God after a more peculiar manner than others had been; a remarkable servant not only in respect of his sanctity and integrity, but as a special type and figure of the Son of God, who was in succeeding ages to take the form of a servant upon him, and in this form to be exposed to more terrible combats with Satan, than job had been, although as man he were more upright and righteous then job. And besides such Saints of God, as were peculiar types of the Son of God, or of the man CHRIST JESUS in the days of his affliction; That induction made by Eliphas, job 4. ver. 7, 8, 9 was universally true in respect of those times, and these ensuing. Remember I pray thee, who ever perished being innocent? or where were the righteous cut off? Even as I have seen, they that plough iniquity, and sow wickedness, reap the same. By the blast of God they perish, and by the breath of his nosethrills are they consumed. That of the Psalmist (whether David or some other) was universally true, not of his times only, but of aftertimes also, though true of later times with the former allowance or exception, of such as were special types of Christ in his affliction. I have been young, and now am old, yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging their bread, Psal. 37.25.   

CHAP. X. How the Son of God did conquer Satan at those weapons, wherewith he had conquered our first Parents.  
1. THat the Son of God was manifested to dissolve the works of the Devil, our Evangelist S. john hath taught us: and S. john Baptist had told him, and others as much before. I knew him not (saith this his forerunner) but that he should be manifested unto Israel, therefore I come baptising with water, And john bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a Dove and it rested upon him, joh. 1.31, 32. But did this manifestation declare, or manifest his purpose to dissolve or destroy the works of the Devil? Yes. Immediately upon his baptism, he gave Israel and the world just proof, that the end of his manifestation, was to take away the sins of mankind, and for this reason he began to untwist that triple cord, wherewith our first Parents, and in them their whole posterity were bound by Satan. For albeit the first sin found entrance into our nature by incogitancy, and had its period or accomplishment in pride; yet were not pride or incogitancy the only strings of that snare, wherein Satan had taken us. The bonds and ties by which he took, and holds us captive, are mentioned by S. john in his first Epistle, 2. Chap. ver. 15, 16. Love not the world, nor the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. From these three heads or sources, all the overflowing of ungodliness may be derived; and these found entrance into this visible world through our first Parent's folly, and Satan's subtlety. For albeit the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, took their distinct specifical being, or live-shape from the first sin, yet were the seeds of all these sins sown by Satan in our first Parents souls and senses, before the body of sin with its members were framed, or animated. There was an extravagant desire of the eye, an irregular appetite of the flesh, by which the Serpent tolled on the first woman to eat the forbidden fruit; and the eating of it did hatch this threefold brood in kind. The woman (saith Moses Gen. 3.6.) saw (through false spectacles of Satan's making) that the tree was good for food: (here was the embryo or seed of the lust of the flesh) and that it was pleasant to the eye; (here were the first lineaments of the lust of the eye) and a tree to be desired to make one wise: (this was the inchoation of the pride of life) And she took of the fruit thereof and did eat, and gave also to her husband, and he did eat: and by their eating, the former desire of forbidden food was turned into the lust of the flesh: The curiosity of the eye was turned into the lust of the eye; and the desire of knowledge or proper excellency, was changed into the pride of life. So that the truth of S. james his observation, Chap. 1. ver. 13, 14. was remarkably experienced, in the manner of our first Parents fall. Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God. For God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth be any man. But every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin; and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. Now to dissolve these three temptations or cords of vanity, wherewith our first Parents were taken captives: the Son of God, immediately upon his Baptism, was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted.  
2. Our first Parents being placed in Paradise (a place furnished with variety and plenty of food) by too much indulgence unto their appetite, or by incogitancy to bridle it by reason, could not abstain from that fruit which only was forbidden them. Power they had to have abstained: but they did not use it, when they had no necessity, no urgent provocation to eat at all, much less to eat of that fruit. The Son of God made a man more subject to bodily harms by long forbearance of meat, than our first Parents were: after forty days continuance in a vast and barren wilderness, wherein no food or fruit did grow, could not in his hunger be tempted to eat any food which the ordinary providence of God did not reach unto him. Ingeus iedam necessitas, Necessity (as we say) hath no law: there is no fence against it: Cogit ad turpia, it makes men, otherwise honest, to do many things which are not comely. And, for this reason the great tempter at the first bout, assaults our Saviour with this fiery dart of necessity. If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. As if he had said, Long fasting hath made it apparent that thou art a man subject to weakness and infirmity; and (if thou be withal the Son of God) thou canst, and a necessity is laid upon thee, as man, to provide thyself of food, for without food man cannot live. Yet this fiery dart (though steeled and pointed with the tempting delight of manifesting his own worth or excellency) is wholly diverted by that shield of Faith: It is written, Man shall not live by bread only, but by every word which proceedeth out of the mouth of God: So Moses had said unto Israel, I fed thee with Manna, to teach thee, that man liveth not by bread, but by every word which proceedeth out of the mouth of God, doth man live. 
* Deut. 8.3.  Israel then did live for a long time both by Manna, and by the word of God; on which, without Manna, they would not have relied. Manna was as the body, and the word of God spoken by Moses, as the soul, or spirit of that food, by which they lived: both Manna, and that word of God, make but an Emblem or type of the eternal Word of God, who is the food of life; Life itself; and yet at this time (as man) was an hungered. So then, as he was the Son of God, he was able of stones to make bread, and as he was a man subject to infirmities, he had just occasion at this time to use his power. Yet as man invested with the form of a servant, he could not be induced to use this power. For as he often professeth, he came not to do his own will; no not in things lawful and most agreeable to nature: but the will of him that sent him, though that did enjoin him to do or suffer things most displeasant to nature. This was the time, wherein he was by his Father appointed to conquer the irregular appetite of the sense of taste, and the lust of the flesh.  
3. Our first Parents being Gods Vicegerents here on earth, Lords of all his visible creatures, not therewith content, by Satan's enticements aspired to be like unto God, higher than Angels, than other powers or principalities. The Son of God, albeit he were by nature Lord of men, and Lord of Angels; cannot be alured to exercise his command over them, albeit they were commanded to attend him. Satan's pretence in his second assault was very fair, and seemed to be countenanced by Scripture. If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down, for it is written; He shall give his Angels charge concerning thee, and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. 
* Psal. 91.11, 12.  Fitter occasion to any man's seeming could not be offered for the exquisite verification or exact fulfilling of this Prophecy, than by this adventure to throw himself down from the pinnacle of the Temple. But the Son of God, who gave the Law, being now made under the Law, submits himself unto that legal precept; Thou stalt not tempt the Lord thy God; and with this Scripture retorts Satan's attempted blow upon himself. But what temptation of God had it been in the Son of God to have thrown himself down from the pinnacle of the Temple, to have given proof that he had been that just man, over whom God had given his Angel's charge? Some there be, who reply, that Satan did allege this Scripture impertinently, imperfectly. For the Psalmist saith, He shall give his Angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. Now the ways of men are not in the air, but upon the earth. This interpretation I neither much dislike, nor altogether approve; because our Saviour doth not tax Satan for his impertinent, or imperfect allegation of the former Scripture. Nor do I see any reason why flying in the air might not be one of the ways of the Son of God made man, as well as walking upon the Sea in a tempest; if so it had pleased him, or his heavenly Father, by whose appointment or disposing he did do or suffer all things. Now it was his Father's will, that by his walking on the water he should manifest himself to be the Son of God, able to command either wind or water. It was likewise his Father's will, that at this time as man he should conquer the pride of life, or that deeply implanted desire in all men of proper excellency, or advancing themselves before due time. By this free resignation of his authority over the Angels, he makes satisfaction for our first Parent's pride in seeking to advance themselves above the Angels.  
4. Again, Paradise did afford our first Parents as full satisfaction for the delight of the eye, as it did for food: and yet desire of that food which they needed not, found entrance into their hearts or fancies by their eyes. But the Son of God being made the Son of man, having neither place to lay his head, nor any prospect for the present to please his eye; had all the kingdoms of the earth, and their glory represented unto him, with proffer of their sale or donation rather, only upon condition that he would do that homage unto this great Prince of the world, which many Princes do to Kings or Emperors: or Emperors themselves had done to Popes or Prelates. The pretence was fair, and the temptation the strongest of all the three. For what man, who is but mere man, would not adventure upon any practice for the gaining the Kingdom or Monarchy which their Ancestors had foolishly lost. Now Adam was Lord and Monarch of this visible world, until he suffered himself to be conquered by Satan, who did remain the facto, if not by right of conquest, the Prince of it, and Lord of men; until the Son of God made man did throw him out of possession. But that hour of his was nor yet come: so far was he from affecting the kingdoms of this world, that he was yet acting the part of a servant in it; but a servant to his father only, not to men or Princes in this world. Of how mean a condition soever he were as man, yet he disdained to worship men or Angels though but with civil worship, for any preferment: and therefore dismisses this great Usurper thus with indignation, Avoid Satan. Satan, it seems had a prenotion or suspicion that Christ was that Just and holy man, whom the Psalmist describes, Psal. 91. Or such a Son of God, as they were which appeared before the Lord, when he was permitted to tempt job. That he was the only Son of God, or equal with God, was more than he then knew.  
5. These three temptations wherein our Saviour foiled Satan, are paralleled to the first temptation of job, which was loss of worldly substance; more generally all the evils which the Son of God did suffer in our flesh, or whilst he was conversant with men in the form of a servant, did bear Analogy to the Evils which job did suffer, but for particulars more in number, and more grievous: there was no evil that comes ab extra which he suffered not in greater measure, than job did any. As for loss of goods or worldly substance, job made no reckoning: the Son of God, though heir of all things, did not vouchsafe so much as to grace these by being owner, or possessor of them: He renounced the world, and all things in the world before he came into it: he would not be entangled or meddle with them, that he might please him, who had chosen him to be his soldier, his only champion in this great conflict with the Prince of darkness. But to parallel jobs other temptations with our Saviour's.   

CHAP. XI. A parallel between Jobs second temptation, and the Son of God's sufferings in our flesh before the hour of his Agony or his Cross.  
1 IOb was smitten with sores, from the crown of his head, to the soles of his feet; his disease was more than natural, at least incurable: for he was thus smitten by Satan. But was the Son of God thus smitten? durum est affirmare. Satan had no power thus immediately to smite him. For bodily diseases, we do not read of any that did take possession of his sacred body: we read that he cured all manner of diseases, but never stood in need of the Physicians help for himself. No disease did breed in his body being free from sin; and being anointed to cure all, he did not, he could not take any by contagion. But though he cured all manner of diseases, or all the diseased which were brought unto him; yet we do not read that he cured all in Judea which were diseased. For so none should have died in that land during the time of his three years' pilgrimage through it, from his baptism to his death. Albeit he cured many of diseases natural, yet not all that were naturally diseased, though weak, or sick unto death. For he was not manifested to dissolve or destroy the works of nature, albeit he gave proof by many experiments that he was able to destroy or divert the whole course of nature. But we read, That JESUS of NAZARETH being anointed by the Holy Ghost, went about from his baptism to his death, doing good and healing all that were oppressed of the Devil, Acts 10.38. And many were so oppressed which were not possessed. Many diseases, which to us would have seemed natural or casually bred, were as immediately procured by Satan, as jobs plagues were; and in these bonds of bodily affliction Satan had held them longer than he held job. Such was that woman's disease, whose cure being wrought by the Physician of our souls upon the Sabbath day, the Ruler of the Synagogue did malign as an ungodly work: but the Son of God's reply doth justify as well the truth of our assertion, as the lawfulness of his practice. Hypocrite, doth not each one of you on the Sabbath day lose his Ox or his Ass from the stall, and lead him away to the water? and ought not this daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day? Luk. 13.14, 15. This bodily disease was a work of Satan, which the Son of God came to dissolve. Satan had thus bound her to the end that he might by these bonds draw her to some unlawful practice for her ease; as to ask counsel of some cunning woman, or to adventure upon the pretended mysteries of some unhallowed Art. Of diseases merely natural, the cunning Tempter makes use or way by them for his temptations, though he have no finger in the inflicting of them; yet he moveth such as are grievously afflicted with them, to repine or murmur against God: and all such repining, or impatiency in sickness, though occasioned by sickness merely natural, is a work of Satan which the Son of God came to dissolve or prevent. But how did he dissolve or prevent them, by taking them upon him? Though Satan could lay these and the like bonds of bodily afflictions upon this woman, and upon many others both men and women in Judea in these times; could he therefore lay the like upon the body of the Son of God? It is certain he could not. How then did the Son of God in bodily maladies or grievances either parallel job, whom Satan had smitten, or those miserable creatures, whom he loosed from Satan's bonds? He did not parallel them at all in the matter of the disease, or bodily grievance; that could not breed in his body, it could not be produced in it by Satan: yet did he parallel job, and all the parties whom he cured though smitten or bound by Satan, in the grief or pain of the disease, whose matter could not fasten upon him. He which commands us by his Apostle, to weep with them that weep, did out of all question exhibit a more real pattern of this precept, than the Apostle could practise. Yet saith the Apostle of himself, and he said it without hypocrisy, without boasting, Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn not? Such was his care of all the Churches, that every man's grief was in some measure the Apostles grief; every man's infirmity did in some portion weaken him: yet was it not foretold of this Apostle by any Prophet, that he should bear our griefs, or take our infirmities upon him. This was the peculiar Character of the Son of God manifested in the flesh, expressly foretold by the Prophet Isaiah, Chap. 53. ver. 4. and the accomplishment of it related by S. Matthew, Chap. 8. ver. 16, 17. The manner of his curing others of their sicknesses and infirmities, was by taking them upon himself, not in kind, but by sympathy. As the eye takes the form or shapes of objects visible without participation of the substance whence they flow: so our Saviour took the grief or pain of every disease which he cured, without the matter or corruption which did breed grief in the diseased patient. In all men's griefs he was grieved; in all their pains he was tormented. He wept with those that wept, and mourned with such as mourned. Who did groan, and he was not troubled in spirit; who did sigh, and he was not sad in heart? He took their sighs and sorrows at a lower key, than they themselves did, which had matter of affliction or sorrow in them. Yet do we not read that he sighed, groaned, or often wept when he cured others: but the reason was because such as besought his help, did not beseech him with sighs, with tears or groans. At the raising of Lazarus from the dead he wept and groaned: what was the reason? Not to prejudice the allegories and mysteries, which some ancient Fathers have hence observerd; the principal reason according to the literal sense why at this time he wept, was because Mary and her comforters came to him with weeping eyes. So saith the Text, joh. 11.13. When jesus saw her weep, and the jews also weep which came with her; he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled in himself and said, Where have ye laid him? They said unto him, Lord come and see: and jesus wept. Lazarus no doubt had sighed and groaned in his absence, had wished his presence with these, and other like expressions of sorrow: and now that he finds Lazarus dead, and Mary's cheeks for his decease bedewed with tears, he sympathizeth with her in her present grief, and by tuning his heart to Lazarus his dying pangs or throbs, he looseth him from the bonds of death, and freeth Mary and her good friends from matter of grief and sorrow by taking her sorrow upon him.  
2. And as the care of all the Churches which he had planted, was not the least part of S. Paul's grief and vexation: so the sorrow which the Son of God did conceive for such as would not seek unto him for help, for such as did not sorrow for their sins, was a great part of his sufferings. Thus he wept for Jerusalem, whilst Jerusalem went mad with mirth, and resolved to banquet all her guests at that great Passeover with his blood. When he was come near, he beheld the City, and wept over it saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, in this thy day the things which belong unto thy peace, but now are they hid from thine eyes, Luk. 19.42. These tears were shed in public for the City and Nation, but how many more he shed in private, or with what sighs he deplored their estate, that would not implore his help, that would not feel their misery, being bound by Satan as well in body, as soul; this I leave to the Readers consideration and conjecture. Even when the full weight of bodily misery did seize upon him, when he was bearing the Cross unto the place wherein he was crucified, he pitied Jerusalem more than he would suffer others to pity him. Weep not for me ye daughters of jerusalem, but weep for yourselves. Thus he did more than bear our griefs: for he was grieved at their miseries, which did not grieve for themselves: Nihil miserius misero non miserante seipsum. But in all these sufferings by sympathy, there was no violence, they were not mingled with disgrace or scorn. Albeit his cures were often slandered by the Scribes and Pharisees, yet were they still magnified by the parties cured, or by the people. But when his hour was come, the hour wherein he was to enter combat with the enemy of mankind, he was not one minute free from violence or indignity. The greatest evils which can befall men in this mortal life, are tortures of body, indignities, or disgrace: and it is disputable whether a wise man would not rather choose death itself, than either lingering torture, perpetual disgrace, or a foul indignity. But we need not dispute this question in the case of the Son of God: disgrace and pain, indignities and torture, did not come single upon him: one of them was another's second, whilst the conflict betwixt the Serpent and the woman's seed continued. As it is the property of some biting Serpents to make way or entrance by their venomous teeth for the infusion of more deadly poison from some other parts of their body: so this generation of Vipers, which persecuted the Son of God, used the civil power of Pilate, and the Roman soldiers to open his veins, and launce his flesh, that their tongues might instill the poison of Asps into his glorious stripes, and bleeding wounds. But with the bitter taunts and indignities offered unto him, even whilst he was upon the Cross, I am not to meddle in particular: they have proper seasons allotted for their memorial. It sufficeth therefore to observe, that the obedience and patience of the Son of God in these most grievous sufferings were so absolute, that we must borrow the patience of job, not in the second temptation by bodily grievance, but in his first temptation by loss of goods, or worldly substance, for a scale to set it forth. In all his sufferings, in all that his enemy's tongues or hands could do, or say unto him, this servant of God did not sin so much as in word, but offered the sacrifice of prayers and supplications with the sacrifice of his soul, and spirit for his persecutors.  
3. Yet admit jobs patience in his bodily afflictions had been more perfect than in the first temptation it was, for loss of bodily goods; and his obedience most complete both without mixture of impatiency, without stain of disobedience: the full measure of both had not been equivalent to the least scantling of the obedience, or patience of the Son of God made man; for those acts though otherwise equal, are always best which are done ex officio. Prayers or solemn services officiated by a Priest, and justice awarded by a Magistrate, are more acceptable unto God, and more beneficial unto men; than if the same Act or Offices were more accurately performed by private men without a calling. Now job, and other holy men became pro modulo, in some sort the servants of God by obedience. It was the greater measure of their obedience, which made their service more acceptable. But the obedience of the Son of God made man, did result or issue from the form of a servant which he voluntarily and on purpose took upon him, that he might in it, and by it, perform obedience more than sufficient for dissolving the force and strength of that disobedience and rebellion, which the Devil had wrought in the Father of mankind, which with its curse became hereditary to his sinful posterity. The first Adam was created in the image of God, not in respect of holiness only, but in respect of sovereignty and dominion. The second Adam though he were the Son of God, was moulded in the form of a servant, even from his first conception. For as the Apostle saith; he who was in the form of God, did empty or annul himself, taking upon him the form of a servant. This was the terminus ad quem, the intrinsical term of the Son of God's first humiliation; for as was said before, the Son of God did not humble or empty himself only in his manhood, or according to his manhood, after it was assumed; but in the very assumption of the manhood thus moulded in the form of a servant. His humility as man was the humility of a servant, it was not affected but a native branch of his present calling. His obedience was not forced by constraint or fear, it was more than a branch, the very essence of his calling. For he took upon him the form of a servant, it was not put upon him against his will, as it was upon job. Nor was his obedience as man more excellent than any other man's had been in respect of its root or original only, as being the formal effect of his calling, that is of the form of a servant which he took upon him, but most complete in respect of the end or final effect. For having annulled himself by taking upon him the form of a servant, he further humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even to the death of the Cross. Other servants may with their earthly Master's consent▪ be set free; and supreme authority may in some cases command their Masters to set them free. But the form of a servant was so closely united, or wedded unto the Son of God manifested in the flesh, that it could not be cut off or divorced from him, save only by death, and by the death of the Cross which was a servile death, and the accomplishment of his service. But in what peculiar acts was the obedience or exercise of the form of a servant, which the Son of God took upon him, most conspicuous or more remarkable, than they have been in other men?  
4. It is a great deal more usual to our Saviour than to any Prophet, to any sacred Writer, or other Messenger of God's will, to tell his hearers that he came not of himself, but was sent, that being sent he came not to do his own will, but the will of him that sent him; that he spoke nothing of himself, but as his Father had appointed him, so he spoke, and so he did. What was the reason, that he that spoke as never man spoke, and did those works which none besides could do, should so often use these or like speeches to his Auditors. Sure, his speeches unto this purpose are neither apologetical, nor preventive: as if his authority had been more questionable, or his practices more suspicious, than the authority and practices of the Prophets, and other holy men had been. And what was it then that gave occasion to this peculiar form of speech, or made the use of it so familiar and frequent? All his speeches to this purpose are but the characters or expressions of the form of a servant, which he took upon him. His whole course of life, his undertake and encounters with this stubborn people, or with Satan and his instruments, might have testified to any considerate, unpartial man, that no man being left free to himself would have adventured upon them out of the deliberate choice of an humane or reasonable will. Specially his last sufferings were such as no wise man, how godly soever, would have undergone, unless they had been put upon him by authority supreme and irresistible. We may further observe, how the form of a man, and the form of a servant, which had laid quiet for three and thirty years without any Crisis of their difference, did upon the approach of his death and passion begin to struggle, but without all strife or hostile dissension, as Esau and jacob towards the time of their birth had done in their mother's womb: Even in the height of that triumphant and more than royal entertainment, which the multitude made him at his entrance into Jerusalem, as if he had then come to take possession of the Crown of his father David, even whilst his ears were filled with these and the like acclamations, Hosanna to the Son of David: He began to be troubled in spirit, whilst the form or nature of man did suggest one thing, and the form of a servant correct what the form of man did suggest, and sway him another way. What shall I say? Father save me from this hour: 
* joh. 12.27.  So the reasonable soul of man could not but wish, it could not but apprehend this hour as an hour of evil: and evil, as evil, cannot be desired by the will of man. Reason cannot but desire or wish the prevention or removal of it. But though he were the Son of God, yet as the Apostle speaks, He learned obedience by the things which he suffered. 
* Heb. 5.8.  He resolves not to do according to his own liking, but as his Father should appoint him. And hence he instantly overbalanced the former natural desire or inclination of the form of man with the serious consideration of his office or present calling, as he had taken upon him the form of a servant. For as it were recalling himself, he addeth; but therefore came I unto this hour, to wit, that he might suffer all the evils incident to man in this world.  
5. Afterwards, when his agony came upon him, his wont natural inclination of the form of man, or sway of the reasonable soul became more strong: and hence he puts his former wish or intimation, [Father, what shall I say? save me from this hour] into the form of a prayer; Father, if it be possible let this cup pass from me: and yet overswaies this natural inclination or desire as he was man, with a stronger desire or delight to do the office of a servant, and counterchecks that prayer which he had conceived as man, with a prayer which he had conceived ex officio, with a prayer of consecration, nevertheless not as I will, but as thou willest: as if he had said, Though it be just and reasonable which I desire; so just, as thou wouldst not deny the like to any other man in my case; yet seeing I am thy servant, and the Son of thy handmaid in such a manner as no other man hath been, I wholly submit myself unto thy will, and consecrate myself unto thy service, how hard soever it shall prove. Abraham, we know, waxed bold with God by often reiterating and renewing the form of his petition for Sodom. First he prayed that God would spare the City for fifty righteous men, then for forty, then for thirty, and lastly descends to ten: His boldness was grounded upon a dictate of nature or common principle of faith, that it was far from him who was to do justice to all the world, to slay the righteous with the wicked. Suppose, God had said to Abraham at his first petition thus, Abraham at thy request I will for this time spare the men of Sodom, upon condition that thou, and such as supplicate for them will become their bail, and stand between them and that storm of fire and brimstone which must shortly go out against them from my fiery presence; would this hard condition have been accepted by Abraham, or accepted with patience? Would he not have opposed this former principle with greater vehemency and passion, [To slay the righteous for the wicked, that be far from thee, O Lord: shall the Judge of all the world thus far transgress the rule of justice?] Yet may we not think, that righteous Abraham, though instiled the friend of God, was so much less sinful than the most sinful man in Sodom, as the man CHRIST JESUS was more righteous than Abraham. And what then could restrain this just and holy One for making the same plea for himself, which Abraham for himself might have made, which without offence unto his Lord, he did often make on the behalf of so many righteous men, not as were, but as he supposed possibly might be in Sodom? Only this; the Son of God who is equal with God, to the end and purpose that he might dissolve the works which the Devil had wrought in our nature, had taken our nature upon him, had made his humane flesh, and humane blood, the flesh and blood of God himself, though not as parts of the Divine nature, yet as appurtenances of the Divine person, and was not only found in the fashion of man, but was invested with the essential form of a servant. And it is the perfection of a servant, not to do his own will, but the will of his Lord. Now the body or humane nature of the Son of God was not a servant to his Divine person, but to the person of his Father, whose will he was in the humane nature to perform, whatsoever the performance of it should cost him. For unto this purpose only, and no other, did he take both the nature of man and form of a servant upon him, that he might in them and by them accomplish the will of his Father. As for his body, that, during the time of his humiliation, was in bonis patris; the goods and possession of the Father; as every servant (properly so called) is the goods and inheritance of his Master. His sufferings in this nature were to be extended until the full price of our redemption was paid. The just measure of these his sufferings, and full price of our redemption, he did (as he was man) learn by experience.   

CHAP. XII. Of Christ's full satisfaction for the sins of men, and whether to this satisfaction the suffering of Hell pains were necessarily required: And of the Circumstances of his Agony.  
1 THe undertake of the Son of God for man's Redemption did for the most part consist in his sufferings. Though he were a Son (saith the Apostle, Heb. 5.8.) yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered. Though he were always a Son, the only Son of God; yet suffer he did not any longer than whilst he was in the form of a servant. Of all true service or Apprenticeship, obedience is the special property: the greatest perfection whereunto the condition of a servant, or one under legal command can pretend. Now the perfection of obedience cannot by any means either be better exemplified or approved, than by patience in suffering. Servants (saith S. Peter, 1. Pet. 2.18, 19, etc.) be subject unto your Masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward: For this is thank worthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if when you do well and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. For even hereunto were ye called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example that ye should follow his steps: who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth; who when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not, but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously: who his own self bore our sins in his own body on the tree.  
2. By this unspeakable obedience of the Son of God in vouchsafing to suffer for us, with unimitable patience what he had in no degree deserved: we who were by natural condition slaves to Satan, were fully redeemed unto the liberty of the sons of God. Of what kind soever his sufferings were, such and so many they were, and all so patiently sustained by him, that he made a full and perfect satisfaction for the sins of the whole world, as the ancient and our English Liturgy expresseth. And that he made a full and perfect satisfaction for all the sins (whether of disobedience or impatience in sufferings) of all those men who are in any degree redeemed by him, is not questioned by any Christian whether in truth or profession only, who grant that the Son of God did make any true and proper satisfaction for the sons of men. Concerning the extent of man's redemption by the Son of God, or for his full satisfaction for their sins, we shall, if God give leave, discourse hereafter. But whether unto this full and perfect satisfaction which he undertook to make for men, if not universally (as our Church teacheth) yet as all reformed Churches agree, indefinitely taken: it were necessary, requisite, or expedient that the Son of God should in our nature undergo the same penalties or sufferings in kind, which without his satisfaction for them, all mankind should have suffered, is a question which of late years hath troubled even those reformed Churches, which agree upon this general; that his satisfaction was most full and all-sufficient. The heat of this contention is unto this day rather abated, than extinguished. Now the pains which all the sons of Adam, and Adam himself, without full satisfaction made by the Son of God, should in justice have suffered, were the pains of Hell, perpetual durance in that unquenchable fire, which was of old prepared for the Devil and his Angels. Whether this fire, be it material or immaterial, or more than equivalent perhaps unto material fire, did seize upon the humane soul or body of the Son of God, or upon both, either in his Agony in the garden, or upon the Cross, is the point or problem now in question. The affirmative part of this problem hath been averred by some in their public writings under the title of the Holy Cause; so dignified for no other reason, as I conceive, but because it was in those days maintained stiffly by such as deemed themselves more holy than other men, at least more Orthodoxal in points of sacred doctrine than their Fathers in Christ, and (by confession of their own consciences) more learned than themselves. Others taking this for granted that Christ did suffer all the pains of the damned, have been so far overswayed with their adherence unto this doctrine, as to misdeem that Article in the Apostles Creed concerning Christ's descending into Hell, or ad inferos, to incline this way; as if to believe Christ did descend into hell, had been all one, as if he had suffered the pains of hell in his Agony, in the garden or upon the cross. But if this had been any part of the true meaning of that Article; the Apostles, or whosoever were the first Composers of the Apostolic Creed, as we now have it in the Latin, & especially in the English would have expressed themselves in plainer terms. For if by [Hell] in that Article the pains of Hell had been by them meant or intended, they would not have said that the Son of God descended into hell, but rather that hell had ascended up unto him, whether in the garden or on the Cross. That the Son of God our Saviour Christ did truly descend into the nethermost Hell may with greater ease, and more probability be proved out of the Canonical Scriptures as well of the old Testament, as of the New; than his suffering the pains of hell, can be inferred from either Testament, or from the Apostles Creed. That Christ did after his death or dissolution of body and soul descend into hell, such as maintain his suffering the very pains of Hell, do generally deny. But to omit this incongruous paradox, or this preposterous expression of it, that Christ's descension into hell should intimate his suffering of Hell-paine before his death, it shall suffice to examine the reasons which have been or may be brought, that he did or was to suffer such pains whensoever or in what place soever. All the reasons which can be alleged that he did suffer such pains, must either be drawn from the event, or some experiments recorded in the new Testament, or from some predictions in the Old, or from a necessity or expediency whether in justice, in equity, or out of his abundant love to mankind, that he was to suffer them.  
3. No necessity or expediency of such sufferings can be (as I conceive) pretended, but either for satisfying God's justice, or for his full and absolute conquest over Satan, or for his consecration to his everlasting Priesthood, that he might be a merciful and faithful high Priest in things concerning God, or a sweet comforter of all such as suffer whether in body or soul for his sake. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the former question, that he did suffer the very pains of Hell, must be proved or attempted from his speeches, gesture, or other experiments related by the Evangelists in their accurate descriptions of his Agony, and sufferings upon the Cross. To begin then with the relation of his Agony. That is related at large by S. Matthew and S. Luke, which is scarce mentioned by S. john, whose special part in penning this sacred tragedy, it was to remember that divine discourse with his Disciples, being at his last Supper with them, and his repair to the garden beyond Cedron, which he had so often frequented before, that the opportunity of this place made judas of a secret thief▪ an open Traitor.  
4. The manner & circumstances of the Agony it self are most fully related by S. Luk. cap. 22. ver. 39, etc. And he came out, and went as he was wont, to the mount of Olives, and his disciples also followed. And when he was at the place, he said unto them, Pray that ye enter not into temptation. And he was withdrawn from them about a stones cast, and kneeled down & prayed, etc. Not to dispute about the phrase here used by S. Lu. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as whether it imports some violent withdrawing by impulsion, or some extraordinary instinct, or whether in true construction it be no more than thus, he did voluntarily withdraw himself: questionless he was by the one means or other now led the second time to be tempted. The temptation was grievous and more extraordinary than his former temptation in the wilderness. Thus much is intimated by that peremptory monition to his Apostles, [Pray that ye enter not into temptation:] partly from the manner of his prayer for himself; Father if thou be willing, remove this Cup from me. The question is what Cup this was, whose removal he desired? It was a deadly cup as all agree; but of what death? natural, or supernatural? death of body only, or of soul? Had the Cup which he so feared to drink, been only a death natural, or such as other men had or may taste of, his serious reiterated deprecation of it, would in some men's collections argue less courage or resolution in him than many others though generous, yet but mere men, have exhibited either at the approach or onset of death, or in the very conflict with deadly pangs, or terrors. Or if Peter at this time had not been amazed with heaviness of spirit, he might thus have crowed over his Master, dulce bellum inexpertis, when I forewarned you to be good unto yourself, and not to let these things come upon you; all the thanks I had for my pains was this, Get thee behind me Satan: for thou savourest not the things which are of God, but the things which be of men. 
* Matt. 16.22.  And yet now thou prayest unto thy Father that these things, which I advised thee to beware of, may not fall upon thee. Wherein then, I beseech thee, did I offend, unless it were in foreseeing or foretelling, that in time it would repent thee of thy forward resolution? But admit this Cup whose removal he now prays for, were more than either the fear or feeling of a natural death, though accompanied with more grievous symptoms than any man before him had either felt or feared: was it possible that the horror of it should not be duly apprehended by him from the time, wherein he had resolved to suffer those things which Peter counselled him not to suffer? If he were ignorant how dear his future sufferings would cost him, why did he undertake to make satisfaction for our sins by them? For to undertake any business of greater consequence out of ignorance, or out of knowledge in part commendable, without due and constant resolution; how ever the success fall out, doth always prejudice, if not elevate the just esteem of the undertakers discretion. The undertaker in this great business of man's Redemption, was the Son of God, whose wisdom no man can too highly estimate, whose undertaking for us all men besides himself do esteem too low. Shall we say then he was not ignorant of any thing that should befall him; yet ignorant of them as man, or that he was ignorant of them in part, in part did foreknow them? Surely as he was God, he did know all things before they were, before they could have any title to actual being. For infinite knowledge (such is the knowledge of the Deity, and of every Person in it) can neither be ignorant or nescient of any thing whether future, present, or past, or of any thing possible to have been, or possible to be either for the present or future. If the least degree of knowledge of any thing past, present, or future could accrue or result de novo unto the Divine nature, either in itself, or in any person in it, whether ab extra, from occurrences which happen in the revolution of time, or from the supposed determination of his own will from eternity; we should hence be enforced to deny that the wisdom or knowledge of the Divine nature, or of any Person in it were absolutely infinite. For that unto which any thing can accrue, or be added is not truly infinite for the present, or in itself; can be no otherwise infinite than by succession, or by addition of somewhat to it besides itself. If it were true which some avouch, that God doth not, or rather cannot foreknow contingents future, otherwise than by the determination of his own will: this supposed determination of his will (being indeed but a fancy or transformation of his will to the similitude of ours) doth make his knowledge absolutely infinite, being of itself only capable of true infinity, by this addition.  
5. That God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is of wisdom and knowledge truly infinite; not by occurrences ab extra, from the Creation, but in himself, I firmly believe. As for the manner how he doth know, or foreknow things future, contingents especially, is a point which I could wish were not at all or more sparingly disputed, as being assured, that this point of all others now questioned, cannot possibly be determined by any man or Angel, unless he be every way as wise as God, or somewhat wiser. God (the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) I verily believe did more perfectly know the degrees and qualities of all the sufferings of our Saviour in the flesh, than he himself as man did either know or foreknow them. Yet did not the Divine nature, or any Divine person, as Divine, know them by experience or painful feeling as the man CHRIST JESUS did, but by a knowledge as supereminent to the knowledge of sense or humane reason, as the Divine nature is to the nature humane: or as ubiquitary being or immensity is to circumscriptive or local presence. The Divine nature, whether we consider it in the Person of the Father, Son, or Holy Ghost, could learn nothing which they knew not before, by the sufferings of the Son: yet the Son himself as man did learn obedience by the things which he suffered in the flesh. Whatsoever may be thought or said of other knowledge communicated to the man CHRIST JESUS by the virtue of the Personal union: yet his sensible or experimental knowledge, as of pains and sorrow whether incident to body only, or to both body and soul, was not from his cradle infinite, was not so complete at his baptism, as at his last Supper, nor then so exact as in the garden, or upon the Cross it was. A growth or increase in this kind of knowledge is granted by such of the Schoolmen, as did not know or consider, what it was for the Son of God to be in the form of a servant, but took this to be all one, as to be in the form of a mortal man. But such as duly consider his peculiar estate or condition, whilst he was in the form of a servant, will easily conceive his voluntary renouncing that full measure of knowledge which he now hath as man, and his obedient submission of his manhood unto the feeling of our infirmities, to have been a necessary part, or rather the very depth of that humiliation, or exaninition of himself, whereof the Apostle speaks. For it is one special good quality of a servant, not perfectly to know his errand, not to be too inquisitive after the particular contents of it, before he be sent; but to expect instructions from him that sent him, though it be in an Ambassage.  
6. If we take it then as granted, that our Saviour as man did from his infancy most clearly foresee, or distinctly know, that he was to redeem mankind, by tasting the bitter cup of death for them; it will not hence follow, that he should at all times know, either the true quality, or exact measure of the pains which he was at the time appointed by his Father to suffer, for accomplishing this great work undertaken by him. For of all things that can be known by men, the knowledge of pains either for quality, or the distinct measure of them, is least possible without experimental knowledge, or sensible feeling of them. Many Physicians have learnedly discoursed of the several sorts of fevers, and calculated their degrees more mathematico, as Mathematicians do the quantity of figures or solid bodies, or revolutions of the Heavens. But the real pains or languishments of hectical, pestilential, or other fevers, the most learned Physician in the world cannot distinctly know or calculate, unless he feel them. Or in case by sensible experience he knew the nature or quality, or several degrees of every fever; he is not hereby enabled distinctly to apprehend the maladies which attend the Gout until he feel them. Or suppose he knew these maladies from the highest to the lowest degree, this will not indoctrinate him to know the extremities of the Stone so perfectly and distinctly as his meanest Patient doth which hath sensible experience of it, though in a middle degree. Our Saviour long before his last resort unto the garden of Gethsemane, was a man of sorrows, had plentiful experience of humane infirmities or bodily maladies. For he had felt the grief and pain of all the diseases which he had cured by most exact and perfect sympathy with the diseased. His heart was tuneable to every man's heart, that did seriously impart his grief of mind or affliction of body unto him. Only in laughter or bodily mirth he held no consort for aught we read with any man. But the grief and sorrow which in the garden he suffered, could not be known by sympathy. The protopathy was in himself, and no man, not the Apostles themselves could so truly sympathise with him in this grief, as he had done with them, or the meanest of their brethren in other grievances or afflictions. For never was there on earth any sorrow like unto the sorrow, wherewith the Lord had afflicted him in this day of his wrath. Yet was his obedience more than equal to his sorrow, and this obedience he learned by his sufferings.  
7. But if in this hour, or any other he learned obedience, this seems to argue that he was either disobedient before, or at lest wanted some degree or part of obedience. For no man can be said to learn that lesson, which he hath already most perfectly by heart. To this we say, That how ever the Son of God, or the man Christ Jesus, did never want any degree or part of habitual or implanted obedience; yet the measure of his actual obedience was not at all times the same. The obedience which the Apostle saith he learned, was obedience passive; and all passive obedience doth properly consist in patient suffering such things as are enjoined by lawful authority, or in submitting our wills and affections, not our bodies only unto the just designs of Superiors. Our Saviour at all times wholly submitted his humane will unto his Father's will, had always undertaken with alacrity whatsoever his Father had appointed him to undertake or undergo: but his Father had never called him to such hard service as in this hour was put upon him. Now if obedience passive consist in patience of suffering, it must needs increase, as the hardness of the sufferings increase; in case the hardest service be borne with equal patience, or undertaken with the same measure of submission unto his will which enjoines them, that meaner services are. Again, if the true measure of bodily pains or sorrow of mind cannot otherwise be known than by experience, the Son of God himself as man, and in the form of a servant, was to learn obedience, at lest some new degrees of it by gaining experience of unusual pains and sufferings. And such questionless were those anguishs, whether of soul or body which he suffered in the garden. That he had often prayed before this time, we read; and no doubt had always tendered his petitions to God as to his Father with such humility of spirit, as became an obedient Son, and faithful servant, as did best befit the Ideall pattern of all true obedience. But we do not read, nor have we any occasion or hint, to conjecture, that at any time before this he did so humble himself in prayer, as at this time he did, whether we respect the form or tenor of his supplications, or his voice or bodily gesture in the delivery of them. All the circumstances of these his supplications, are accurately recorded by the Evangelists. He was withdrawn, or did withdraw himself, from his Apostles about a stones cast. And yet in this distance his Apostles though drowsy and heavy, did hear him pray distinctly, who had taught them and us to pray for ourselves in secret, so secretly as that none besides our heavenly Father might hear them. As for his gesture or posture of body, that, at the first delivery of his prayer and supplications was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So S. Luke Cap. 22. ver. 41. He went forward, saith S. Mark, a little and fell on the ground and prayed, Mark. 14.35. So he might do and fall on his knees as S. Luke relates. But S. Matthew adds, he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father if it be possible let this cup pass from me. That he thrice used this form or tenor of prayer, whether at each time he used the same posture of body, or rather falling on his knees than on his face; is not so clear though most probably he did so. Now that which these three Evangelists do intimate or imply in the accurate relations of these circumstances, is more expressly recorded by S. Paul, Heb. 5.7. to wit, that in the days of his flesh he offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears. And no wonder if streams of tears gushed from his eyes, when his whole body (as S. Luke informs us) did distil blood. The full importance of this sacred passage of S. Paul, Heb. 5. from the fourth verse to the ninth, seeing it contains matter of deeper mysteries than most Interpreters (which I have read) have taken any great pains to sound, must be part of the subject of another following Treatise, concerning his consecration to his everlasting Priesthood. Thus much in the mean time I take as granted that the forecited seventh verse of the fifth Chapter to the Hebrews doth in special refer unto the supplications made by our Saviour in his Agony: and will be the best Comment I know upon the Evangelists, for clearing that point now in question [what Cup it was, for whose removal he thrice so earnestly prayed.]  
8. He offered up these his prayers, saith the Apostle, unto him who was able to save him from death. This is exactly parallel to the preamble which our Saviour used before the full ingruence or paroxysm of his Agony; Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee, take away this Cup from me, etc. No man doubts but that his Father was able to save him from dissolution of body and soul, that is, from death itself, whether it had come by course of nature, or by violence. But from this death it is plain he did not save him. Of this cup or kind of death he tasted to the full, in the utmost extremity, upon the Cross. How then is it true which S. Paul in the forecited place addeth, that after he offered up prayers with strong crying and tears, he was heard in that he feared: Or (as others read) for his piety. Whether reading we follow, this, or that, the just importance of our Apostles words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is thus much at least, that he was delivered from that which he so much feared, though with a pious fear: for out of such a fear he offered up his prayers with strong crying and tears. The Cup then which he so earnestly prayed might pass from him, was not the cup of violent death simply considered, nor as accompanied with all the indignities done unto him by the Jews, Romans, and others the very next day. For what then did he at this time so earnestly pray? for speedy release or deliverance from the heaviness of soul, or anguish of spirit, which now had suddenly seized upon him. The very first draught of this Cup had cast him into a bloody sweat, and had he been enforced to have taken a second, or third deep draught of it; or if his present anguish had been for some few hours continued, he had prevented the cruel tortures of the Cross, and the indignities done unto his person by the Jews or Roman Soldiers. This was that Cup which Peter counselled him not to taste of, for whose removal he never prayed, as being fully resolved to pledge the utmost extremity of their malice, with a far greater measure of patience. And for this reason when Peter drew his sword for his rescous (as he intended) he checks him again, as he had done, Matth. 16.23. Put up thy sword into the sheath: the Cup which my Father gives me, shall I not drink it? joh. 18.11. But that cup which he so earnestly did pray might pass from him, did certainly vanish with his Agony, and his Agony did endure no longer than he offered up his supplications and prayers; about the space of an hour. There remained no sign or symptom of it after the Traitor had delivered him up into his enemy's hands. Or if we ponderate S. Luke's relation of his Agony aright, his prayers were heard upon the first, or second uttering of them. Seeing ease, or deliverance from the ingruence of pains, is all that they pressed for the present desires: it is all one whether the burden be lessened, or his strength to bear it be increased. His ease and comfort is either way the same. Admit then the heavy burden laid upon the Son of God in the days of his flesh, had continued the same or perhaps increased from his first entering into the garden: yet his prayers were heard in that an Angel was sent, whether to strengthen him or to comfort him, Luke 22.43. The word in the Original is often used for such internal strength, as men recover by some comfortable refection, when they are faint for want of meat, or by gathering their spirits after they have been dissipated or dejected by sudden fear or amazement. It would perhaps be accounted impertinent to make inquiry what Angel it was, which was sent to comfort or strengthen the Son of God in that extremity of his Agony. Yet many of the Ancients, and of modern Interpreters not a few, are of opinion that it was the same Angel which did annunciate his birth and conception, and that was the Angel Gabriel. Who though perhaps he did not take his name from his foreseen deputation to his function; yet did he never brook it better in any former acts of his ministry, then in the performance of this present service. His name imports as much as the strength of God, and at this time he strengtheneth the man CHRIST JESUS who then was, and now is the Son of God: as truly God as man. Now if he who was the Son of God, did receive strength or comfort from an Angel; it is no paradox or solecism to say, that he learned obedience by the things which he suffered, or that these present sufferings were unknowen to him as man, until he felt them. For no reason can be to my apprehension conceived, why he who was the Son of God might not be capable of some growth in knowledge, experimental especially, as well as in bodily quantity or strength of body. Concerning the nature and quality of those sufferings wherein he was strengthened or comforted by an Angel, as whether they were natural or supernatural; or if supernatural, whether they were the very pains of Hell, or such as we should have suffered without his satisfaction, cannot be inferred either from the unusual form of his prayers uttered with strong cries, or from his gesture in the garden.  
9 Some there be who take his bloody sweat in that grievous Agony to be a symptom of infernal pains. But from what grounds either in Philosophy or Divinity, I know nor. If the pains of Hell or hellish pains (so some distinguish) be procured by the fire of Hell (be that material or immaterial) bloody sweat can be no probable effect of the one or other fire. Nor is such sweat any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or demonstrative sign of pains more grievous than may be inflicted by agents, or suffered by patients merely natural. For however in colder Countries bloody sweats be as rare in men's bodies, as showers of blood in the air: yet as a good Philosopher hath long ago observed, to sweat blood is not unusual to Italians, 
* Curaeus.  yet usual only (as I take it) to men of that Climate in some peculiar diseases. The most remarkable instance which I have read of bloody sweat in a man not oppressed with any disease, is of a Captain 
* Capta Dragonera, Magio negotium datum, ut Montemmarinum munitissimun locum aggrederetur. Igitur secum ducto Augusto Saluciarū principis not●o filio, eò tendit: evocatoque quasi ad colloquium praesidiariorum duce ab Augusto, quîcum arctissima intercedebat amicitia; Magius ex compacto superveniens eum comprehendi jussit, & ut locum dederet, hortatus; cum nihil proficeret: postremo minas addidit & ipsum vinctum quasi ad supplicium in oppidi conspectum deduci imperavit, tam miserabili spectaculo victi oppidani, ut ducem suum periculo eximerent, deditionem fecere. 0bservatum, tam indignae mortis vehementi metu adeo concussum animo eum suisse, ut sanguineum sudorem toto corpore funderet. Th●an. lib. 10. pag. 221.1.  an Italian (if I mistake not) who being surprised by the subtlety of his Enemy, whom he had trusted too far upon a tryste of Parley, and thereby enforced either to yield up the Fort which he had stoutly maintained, or otherwise to be presently hanged: the consideration of this perplexity wherewith through his own folly he had entangled himself, did make such deep impression into his generous spirits, that it squeezed blood out of his veins. Our Saviour (no doubt) as man, had a more full apprehension of all the malicious disgraces and cruel indignities which his enemies could put upon him, than this Captain had. The measure of his bodily sufferings and personal wrongs were in number far more, and for quality far more grievous than ever were intended to this Captain, or to any other mortal man by their enemies. And though the death of the Cross was in itself an ignominious and cruel death, yet in our Saviour's particular that was most true, mortis modus morte pejor; the manner of his apprehension, of his double arraignment, and conviction, of his usage before he was brought to the place of execution, and all the time whilst the malice of Jew and Gentile was wreaked upon him was more grievous than the death of the Cross itself without these grievous concomitants could have been. To scan these briefly, and in order. The very manner of his apprehension made some impression of sorrow and indignation in him, as appears by the character of his speech, Luk. 12.32, &c Then jesus said to the chief Priests and Captains of the Temple, and the Elders which were come to him, Be ye come out, as against a thief, with swords and staves? when I was daily with you in the Temple, ye stretched forth no hand against me, but this is your hour, etc. And so no question did their binding of him in bonds by all probability and circumstances more grievous and more disgraceful, than ordinary felons, thiefs, or murderers, in those days were liable unto, especially before legal conviction. For judas who had bargained with the high Priests and Elders for making delivery of him into their hands, had forewarned them, Matt. 26.48. Led him away safely; as if he had said, Be sure ye make him fast. Whether the Traitor thus spoke out of a desire to have him put to death, or only to secure himself against all quirks of Law concerning his bargain in case JESUS (as he oft had done) should escape out of their hands, I will not peremptorily determine: albeit I am not ignorant that diverse of the exquisitest Interpreters, and other good writers are of opinion, that judas betrayed him, not so much out of malice, as out of covetousness: being persuaded he was able to quit himself from any restraint, that they could lay upon him. In the mean time, however it fared with his Master, or with them to whom he delivered him; he resolved to free his gainful bargain from further question. And this may be the probable reason of his relentance after he saw his Master condemned to death, without all hope of rescue or reprivall. So it often falls out, that when the events fall out worse than the Projectors intended, albeit their first intentions were in themselves wicked, the consideration hereof brings them commonly to such remorse, as causeth despair sooner than any degree of true repentance. And for judas to make his gain, or to redeem the loss which he had suffered by the waist of ointment as he interpreted it, poured upon his head, by the delivery of his Master, although he did not at all intent his death; was an odious treason, which is always the proper fruit of a base and covetous mind. And both branch and fruit, the covetousness, and the treason might be a corrasive to our Saviour, and in part occasion his Agony. So might the malicious disposition, and ignominious proceeding of the Priests and Elders against him, be more grievous to him than the pains of death or public disgraces which he suffered by them. The suborning of false witnesses against him were more distasteful to his righteous soul, than all the sufferings and scornful revile which they bestowed upon him. But amongst all the indignities which Satan, and his instruments could invent, these were the most grievous. First their begging of Barrabas his pardon, when Pilate would have dismissed or reprived JESUS. This was a cruel kind of mercy, the true effect of preposterous zeal, and Pharisaical hypocrisy. For this custom of showing mercy, or begging pardon for some prisoner at the great Feast of the Passeover was first instituted in the remembrance of the mercy which God had showed unto their Fathers in delivering them out of Egypt. And in requital of this extraordinary favour, which the Lord God of Israel had showed to their Fathers, they deliver him to be crucified by the Gentiles, being set up by Pilate an heathen Governor in competition for this poor favour with Barrabas, a notable rebel, thief, and murderer. Another indignity was the sudden execution of this most unjust sentence, not giving him such competent time as other prisoners had to dispose of himself, and of his estate, or to make preparation for death. For this Session was not called for him but for others who had been in custody before, yet he is cast into the bargain as a fragment or refused remnant, as a party no more considerable than a Cutpurse taken in the manner in open Court whilst others are arraigned. Now all these indignities and many more, as the Evangelists tell us CHRIST did foresee before his Agony seized upon him. And might not the foresight or due apprehension of them, and of the lingering death which these did usher in, or both put together, more probably cause that Agony and sweat in the garden, than the apprehension of death and indignities approaching, or then the extremity of some diseases do the like effects in other men?  
10. As for the sweeting of blood in some diseases, that is never occasioned by any apprehension of the disease occurrent, but only by the ingruence of the disease itself, whereof it is an effect or symptom. Or if it be objected that our Saviour might have a deeper apprehension of his death approaching, than any other man had of diseases before they did actually seize upon him. Yet is there no reason to suspect, that he had not the same apprehension long before he entered into the garden, or that this apprehension whether of death or indignities, should not be improved by sensible experiments of the violences after done unto him in the high Priests hall, by the Roman Soldiers, or by his scourging at pilate's command which was more cruel than others condemned to die the death of the Cross did suffer; because Pilate hoped that the sight of his gory stripes might quench the malicious heat of the Jews, and acquit him from further condemnation. Yet in all his ensuing sufferings we do not read or find that he had any symptoms of that anguish which came upon him in the garden: He did not so much as pray unto his Father for any release from the tortures and indignities, which he actually felt by sensible experience; but rather for his enemies which had procured them. Or if his bloody sweat in the garden had been occasioned (as in all probability it was not) from any foresight or apprehension of his indigne usage by the Jews, and by the Roman Soldiers, whilst he was in hold or upon the Cross; it could not be any symptom of hellish or infernal pains.  
11. Yet that he suffered such pains upon the Cross hath been avouched too confidently by some, and more peevishly maintained by others. One especial ground pretended for this ill sounding doctrine is, that exclamation uttered by him a little before his death; My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? The collections which many learned writers of the Romish Church have drawn from Calvins' Comments upon these words, are too plentiful to be here inserted; and the imputations which they lay upon him and his followers unanswerable, if he meant or spoke as they express his meaning, to wit, that these words should argue a sensible experience of Hell pains, or the worst symptoms of such pains, as either despair, distraction of mind, or discontent. I should be very sorry to read them in Calvin, or in any other writer of the reformed Churches, very unwilling distinctly to call to memory some passages in late English Writers which to my remembrance incline too much this way. All I can say in Calvins' defence, if he peremptorily affirm, that our Saviour did suffer the pains of Hell upon the Cross, is this. If it be an heresy (as the Romish Church doth make it, and I cannot gainsay them, if it be stiffly maintained:) the heresy was broached by a great and learned Romish 
* Cusanus.  Cardinal before Calvin wrote. And when the Pope, who is the pretended Judge of all heresies, shall condemn his books for heretical, or his opinion in this particular for an heresy; I shall be ready to persuade the Church of England (as far as I am able) to do the like. The true importance of our Saviour's exclamation or proclamation rather upon the Cross (for he uttered it, voce magna, with a proclamatory voice,) will come to be scanned in the next Treatise. But if Satan either by his own strength, or by special permission from God the Father, did tempt our Saviour upon the Cross, whether immediately or mediately by the malicious stratagems of the Jews, and by the profaneness of the Roman Soldiers so far as to proclaim his own despair or diffidence of God's favour towards him, or to the least degree of impatience or discontent; it would be hard to make any construction of our Saviour's prediction, joh. 14.30. The Prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me; or as some have more fully expressed the Hebraisme, nothing against me. As certainly he had no matter to work upon, no occasion of solace either to himself or to his infernal associates, as if they had moved him to the least degree of diffidence or impatience. For our Saviour questionless was more than certain by a more excellent certainty, than the certainty of faith, that he should be saved from the second death; that he should never fall away from God's favour, nor be for a moment forsaken of him. Otherwise, he had been a less faithful servant of God, less mindful of special revelations made to him as man, than they are who believe their own special election or predestination, only upon application of God's general promises to themselves in particular. For besides the internal revelations made to him as man, he had many public assurances, such as others besides himself did hear; none of which he did ever distrust or doubt: much less could he fear lest his Father should be so far displeased with him, as ever to forsake him. Now his pains upon the Cross were grievous, and the indignities done unto him, to flesh and blood intolerable: yet his apprehension of celestial joys due unto him, was never interrupted. And out of this never interrupted apprehension, or rather view of these joys, he endured the Cross, and despised the shame, as our Apostle tells us, Hebr. 12.2. Not only his apprehension of these, but his most circumspect observance of all opportunities to do his Father's will, and to see all the Scriptures concerning him fulfilled; was never more conspicuously remarkable, whilst he was upon the Cross, than in his last conflict with death. The fulfilling of the Prophecies concerning his sufferings, requires a peculiar Treatise. For his extraordinary circumspection about that very point of time wherein he uttered these words, Eli, Eli, lamasabacthani, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? that is abundantly testified by S. john who was an ear witness of his speeches. Now there stood by the Cross of jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Marry the wife of Cleophas and Mary Magdalene: When jesus therefore saw his mother, and the Disciple standing by whom he loved; he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy Son. Then saith he to the Disciple, Behold thy mother. And from that hour that Disciple took her unto his own home, Joh. 19.25, 26, 27.   

CHAP. XIII. The bloody Sacrifice of the Son of God, was all sufficient to make full satisfaction for the sins of the world, without his suffering of any supernatural or unknowen pains.  
1 BUt however the former pretended conclusion concerning Christ's suffering the pains of Hell, or any of their symptoms, cannot be inferred either from his bloody sweat in the garden, or from any speeches of his or any effect related by the Evangelists: yet the favourers of this conclusion rather than they would give it over endeavour to prove it by reason drawn from the final cause of all his sufferings. The suffering of the pains of hell (say they) was necessarily required to the full satisfaction for all our sins, which all good Christians confess he did bear both in his Agony and upon the Cross. But the very foundation of this assertion is very weak, and the superstructive worse: most derogatory to the infinite worth of Christ's bloody Sacrifice. First, it is not required by the rules of equity, whether Divine or humane, that satisfaction for wrongs done should always be made in kind, or by way of counterpassion. It is in many cases more full and more sufficient when it is made by equivalency, than if it were made in kind. As in case a man in his rage should cruelly beat his neighbour, or butcher his cattle: to permit the party which suffered the wrong whether in his person or in his goods, to exercise the like rage or cruelty upon his person or live-goods, which did the wrong, could be no true satisfaction either to the law, or party wronged, but rather beastly revenge. The best satisfaction which in this case could be awarded to the party wronged, would be to give him such contentment in one kind or other, as might in reason, though not to passion, be as beneficial and useful to him, as the effects of his fury and rage which did the wrong, were in just estimation hurtful: and yet such withal, as should make the offender, as unwilling to do the like wrong again, as the party wronged or any in his case would be to suffer it. This is the only true satisfaction which in the same or like case could be justly made to the Law, whose true intendment always is to make all men willing to do to others, as they desire should be done unto them: unwilling to do any thing to others, which they would not have done unto themselves. Our father Adam had wronged our common nature, and all of us had offended our Creator more grievously, than any man can wrong another. Now in that our God and Creator is withal the eternal rule of justice, or rather Justice itself; it was requisite that satisfaction should be made unto him in the fullest degree. For one man, for all men which had done this wrong, to make satisfaction to infinite Majesty either in whole or in part was impossible. Though all mankind had been condemned to suffer uncessantly both in body and soul, they might by this means have been continually making satisfaction, but never have made it; albeit their sufferings had been endless. Therefore was this great work undertaken by the Son of God made man for us.  
2. Suppose then all this had been foreknown, before our Saviour was incarnate, ever since the fall of our first Parents, and the sentence denounced against them; it would have been a more grievous sin in our first Parents or in any of their posterity, than the sin of the old Serpent in seducing them or us to yield to his suggestions, to have besought God the Father, that his only Son should make satisfaction for us in the very same kind, which we should have made, but could never make, that is, by suffering the pains of Hell. That the man Christ Jesus might suffer such pains as the damned shall do, was perhaps the desire of Satan, that which the great Enemy of mankind did most earnestly labour to effect. And if thus he did but desire, this was the greatest actual sin, which either he or his infernal associates ever had committed, or can commit. Whatsoever they might desire, all that our heavenly Father could require of his only Son after he became our surety, was to make full satisfaction for all our sins against his Deity, or the eternal rule of justice. But all this he knew might be accomplished by his only Son after a more excellent manner, than either by exercising his wrath due unto us, or by suffering Satan whose redemption his Son did no way undertake, to wreak the utmost of his malice or foehood against mankind upon him. For myself amongst others, I must confess, I could never understand the language of many professed Divines, who would persuade us that the full vials of God's wrath due unto our sins were poured upon his Son. Whatsoever their meaning be, which I presume is much better, than I can gather from their expressions, the manner of speech (to say no worse) is very improper, and to me unpleasant. For how was it possible, God the Father should be wroth with him in whom alone he was always well pleased. But wrath or anger against any one, are always the effects of some displeasure precedent: and no satisfaction can be made whilst displeasure is taken, or wrath kindled against the party which seeks to make satisfaction or reconciliation. Now the infliction or permission of Hell pains to be inflicted upon any, is the award not of God's judgement, but of his wrath and fury.  
3. If it be objected that our sins were infinite, though not for number yet for quality, because committed against an infinite Majesty; and consequently that no satisfaction according to the exact rule of justice could be made without punishment, or penalties truly infinite: the answer is as Orthodoxal, as easy or common, That the satisfaction made for us by the Son of God, was more truly infinite, than the sins of mankind were. For it was absolutely infinite. Non quia passus est infinita, sed quia qui passus est erat infinitus. The person or party who made satisfaction for us, or party which undertook the satisfaction, was both in Majesty, and in goodness, as truly infinite, as the Majesty and goodness whom we had offended, and by whom exact satisfaction was required: both of them were both ways absolutely infinite. I omit the weakness of such calculatory arguments, as this; [Our sins were absolutely infinite, because committed against an infinite Majesty,] as too well known to most students, and often enough, if not too often deciphered in other of my meditations. For this being admitted, all sins should be equal, because all are committed against the same infinite Majesty and goodness. As for the true measure of our sins and ill deservings, that must be taken from the measure of God's displeasure against them: and that is but equal to the several degrees of our disobedience to his most holy Laws and Commandments. This than we verily believe, that the full height and measure of all disobedience and rebellions against God, was neither higher or greater than the obedience which his Son performed in our flesh, or whilst he stood in the condition of a servant: that our heavenly Father was never so much displeased at all our disobediences, as he was well pleased with the obedience of his only Son, or with their obedience that are truly ingraffed in him, and are made partakers of his obedience in his sufferings. Both parts of this conclusion may with facility be evinced in the judgement of all men which have subscribed unto, or do admit the principles in Divinity, whether Legal or Evangelicall.  
4. It was a maxim undoubted in the time of the Law, that obedience was better than sacrifice: the corrollary or consequence of which maxim doth amount to this point, that obedience without sacrifice, was always better than sacrifice without obedience. Yet such sacrifices, as were appointed by God, being offered out of the spirit of obedience, were always more acceptable than obedience alone. Such sacrifices as were appointed by God himself, unless they were offered in obedience and out of conformity to his Law, were abominable. The principal part of obedience, which the Law required, was the humble confession of the parties sins, for whose sakes they were offered. This confession was made over the heads of the beasts which were offered: the parties offering them always acknowledging either expressly by their tongues, or implicitly in heart, that they had better deserved a cruel death than the dumb creatures, which they sacrificed had done. Briefly, Legal sacrifices were then acceptable, when their offerers put on such affections, as David maketh expression of, when he saw the people plagued for his sins, or at lest when the punishment of their own sins came suddenly upon them through his folly. Lo, I have sinned, and I have done wickedly: but these sheep what have they done? 
* 2. Sam. 24.17.  Yet even whilst the best of God's people thus affected did offer the best kind of Legal Sacrifices (bullocks whilst their horns and hooves began to spread,) their sacrifice and obedience did but lovingly meet, they were not mutually wedded or betrothed. But whilst the Son of God did offer up himself for us upon the Cross, his sacrifice and obedience were more strictly united, than man and wife, than man's soul and body. For betwixt these there is oft times dissension or reluctance: so was there never betwixt Christ's Divine person who was the offerer, and the humane nature which was the offering. His humane nature and will before it was sacrificed, and whilst it was sacrificed, was more obedient to his Father's will, than our first Parents senses or affections in their integrity were unto their reasonable souls. When he cometh into the world (as our Apostle interprets the 
* Psal. 40. Heb. 10.5, 6, 7.  Psalmist) he saith, Sacrifice and offerings thou wouldst not, but a body hast thou prepared or fitted for me. In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hadst no pleasure: then said I, lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me) to do thy will O God. This will of God accomplished through the sacrifice of his Son, was that will of God, by which we are sanctified, and if sanctified, then justified; yet not justified without satisfaction before made. Of the full meaning of this place, and of the true reconciliation of the Seventy Interpreters (whom the Apostle follows) with the Psalmist or the Original, by God's grace hereafter. Thus much is pertinent to our present purpose, that the body which the Son of God assumed to do that will of his Father, which could not be accomplished by any other sacrifices (though numberless and endless) was a body fitted for all kinds of calamities and crosses, which are incident unto mortality: a body more capable of pain, or deeper impressions from the violent occurrences of all externals, which are natural; than any other man's body was, or had been. A body as it were moulded and organised of purpose to be animated or actuated with the spirit of obedience and all manner of patience in suffering, which can be required in a faithful servant. Servants (saith S. Peter 
* 1. Pet. 2.18, 19 ) be obedient, etc. For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. CHRIST JESUS who was the pattern of all obedience required in servants, not only whilst he was to deal with malicious unreasonable men, but in the very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his Agony, (when his heart within him was become like melting wax through the vehemency of that fiery trial) did set the fairest copy of that obedience, which S. Peter requires should be taken out (how rudely soever) by every servant of God, under his own hand. Even in this Agony when his mortal spirits did faint and languish, the spirit of obedience was much stronger in him, than the pulse of pain and sorrow. It did not intermit or abate when his pains and anguish did increase. Being in Agony (saith S. Luke) he prayed more earnestly, Luk. 22.44. These words I refer if not to the third, yet certainly to the second paroxysm of his Agony; one or more of which fits did wring blood from his sacred body, being otherwise full of health. But most probable it is from S. Luke's relation. Chap. 22. ver. 44. that he sweat blood both in the first and second fit, and that in all the three he delivered his supplications 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kneeling, or falling upon the ground. The form of his prayer and manner of deportment in it, (as was said before) exhibit a true document or demonstrative argument, that besides his Divine will, he had a will truly humane, a reasonable will in that he did desire or deprecate the removal or assuagement of his present sufferings, with greater fervency of spirit and devotion, than any sons of Adam could deprecate the pains of Hell, if they should be beset with them, or feel their approach. And yet withal, he wholly submits his humane body, soul, and will unto his heavenly Father's will, who by his consent had free power to dispose of them in life and death, as he pleased. Out of this fervent spirit of obedience consecrated unto God's service by his most devout prayers, he was delivered from the pains and terrors, which he both feared and felt in the garden.  
5. As for his sacrifice upon the Cross, albeit we subduct the worth of it in itself considered (which infinitely exceeds the worth of all other sacrifices;) it was most properly, and most really the sacrifice of a broken heart, or contrite spirit. For after his natural strength was spent, and his bodily spirits diffused with his blood; he lastly offers up his immortal spirit, his very soul unto his Father. Father into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus he gave up the ghost, Luk. 23.46. The spirit of obedience did not expire with bodily spirits, it did accompany his soul into Paradise: it was not put off with the form of a servant, but clothed upon with glory and immortality. Shall we yet doubt, whether the sacrifice upon the Cross being offered out of such unexpressible obedience were fully sufficient to make abundant satisfaction for all our disobediences; albeit we should subduct his obedience and patience in that grievous Agony in the garden?  
6. If any man be disposed to move further doubt about this point; the Apostles authority, or rather his reason will put the point out of question, Heb. 9.11, 12, 13, 14. But Christ being come an high Priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect Tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building: Neither by the blood of goats and calves; but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh; how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal spirit, offered himself without spot to God, purge your consciences from dead works, to serve the living God? The form and manner of his dispute in this passage, as in most others throughout this Epistle, is allegorical: but allegories in true Theology always include arguments of proportion, and are as firm as any Geometrical or Mathematical demonstration. The terms of proportion in this argument are especially four. First, sins merely ceremonial, that is such errors and escapes, as are evil because forbidden, not evil in themselves. The second, the remedy appointed for such sins, and that was the blood of bulls and goats, etc. The third, sins properly so called, that is, all offences or trespasses against the Law of nature, or against the Law of God. Things not evil only because forbidden, but rather forbidden because evil in their own nature. The fourth term is, the antidote or preservative against such sins, as in their nature poison our souls: and this sovereign preservative is only the blood of Christ. The Apostle takes it for granted, that the sacrifice of bulls and goats were sufficient to make satisfaction for sins merely ceremonial; and the blood available so far to sanctify the parties offending against the Law of Ceremonies, as that they might be admitted into the Congregation, or stand recti in curia, after the sacrifice was once offered. Of this purification concerning the flesh by the blood of such sacrifices, that which the Romanists say of the Sacraments of the new Testament, might be more probably said; Conferebant gratiam ex opere operato. The ceremonial sin was taken away by a ceremonial offering. From this known maxim concerning the law of Ceremonies, or Legal sacrifices S. Paul takes his rise unto the high mystery of the Gospel, to wit, that the offering which the Son of God did make upon the Cross, was more sufficient, as well for making full satisfaction unto God for all sins committed against his Law, as for purifying the conscience of offenders from dead works; more effectual to make men partakers of the true celestial Sanctuary, than the blood of beasts was for making them legally clean. Purification from sin or sanctification always presupposed full satisfaction for the sins committed. To cleanse men from sins merely ceremonial, or to sanctify them according to the flesh the bloody sacrifice of bruit beasts was sufficient, although they suffered no other pains than natural, albeit they felt no force, or assault of any agents, but merely natural, much more is the blood of Christ of force sufficient not only to make a full atonement for us, but to cleanse us from all sins, although he suffered no pains supernatural, although he had suffered no force or impression of any agents more than natural. All this is but a branch of our Apostles inference. For albeit sins committed against the Moral Law of God, do in a manner infinitely exceed sins committed against the Law of Ceremonies only: yet are not the sins of the one kind so much more heinous, than the sins of the other, as the blood of Christ doth for virtue exceed the blood of bulls and goats. Nor is there that odds of difference betwixt sins Moral, and sins Ceremonial, which is between the Priests of the Law, and the high Priest of our souls, the Son of God. And yet the main ground of our Apostles inference doth not simply consist in the superexcellency of the high Priest of our souls, or of the sacrifice which he offered, in comparison with legal Priests and their sacrifices, but withal in the admirable union of our high Priest and his sacrifice. For admit it as possible, first, that there might have been some matter of sacrifice, as pure and spotless, as the body of our Saviour; more pure and glorious than the Angelical substances: Secondly, that this pure and spotless sacrifice had been offered by a Priest for dignity equal to the Son of God (as by the Holy Ghost the third Person in Trinity:) yet his offering or service could not have been so acceptable unto God, as our Saviour's offering or service was; because the infinite worth of the Priest or Person sacrificing, could not in this case have conferred any worth or virtue truly infinite upon the sacrifice or offering made by him, though as holy and glorious as any created substance can be; unless it had been so personally united to him, that in offering it, he had offered himself, as our Saviour did. This is the main stem or rather the root of our Apostles emphatical inference or surplus in the forecited place. How much more shall the blood of Christ who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God.  
7. Answerable to this hypostatical or personal union between our high Priest and his sacrifice, was that union between his obedience to his Father, and his mercy and compassion towards men. Obedience, mercy and sacrifice were so united in his offering, as they never had been before his own death was the internal effect of his mercy towards us, and obedience to his Father the period of his humiliation of himself: He humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even unto the death of the Cross. That we know, was a cruel and servile death; but no part of the second death, not charged with the pains of Hell: otherwise our Apostle would have mentioned them, as the accomplishment of his obedience, or of his service; which, without them did exceed the very abstract or pattern either of service or obedience. Quid est servitus, nisi obedientia animi fracti, & arbitrio carentis suo? Servitude (saith 
* In his Paradoxes  Tully) is nothing else but the obedience of a broken or dejected mind, utterly deprived of all power or right to dispose of itself, or of its actions. It is indeed dejection of mind, a broken estate, or baseness of condition; which make men willing to become servants unto others, or enforceth them to resign all their right and power unto their Masters will. But it was no dejection of mind, no want of any thing in heaven or earth, but only the abundance of mercy and compassion towards us miserable men, which moved the Son of God to renounce this world before he came into it, and to deprive himself of all that right and interest, which every other man hath over his own body and soul, by voluntary resignation of his entire humane nature unto the sole disposing of his Father. Other servants were obedient unto their Lords upon necessity, or dejection of mind: he voluntarily became a servant to his Father, that he might accomplish the office of a servant in the sacrifice of a broken and contrite spirit. This was the internal effect of his service and obedience, and this sacrifice thus offered was all-sufficient to make satisfaction for all the disobedience of men; for the sins of ten thousand worlds of men.   

CHAP. XIV. That our Saviour in his Agony (at least) did suffer pains more than natural, though not the pains of Hell or Hellish pains: That the suffering of such pains was not required for making satisfaction for our sins, but for his Conquest over Satan.  
1 BUt albeit the bloody sacrifice of the Son of God were, as God himself is, all-sufficient to these purposes; may we hence collect that he suffered no pains more than natural, or of no other kind than his Martyrs, Apostles, or Prophets have done? God forbid. Between pains natural and the pains of Hell, there is a mean; to wit, pains altogether supernatural in respect of the Agent, and somewayes more than natural in respect of the Patient: and such pains out of all question the Son of God did suffer in the garden, though not upon the Cross. Nor were these his sufferings superfluous, though no way necessary for paying the full ransom or price of man's redemption or reconciliation unto God. Most expedient they were, if not necessary to other purposes: As first, for his absolute conquest over Satan. Secondly, for his consecration to his everlasting Priesthood. Of his conflict with Satan in the garden (a place suitable to that wherein he had conquered our first Parents,) jobs second temptation was the type or shadow. His Father exposed him to the second temptation, as he had unto the first temptation in the wilderness, and permitted Satan to exercise the utmost of his power against him: only over his soul or life he had no power. These were taken from him by the malice of men, and by the death of the Cross, not by the immediate power of Satan. That the conflict in the garden was extraordinary; that in this hour the decretory battle betwixt the old Serpent and the woman's seed was to be fought (at least the brunt of it;) the letter of the Scripture is to my apprehension very plain: As first from that speech of our Saviour's after his Maundy, joh. 15.13. Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the Prince of this world cometh: with greater violence surely than at any time before had been permitted him to use. For our Saviour uttered these words immediately after Satan had entered into judas: at which time his Commission to enter the lists with the holy seed of the woman was first to be put in execution. It hath always seemed to me a mystery or secret, whereof no reason can be given in nature, how Satan gains greater power of doing mischiefs and harms to men by secret compact with others of their own nature, as with Witches, or other of his own worshippers; than is permitted him to use by his own immediate power or strength. judas, though he was no Witch, yet was he a worshipper of Satan, one who had made Mammon his God, for whose service he had resolved to betray his Master into the hands of his enemies. It is pregnant again from that saying of our Saviour immediately upon the cessation or intermission of his Agony and bloody sweat, that Satan's assaults were at this time extraordinary; When I was daily with you in the Temple, you stretched out no hand against me: sed haec est hora vestra, & potestas tenebrarum, But this is your hour, and the hour appointed for the powers of darkness to try their strength against me. But after they could get no advantage of him by grappling with him in the garden, being not able to move him to the least signification of any impatience, or overture of discontent, as Satan had done job in his second temptation; they leave him unto the malice of his mortal Enemies, being assured they should get advantage enough over their souls, and prevalently tempt them to cruelty and hatred towards this holy One, more than natural. The hour of his terrible combat with Satan was but newly expiring, when thus he spoke to the chief Priests and Elders. And howbeit this word hour sometimes imports more than an hour (as we say) by the clock, some larger indefinite time or season: yet that in the forecited place it is to be taken for a just hour, and no more, many circumstances of the Text persuade me: (this especially) when he saith to his Disciples, Could ye not watch with me one hour? As if he had said, Of all the time that I have been with you, this was the only hour, wherein your watchfulness and attendance on me had been on your parts most requisite, and to me most acceptable. And the effect of his petition as S. Mark 
* Mark. 14.35.  expresseth it, was thus, that if it were possible the hour might pass from him. This was the hour wherein he tasted the bitter cup, whose present bitterness upon his prayer was, if not altogether taken away, yet assuaged; and the hour itself, wherein he was to taste of it, perhaps shortened.  
2. This conflict with Satan, and the issue of it, our Saviour apprehended at his triumphant ingress into Jerusalem immediately after his future glorification was avouched by a voice from heaven three days before he entered into his Agony. Now is my soul troubled, and what shall I say? Father save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour. Father glorify thy Name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again, etc. Now is the judgement of this world: now shall the Prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lift up from the earth, will draw all men unto me, joh. 12.27, 28, etc. In what sense, or how far the world at this time was judged, exhibits plentiful matter of controverse Divinity, not immediately emergent from the positive points of Divinity now in hand. And for this cause I must request the ingenuous Reader for the present to take a matter which before was proposed, into deeper consideration. The point is briefly this; Our first Parents in the self same fact by which they became rebellious, ipso jure, committing high treason against their God and Creator, did subject themselves, and their posterity, unto the tyrannical dominion of Satan. His vassals and slaves all of us were by right most sovereign amongst the sons of men, by right of conquest in Duel. Now albeit the Conqueror was a Traitor and rebel against God; although he did first commit or at least accomplish this his rebellion and treason, by withdrawing our first Parents from that allegiance and obedience which by law of nature they and we ought perpetually to have borne unto our Maker: Yet so observant of all rules of equity and just form of proceedings, was he who is goodness, equity, and justice itself; that unto Satan the professed Rebel against him, and implacable Enemy towards man, he did vouchsafe the benefit of the Law of Arms or Duel. Now seeing Satan, being not Omnipotent but of power, force, and subtlety limited, had thus subdued our first Parents, whom their Creator had endowed with freedom and power sufficient to dispose of their actions for the future good of themselves, and their posterity: his gracious goodness would not take us out of this Rebels hands by the Omnipotent power or irresistible force of his Godhead. Man being conquered by his sometimes fellow creature, was in the wisdom of Divine equity, to be rescued from this bondage by a Creature, by a man of the same nature and substance, subject to all the infirmities (sin excepted) to which we are subject: as taking his substance from that man whom Satan had conquered. As Satan did not appear in his own shape or likeness, when he subdued our first Parents (for so no question they would have been more wary to have closed with him;) but disguised in the similitude of a Serpent, which was a creature more subtle than all the beasts of the field, yet a creature every way far inferior to man: So the Son of God did not enter this combat with Satan in the glory and strength of his Godhead, but in his Godhead as it were disguised or clothed upon with the true nature and substance of man, and of a man whom Satan upon trial before had known to be throughly subject to the infirmities of mortality. Otherwise he had more wit, than to have entered the lists with him in the second conflict.  
3. How much dearer this conflict with Satan cost our Saviour, than jobs second temptation cost him; he only knows, and this knowledge he learned by patience and obedience in suffering these pains of what kind soever they were. The ancient Greek Liturgies express them best by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the unknown sufferings. Such I take it, as no man in this life besides our Saviour alone did suffer, nor shall ever any man suffer the like in the life to come, in which, the pains of Hell shall be too well known unto many. But that our Saviour in this life should suffer such pains is incredible: for this being granted, the powers of darkness had prevailed more against him, than Satan did against job. For the actual suffering such pains includes more than a taste, a draught of the second death, unto which no man is subject, before he die the first death: nor was it possible that our Saviour should ever taste them either dying or living, or after death. This error, it seems, hath surprised some (otherways good Divines) through incogitancy, or want of skill in Philosophy. For by the unerring rules of true Philosophy, the nature, quality, or measure of pains must be taken, not so much from the force or violence of the Agent, as from the condition or temper of the Patient: Actus agentium sunt in patient rite disposito. The fire hath not the same operation upon Gold, as it hath upon Lead; nor the same upon green wood, which it hath on dry. Or if a man should deal his blows with an eeven hand between one sound of body, and of strong bones; and another sickly, crazy, or wounded: the pains though issuing from the equality of the blows, would be most unequal. That which would hardly put the one to any pain at all, might drive the other into the very pangs of death. Goliath did look as big, did speak as roughly, and every way behave himself as sternly against little David, as he had against Saul, and the whole host of Israel: Yet his presence though in itself terrible, did make no such impression of terror upon David, as it had done upon Saul, and the stoutest Champions in his host. And the reason, why it did not, was because David was armed with the shield of faith, and confidence in the Lord his God; a secret Armour which was not then to be found in all the Kingdom of Israel beside. But a far greater than Goliath, associated and seconded with a far greater host, both for number and strength, than the Philistines in David's time were able to make; more maliciously bend against the whole race of Adam, than the Philistines at this or any other time were against the seed of Abraham, was now in field. And all of us are bound to praise our gracious God, that in that hour we had a Son of David far greater than his Father to stand between us and the brunt of the battle then pitched against us. For if all mankind from the East unto the West, which have lived on earth since our Father Adam's fall unto this present time, or shall continue unto all future generations, had been then mustered together, all of us would have fled more swiftly, and more confusedly from the sight or presence of this great Champion for the powers of darkness, than the host of Israel did from the Champion of the Philistines, when he bid a defiance unto them. All of us had been routed at the first encounter without any slaughter, been committed alive to perpetual slavery and imprisonment. But did this Son of David obtain victory in this Duel with the Champion for the powers of darkness, at as easy a rate as his Father David had done over Goliath? No: If we stretch the similitude thus far, we shall dissolve the sweet harmony between the type and the Antitype. The conquest which the Son of David had over Satan and the powers of darkness (whether in the garden or upon the Cross,) was more glorious than that which David had over Goliath, or Israel over the Philistines. David was Master of the field sine sanguine & sudore multo, without blood, or much sweat. The Son of David did sweat much blood before he foiled his potent Adversary. And the present question is not about the measure but about the nature and quality of the pains which the Son of David in this long Combat suffered, in respect of the pains which David or any other in the behalf of God's people had suffered. As the glory of our Saviour Christ is now much greater, than the glory of all his Saints which have been or shall be hereafter: so no doubt his sufferings did far exceed the sufferings of all his Martyrs. But all this and much more being granted, will not infer that he suffered either the pains of Hell or hellish pains (poenas infernales, aut poenas inferorum:) such pains as the power of darkness in that hour of extraordinary temptation had cast all mankind into, unless the Son of David had stood in the breach. Admit the old Serpent had been in that hour permitted to exert his sting with all the might and malice he could, against the promised woman's seed, that is, the manhood of the Son of God: yet seeing (as the Apostle saith) the sting of death is sin (not imputed but inherent) it was impossible that the stinging pains of the second death should fasten upon his body or soul, in whom there was neither seed nor relic, neither root or branch of sin. Or again, admit hell fire (whether material or immaterial) be of a more violent and malignant quality, than any material fire which we know, in what subject soever it be seated, is; and that the powers of darkness with their entire and joint force had liberty to environ or begird the Son of God with this fire or any other instruments of greater torture, which they are enabled or permitted to use: yet seeing there was no fuel either in his soul or body, whereon this fire could feed; no pains could be produced in him for nature or quality truly hellish, or such as the damned suffer. For these are supernatural, or more than so, not only in respect of the Agents or causes which produce them, but in respect of the Subject which endures them. Satan finds always some thing in them, which he arms against them; some inherent internal corruption, which he exasperates to greater malignity, than any external force or violence could effect in any creature not tainted with such internal corruption, from which the promised woman's seed was more free than his crucified body was from putrefaction. The Prince of darkness and this world could find nothing which he could exasperate or arm against him.  
4. In respect of Divine justice, or of those eternal rules of equity which the Omnipotent Creator doth most strictly observe; it was not expedient only but necessary that the Son of God should in our flesh vanquish Satan, and vanquish him by suffering evils, even all the evils incident to our mortal nature. There was no necessity, no congruity that the Son of God should vanquish this great Enemy of mankind by suffering the very pains of Hell or hellish torments. These properly taken, or when they are suffered in kind, are the proper fruits and necessary effects of Satan's victory over sinners; the final wages of sins unrepented of or not actually expiated by the blood of our Redeemer. In all other tribulations, distresses, or persecutions, which are not the wages of sin, We are, (as our Apostle saith Rom. 8.35, 37.) more than Conquerors through him that loved us, if so we endure them with patience. But how more than Conquerors in these which are in themselves evil & distasteful to our nature? Therefore more than Conquerors, because these afflictions suffered with patience, do testify our conformity to the Son of God in his most grievous sufferings: and the dissolution of the works of Satan in us, doth seal unto our souls a full Acquittance from hell pains, from which questionless our high Priest was free in that great Combat with Satan and his infernal powers. Otherwise, he had not been full Conqueror over hell and the second death, which is no other than the pains of Hell, or hellish torments. Nor could the sufferings of such torments be any part of the Son of God's qualification for dissolving those works of Satan, which cannot be dissolved but by the exercise of his everlasting Priesthood, which was the last end or final cause of his sufferings or consecration by afflictions.   

CHAP. XV. Christ's suffering of the unknowen pains, or of pains greater than ever any of his Martyrs or others in this life have suffered, requisite for his qualification, as he was to become the high Priest of our souls.  
1 THe Son of God was to suffer all the afflictions, which we in this world can suffer, in a far higher degree than we can suffer them: to be more strongly tempted by all the means by which we are tempted unto sin, whether by fear of evil, or by hope of things good and pleasant unto nature; that he might (even to our apprehension) be a more faithful and merciful high Priest in things concerning God, than ever any before him had been, or can be. But Satan, we know, tempteth no man in this life unto sin either with the fear or sufferings of any evil or vexations, whereof our mortality can have no experience. He labours to withdraw no man from God's service by giving them any taste or touch of the pains prepared for the damned in the life to come. Such as are in the deepest bonds of thraldom to him, would quickly abandon his service, if he should tender them such a true symbol or earnest of their everlasting wages, or such a momentany taste of Hell pains, as the Spirit of God in this life exhibiteth to some of his children of their everlasting joys. And it is questionable whether our nature whilst mortal be capable of such pains, or whether the first touch or real impression of them would not dissolve the link or bond between man's mortal body, and his immortal soul in a moment. For as flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God, but this mortal must put on immortality, ere we can be partakers of celestial joys: so it is probable that our corruptible bodies must be made in another kind incorruptible, before they can be the proper Subjects or receptacles of Hell pains. But though no man in this life be tempted to ill, or withdrawn from the service of God, by sufferance of such pains; yet in as much as many are oft times tempted to despair of God's mercies by the unknown terrors of Hell, or representations of infernal forces: there is no question but the Son of God, not in his Divine wisdom only, by which he knoweth all things, but even as man, had a more distinct view of all the forces, and terrors of Hell, more full experience of their active force and attempts, than any man in this life can have; to the end that he might be a faithful Comforter of all such unto the world's end, as shall be affrighted or attempted with them. If we consider then only the attempt, assault, or active force by which Satan seeketh to withdraw us from God unto his service, not the issue or impression which his attempts makes upon us sinful men: there was no kind of temptation whereto the Son of God was not subject, whereto he did not submit himself for our sakes, that he might have full experience or perfect notice as man, of all the dangers whereunto we are obnoxious. By that which was done against the green tree he knoweth what will become of the dry, if it be exposed to the like fiery trial. It was requisite that this great Captain of God's warfare with Satan, and of our salvation, should have a perfect view of all the forces which fight against us; that he might be a faithful Solicitor to his Almighty Father for aid, and succour unto all that are beset with them, unto all that offer up strong cries unto him, as he in the days of his flesh did unto his Father, and was saved from that which he feared.  
2. The greatest comfort which any poor distressed mortal man can expect, or which our nature is capable of in oppression and distress, must issue from this main fountain of our Saviour's Agony and bloody sweat, of his Cross and Passion. For whatsoever he suffered in those two bitter days, he suffered, if not for this end alone, yet for this especially, that he might be an All-sufficient Comforter unto all such as mourn; as having sometimes had more than a fellow feeling of all our infirmities and vexations, as one who had tasted deeper of the cup of sorrow and death itself, than any man before him had done, or to the world's end shall do. It would be a great comfort to such as have suffered shipwreck, to have an Admiral, a Dispenser of Alms unto Seafaring men, who had sometimes suffered shipwreck, or after shipwreck had been wronged by his neighbours or natives. And so, it would be to a man eaten out of his estate by usury or vexations in Law, to have a Judge or Chancellor who had been both ways more grievously wronged; a just, or upright man, whose heart would melt with the fellow-feeling of his calamities. Experience of bodily pains or grievous diseases inclineth the Chirurgeon or Physician to be more compassionate to their Patients, and more tender of their welfare than otherwise they would be. And for these reasons, ever since I took them into consideration, and as often as I resume the meditations of our Saviour's death, I have ever wondered and still do wonder at the peevishness, or rather pathetical profaneness of some men, who scoff at those sacred passages in our Liturgy, By thy Agony and bloody sweat, by thy Cross and Passion, etc. Good Lord deliver us; as if they had more alliance with spells, or forms of conjuring, than with the spirit of prayer or true devotion. Certainly they could never have fallen into such irreverent and uncharitable quarrels with the Church our Mother, unless they had first fallen out, and that foully with Pater noster, with the Lords prayer, the Creed, and the ten Commandments. For I dare undertake to make good that there is not either branch or fruit, blossom or leaf in that sacred garden of devotions which doth not naturally spring and draw its life and nourishment from one or other of the three former roots, to wit, from the Lords prayer, or from the Creed set prayer wise, or from the ten Commandments. And he that is disposed to read that most Divine part of our Liturgy with a sober mind and dutiful respect, shall find not only more pure devotion, but more profound Orthodoxal Divinity both for matter and form, then can be found in all the English Writers which have either carped or nibbled at it. Not one ejaculation is there in it, which hath the least relish of that leven, wherewith their prolix extemporary devotions who distaste it, are for the most part deeply soured. But here I had ended my Treatise of the qualification and undertake of the Son of God for dissolving the works of Satan, had not a new Quaere presented itself to my meditations in the latter end of these disquisitions; and the Quaere, is this:  
3. Why our Saviour in his Agony, or his other sufferings upon the Cross should not tender his petitions unto God in the same form or tenor wherein the Psalmists or other holy men which were types or figures of him in his sufferings, had done theirs in their anguish or distress; or in the same form which he once, and no oftener than once did use upon the Cross, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? The ancient style of prayer used by God's servants or Ambassadors, as well in their humble supplications, as in their gratulatory hymns, but especially in their fervent and pathetical ejaculations for deliverance from present dread or danger, was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 my God, and my Lord; or my Lord, and my God. Besides the observations before made to this purpose out of 
c The 7. book of these Commentaries upon the Creed, chap. 36. par. 3, 4, etc.  Masius, or rather out of the Liturgy of the Ancient Jews avouched by him, and of the Primitive Church (well observed by Faber) many passages in the Psalms which did respectively both forepicture and foretell his Agony and sufferings upon the Cross, are most pregnant. Of the ingratitude of his people toward him, of the indignities and cruelties done unto him by the Jews; no Psalmist (the Author of 22. only excepted) hath a more lively punctual representation, than that which is Psal. 35. and 38.40. David in the very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or paroxysm of the grievances which he suffered from such of Saul's followers as he had well deserved of, delivereth his petitions in this form: Avenge thou my cause, my God and my Lord, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Psal. 35.23. judge me according to thy righteousness, O JEHOVAH, my Lord, Psal. 35.24. and 38.16. (whether David or some other were the Author of it) Quia ad te expecto, tu respondebis Domine, Deus mi. And again, Psal. 40.6. Multa fecisti tu JEHOVAH, Deus meus, etc.  
4. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  But when the hour was come wherein all these Prophetical ejaculations of the Psalmists were to be exactly fulfilled in our Saviour Christ: and by him, he prefers his supplications stilo novo in a form or style unusual before, but familiar and usual to him when his passion and death drew nigh, as joh. 12. Father, (not Lord God) what shall I say? save me from this hour, etc. And joh. 17. Father glorify me, etc. He used the same form in his Agony thrice, Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me. And in the last words, which he uttered in the form of a servant, he said not, My God, my God, or my Lord God; But Father into thy hands I commend my spirit. This variation between this most faithful Servant of God and other holy men, Gods faithful servants, in the form of their supplications or gratulatory ejaculations conceived and uttered upon the like occasions, suggests thus much unto us (if I mistake not) that of all God's servants or holy men, the man CHRIST JESUS only was his true Son not by adoption as others were, and we now are, but his Son by right of inheritance; and yet being such a Son, was for a time as truly his Servant, as his Son. He who always had been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or God the Lord: He whose title it was to hear his people's prayers, and unto whom all flesh shall come, Psal 65.2. doth now tender his prayer, not to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not unto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that had been to prefer a petition unto himself, whereas he was now to prefer his petition unto his Father whose Servant he now was as man, but did not thereby cease to be as truly his Son. Had he been his Son by creation only, or in respect of the admirable integrity and superexcellency of his performances as man; he had doubtless tendered his petitions in the same style or form, which other godly men, and Gods faithful servants before had used, though much better than they did. But however he was the Servant of God after a more peculiar manner than any other had been; yet he presents his supplications in such a style as hath relation to himself, rather as he was a Son than as a Servant. The eternal Son of God was the party supplicant unto the eternal Father for his mortal servant. For he was a servant only according to his humane nature, and according to that only as it was mortal, whereas he still remaineth Mediator betwixt God and man, not as man only, much less as a mortal man, but according to his eternal person, and his immortal manhood. This his manhood is now dignified with the real and actual title of Lord. He was our Lord and Mediator before he assumed our flesh into the unity of his Person: but then Mediator according to his Divine Person, or as God only. When he is instiled by the Prophet's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or God the Lord, this later title was more Prophetical than historical, and did import as much as that he who was then jehovah our God, at the time appointed should come to be our Lord by peculiar right of dominion purchased by his sufferings for our redemption. And for this reason I take it, his Apostle Thomas being convinced of incredulity unto the report of his resurrection, supplicates to him for pardon in the same style or form, as the Psalmist and other godly men had done in their distress; My Lord, and my God, 
* joh. 20.28.  which is the full and punctual expression of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For now he was not only spe, but re, become both Lord and Christ.    

SECTION 3. Of the harmonical parallel between the predictions or types of the old Testament, and the Evangelicall relations, concerning our Saviour's triumphant coming unto jerusalem, and of his entertainment there, until the institution of his Supper.  

CHAP. XVI. Of the King of Zion's coming to jerusalem, and how the manner of his coming was for circumstance of time, prefigured by the Law or rite of the Paschall Lamb; and for other circumstances, expressly foretold by the Prophet Zachary.  
1 AN Apostle hath said it, and we must believe him, that our Saviour Christ was Agnus occisus ab origine mundi; the Lamb slain from the beginning of the world. And other Scriptures abundantly testify, that he was to be slaughtered in time, to the end that he might take away the sins of the world. About the indefinite or illimited truth of both these propositions, there is no controversy amongst good Christians. The limitation notwithstanding of both these undoubted truths require some further disquisition; the limitation of the later a larger Treatise: The main Quere concerning the former is briefly this. [From what beginning of the world our Saviour is said to be Agnus occisus, the Lamb slain,] as whether from the first beginning of time, or from the first day of the Creation. To stretch the beginning of the world thus far, is more than the rules of true Theology will warrant. For it was neither necessary or expedient, that the Son of God should be slain, or that any bloody sacrifice should have been offered, if our first Parents had preserved or retained their original integrity. By the beginning of the world, then in our Apostles meaning, we are, I take it, to understand the sinful world, as it is coevall or confederate with the flesh, or the first entrance of sin into it or rather into our nature. From the fall of our first Parents, at least from their convention before their Almighty Judge and Creator; the Son of God was first destinated, and afterwards consecrated to be the Lamb of God, which was to take away the sins of the world. And of his death and passion, or other undertake to this purpose, as well the sacrifice which righteous Abel offered out of the flock, as the bloody sacrifice of himself, being butchered by his ungracious brother Cain, were true types or shadows. So was the Paschall Lamb, which was solemnly offered every year, once in token, afterwards in memory of the Israelites miraculous delivery out of Egypt. The first institution, and observance of this solemnity, was given as a pledge or assurance unto God's chosen people, that the destroyer should not hurt one of them, when he smote all the first borne of Egypt, both of man and beast. The same solemnity was afterwards continued in memory of that mighty deliverance, which Israel had from Pharaoh and his host. Howbeit even this miraculous deliverance was but a shadow or typical assurance of that great deliverance which the Son of God in our flesh, and all God's people, in him and by him, had from the powers of Hell and darkness, in that great Passeover, wherein this true Lamb of God predestinated to this purpose from the beginning of this world, was actually consecrated and solemnly upon his consecration, offered.  
2. A question there is, but soberly handled by some good sacred Antiquaries; whether the Law of the Paschall Lamb delivered by Moses, were to be solemnised according to all the rites and circumstances, which were enjoined, and punctually to be observed at the time of Israel's departure out of Egypt. One branch of this Law it was, that every household which was capable of eating it, should take it from the flock four days before the offering of it. This separation was his consecration, and this rite or ceremony, as some good Writers tell us, was observed throughout the generations, if not in the Lambs offered by every private family, yet in the Lamb designed or chosen for the public sacrifice in that great Festival, which was brought into the City four days before the offering of it, with great pomp and solemnity. But be it that the solemnity of bringing the Lamb four days before the Passeover, was to be observed only in Egypt: this will no way impair the sweet harmony between the Legal type and the Evangelicall mystery; but rather give it a better lustre: For that Passeover which was celebrated in Egypt was the most illustrious peculiar type of this great Passeover, wherein the Son of God was sacrificed for the sins of the world. Other succeeding legal Passovers were but remembrances of that great deliverance whereof the first Passeover in Egypt was the pledge, or preassurance. And we in like sort were once for all delivered from the powers of Hell and darkness, by the visible blood of the new Covenant; of which deliverance, we are more strictly enjoined to continue a memorial, until our Mediator and Redeemer come to judgement. Now to declare unto the world, that JESUS the Son of God and of David, was the Lamb of God ordained from the beginning of the world to effect this mighty deliverance, and to fulfil the mysteries forepictured by the Passeover in Egypt; He came unto Jerusalem (the place appointed for this and other grand Festivals) four days before the Passeover wherein he was sacrificed, and was brought in with greater pomp and solemnity, than any Paschall Lamb, than any Prince of Judah at any time before had been. His attendants were more, and their respects and salutations tendered in more submissive manner, and the titles given to him much loftier than either David his father or Solomon in all his royalty had been accustomed unto. The history of his coming is very remarkable of itself, and the circumstances as they are variously related (yet without clashing or contradiction,) by all the four Evangelists, most considerable.  
3. For the circumstance of time, which was four days before the Passeover, that is determinately and punctually set down by two Evangelists, and may be evidently inferred out of all four. The special occasions of a great concourse of people out of several Nations or Provinces, which at this last Passeover did expect his coming, or went out of Jerusalem to meet him or wait upon him, after another guise, than at any the three former Passovers since his Baptism had been seen; are most fully expressed by S. john Chap. 11. ver. 45. Then many of the jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which jesus did, believed on him. But some of them went their ways to the Pharisees and told them what things jesus had done. John 12.9, 17, 18. Much people of the jews knew therefore that he was there; and they came, not for jesus sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the dead. The people therefore that was with him, when he called Lazarus out of his grave, and raised him from the dead, bare record. For this cause also the people met him, for that they had heard, that he had done this miracle, etc. The original occasion of this great concourse, as appears in these passages, was the irrefragable testimony of his raising Lazarus from the grave, wherein he had laid four days. The special occasions which moved the whole multitude of his Disciples (that is such as for the present did believe in him) to entertain, and did occasion others to entertain him with those extraordinary acclamations, or other expressions of joy & exultation, (recorded by all the Evangelists) are most punctually expressed by S. Luke, Chap. 19 ver. 37, 38. And when he was come nigh, even now at the descent of the Mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the Disciples began to rejoice, and praise God with a loud voice, for all the mighty works that they had seen, saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the Name of the Lord, peace in heaven, and glory in the Highest. These acclamations of his followers and Disciples were so loud, and their exultation (in such sinister construction, as Michal made of David's dancing before the Ark) so lavish, that they exasperated the Pharisees (who were but a small part of the multitude, who did attend or observe his approach,) unto more uncivil behaviour towards this their King, than Michal did use towards David her Lord and husband. Luke 19.39. And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy Disciples: As if they had said, Thy Disciples play the fools: and unless thou inhibit their folly, they will make thee a laughing stock to wise men. But his reply unto them for this their advice, though for terms and language, more mild and gentle; yet for the matter or mystery implied, was more sharp than david's was to Michal: Verse 40. He answered, and said unto them, I tell you, that if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out. For this was the time wherein Jerusalem, and the daughter of Zion had been commanded some hundreds of years before, to rejoice after an unusual manner. And the just occasions of this extraordinary point of time above all others, did require such a solemn and public testification, that if men, women, and children had been silent, the very stones in the street, the edifices and pavements in Jerusalem and Zion, must have supplied their defect. For these were appurtenances of the City, which had been peremptorily enjoined to shout for joy whensoever their promised and long expected King should come unto her. As the occasions of this extraordinary concourse of people, and of their unusual exultation, are most fully expressed by S. john and S. Luke: so the final cause of both, or sweet disposition of Divine providence in this whole business, is most punctually expressed by S. Matthew, Chap. 21. ver. 4, 5. All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophet saying; Tell ye the Daughter of Zion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee meek, and sitting upon an Ass, and a Colt the foal of an Ass. The Prophet, or one of the Prophets at least, which did foretell all that now happened, was Zachariah, Chap. 9.9. whose words are more full than the Evangelists. Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion, shout O daughter of jerusalem: Behold thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation 
* Or said himself, etc.  lowly and riding upon an Ass, and upon a Colt the foal of an Ass: So our ordinary English Translations render the place, word for word: but whether this Translation or others, Greek or Latin do fully and punctually express the Prophet's meaning, is in the next place to be discussed.   

CHAP. XVII. A Comment or Paraphrase upon the first eight verses of the ninth of Zachary: And of the connexion betwixt them and the ninth verse, in which the manner of our Saviour's coming to jerusalem was most expressly foretold.  
1 THis testimony of the Prophet Zachary, (as was observed before 
* The 7. Book of Commentaries. ca 6. ) is merely prophetical, that is, was literally meant of the Messias alone, never verified, much less fulfilled of any King or Prophet: it was a mystery without a type. Other passages in this ninth Chap. such especially as come after this ninth ver. may admit a mystical or allegorical sense: and I should like well of that allegory, which Ribera and Rupertus have made upon the former verses, if they had first given us the true and literal sense. But setting aside such passages as the Evangelists or Apostles have expounded unto us, the best Comments which are extant upon this or most other Prophecies revealed or written, since the building of the second Temple by Zerubbabel, are for the most part made to our hands by unpartial unsuspected Historians, that is, by Jews or Heathens, so we Christians would take the pains to peruse, and diligently compare their narrations of matter of fact, with sacred Prophetical predictions. For the true and literal sense of this whole ninth Chapter of Zacharias, besides the ninth verse, an ordinary Scholar may better inform himself from Arrianus, Quintus Curtius, and josephus, or others which write of Alexander's wars, than from Ribera, Rupertus, or all the professed Christian Commentators, which have not had the hap to consult these Heathenish or Jewish Historians. And some passages in the later part of this Chapter there be, unto which the History of the Maccabees (though Apochryphas for matter of faith) may give great light for the right understanding of them. My purpose is only to touch upon some few such passages in the first part of this Chapter, as are conducent to the point in hand, that is, to make a clear and ocular demonstration how this Prophecy avouched by S. Matthew, and others in this ninth Chapter of Zachary, were fulfilled.  
2. The burden of the word of the Lord in the Land of Hadrach, and Damascus shall be the rest thereof: when the eyes of man, as of all the Tribes of Israel, shall be toward the Lord. And Hamah also shall border thereby, Tyrus and Zidon though it be very wise. And Tyrus did build herself a strong hold, and heaped up silver as the dust, and fine gold, as the mire of the streets. Behold the Lord will cast her out, and he will smite her power in the Sea, and she shall be devoured with fire, Zechariah, 9.1, 2, 3, 4. josephus in his book of Jewish Antiquities, briefly relating the swift success of Alexander in his war, relateth the events in the same order and method, which the Prophet Zachariah had foretold them in. That he first overran Syria & took Damascus, and afterward besieged Tyre, which held out nine months against those forces which had conquered the Persians, Syrians, and other Eastern parts in less space. As for the Writ drawn for the execution of Tyre, you see it is punctually drawn by the Prophet Zachary; but who shall assure us that it passed the Seal, or was executed according to the tenor of his Commission. By her power in the Sea, the Prophet meant, as the Oracle in like case did, her wooden walls or multitude of ships: and these as Curtius tells us, being almost all sunk or taken, their chief Fort was surprised by the Macedonian Army. After her walls were scaled, the greatest part of her defendants summa tectorum obtinebant, saxa, & quoth in manibus for'rs dederat ingerentes subeuntibus, did annoy the Assailants from the tops of their houses with stones, or whatsoever came first to hand. So this their last and desperate fury did blow the fire of God's wrath which was kindled against them, from the Prophet Zacharies' time. For as this Heathenish Writer adds, Alexander exceptis qui in templa confugerant, omnes interfici ignemque tectis injici jubet, commands that all should be slain besides such as fled into the Temples, that their dwelling houses should be burnt. This great Conqueror in all this war, though he expressly knew not his Commission, was but God's Sheriff: and (though intending no such thing) did see the execution should be according to the Prophet's sentence. How much Tyrian blood was shed in this siege, as Curtius saith, may in part be hence gathered; besides all that died in that miserable Sea-fight, or those fierce skirmages about the walls after the Macedonians had made entry both by Sea and Land; six thousand of such as bare Arms were forthwith slain, two thousand hanged on gibbets along the shore, that Askalon, as it followeth in the Prophet, ver. 5. might see it, and fear, and the hopes of Ekronbe confounded. And as Arrianus, josephus, and some other tells us. Tyre being thus miserably ransacked, the other Cities of Syria or Palestina, yielded without resistance. Only the strength of Situation, store of provision, the resolution and fidelity of the Governor to Darius the Persian Emperor, emboldened Gaza to hold out for a time, as stoutly, as Tyre had done. For that part which God had appointed her, and her King or Governor to act, was not fear, but sorrow. Askelon shall see it, and fear, Gaza also shall see it, and be very sorrowful, and Ekron for her expectation shall be ashamed, and the King shall perish from Gaza, and Askelon shall not be inhabited, ver. 5.  
3. The greater danger the Conqueror himself did in the assault of Gaza incur, the more grievous was her ransack, and the greater was the cruelty practised upon the conquered. Alexander's wounded body did exasperate his heroical mind to imitate Achilles (his pretended Progenitor) as much at this time in despiteful revenge, as at other times he had done in valour. For by Alexander's appointment Batis, as Curtius' instiles him, the Governor of Gaza or Deputy King for Darius, being yet as full of life and spirit, as of bleeding wounds, was dragged by the heels after a Chariot through the streets, as Hector had been by Achilles about the walls of Troy. Thus doth confidence in causes accursed by God, inevitably bring their undertakers to those disastrous ends, whereto the just will of the Almighty Judge had for their sins appointed them. All this, and much more which Curtius and Arrianus relate concerning the desolation of Gaza (we need not be afraid to speak it) came to pass, that the word of the Lord spoken by Zachariah might be fulfilled. The King shall perish from Gaza, etc. ver. 5. Yet would I not have these words concerning Gaza, and her Governor, being for quantity indefinite, restrained to this particular time or accident. For that were to make this disaster the complete object of the literal sense, of which it is at the most but a principal part. This woeful accident might, and I take it, did portend the like in success of time, and I have ever held those Interpreters short sighted, rather than overseen, who think the several passages in this Prophecy must literally refer only to the wars of Alexander, or of the Maccabees. For multitude of like events, though different only in time, not in proportion to Prophetical predictions, can neither argue any diversity in their former object, nor any plurality of literal senses. All in their order may be alike literally meant by the same Prophet, all alike properly signified by the same words. No man questioneth whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek, or homo in Latin, have more significations than one, although in strict propriety of speech they denote or signify as well men now living, as those that died a thousand years ago.  
4. Hitherto we have seen how God by Alexander begun to pull down the pride of Tyre, and of the Philistines: not with purpose utterly to destroy them, as he did the old world, but rather by this castigation or contusion, to prepare and fit them for that mixture with the Jews their ancient Enemies, which was foretold by the Prophet Zachariah, ver. 6, 7. And a 
c That is, it should be a quiet habitation for bordering Nations or a mixed people.  bastard shall dwell in Ashdod, and I will cut off the pride of the Philistines, And I will take away his blood out of his mouth, and his abominations between his teeth: but he that remaineth, even he shall be for our God, and he shall be as a Governor in judah, and Ekron as a jebusit. The literal truth of this last cited passage, we may see experienced after the wars of Alexander and of his Successors with the Maceabees, partly in that great place which Herod of Askelon held amongst the Jewish Nation, partly in the Philistines Proselytes, who were admitted as Communicants with the sons of Abraham in their Sacraments and Sacrifices, partly in the admission of the Jews as free Denizens into the Cities of Palestina, and in such quiet cohabitation of the Philistines and these modern Jews, as had been between the Jebusits and their Ancestors. Every part of this observation might be concludently proved out of unpartial Historians, Heathenish or Jewish, which wrote before our Lord and Saviour was borne. Divers parts of it are abundantly proved out of the Author of the first Book of Maccabees, Chap. 10. ver. 88, 89. Now when King Alexander heard these things (to wit, the victory over Azotus, and the submission of Askelon upon the ransack of it,) he honoured jonathan yet more, and sent him a buckle of gold, as the use is to be given to such as are of the King's blood: he gave him also Accaron with the borders thereof in possession. Chap. 11. ver. 60, 61. Then jonathan went forth, and passed through the Cities beyond the water, and all the forces of Syria gathered themselves unto him, for to help him: and when he came to Askalon, they of the City met him honourably. From whence he went to Gaza, but they of Gaza shut him out: wherefore he laid siege unto it, and burned the suburbs thereof with fire and spoiled them. Chap. 13. ver. 33, etc. Then Simon built up the strong holds in judea, and fenced them about with high Towers and great walls and gates and bars; and laid up victuals therein. Moreover Simon chose men, and sent to King Demetrius, to the end he should give the land an immunity, because all that Tryphon did, was to spoil. Unto whom King Demetrius answered and wrote after this manner; King Demetrius unto Simon the high Priest, and friend of Kings, as also unto the Elders and Nation of the jews, sendeth greeting. The golden Crown, and the scarlet Robe which ye sent unto us, we have received, and we are ready to make a steadfast peace with you, yea and to write unto your Officers to confirm the immunities which we have granted. And whatsoever Covenants we have made with you, shall stand; and the strong holds which you have builded, shall be your own. As for any oversight, or fault committed unto this day, we forgive it, and the Crown tax also, which ye owe us, if there were any other tribute paid in jerusalem, it shall no more be paid. And look who are meet among you to be in our Court, let them be enrolled, and let there be peace betwixt us. Thus the yoke of the Heathen was taken away from Israel in the hundred and seventieth year. Then the people of Israel began to write in their Instruments and Contracts, In the first year of Simon the high Priest, the Governor and Leader of the jews. In those days Simon camped against Gaza, and besieged it round about, he made also an Engine of war, and set it by the City, and battered a certain Tower and took it. And they that were in the Engine, leapt into the City: whereupon there was a great uproar in the City, insomuch as the people of the City rend their clothes, and climbed upon the walls with their wives and children, and cried with a loud voice, beseeching Simon to grant them peace. And they said, Deal not with us according to our wickedness, but according to thy mercy. So Simon was appeased towards them, and fought no more against them, but put them out of the City, and cleansed the houses wherein the Idols were: and so entered into it with songs and thanksgiving: yea he put all uncleanness out of it, and placed such men there as would keep the Law, and made it stronger than it was before, and built therein a dwelling place for himself. They also of the Tower of jerusalem were kept so straight, that they could neither come forth, nor go into the Country, nor buy, nor sell: wherefore they were in great distress for want of victuals, and a great number of them perished through famine. Then cried they to Simon, beseeching him to be at one with them, which thing he granted them, and when he had put them out from thence, he cleansed the Tower from pollutions. And entered into it the three and twentieth day of the second month, in the hundred seventieth and one year with thanksgiving, and branches of Palm-trees, and with Harp and Cymbals, and with Vials and hymns and songs; because there was destroyed a great Enemy out of Israel. He ordained also that day should be kept every year with gladness. Moreover, the hill of the Temple that was by the Tower, he made stronger than it was, and there he dwelled himself with his company. He that will compare these and many other passages in this grave Writer with the ninth of the Prophet Zachariah, will perceive there may be good use of books not Canonical, for the right understanding of sacred Writings most Canonical; and that this book though Apocryphal, did not deserve to be left out in the new impressions or binding up of our Bibles. But to return unto the Prophecy of Zachariah.  
5. The manifest accomplishment of all the strange alterations foretold by him in this ninth Chapter, might well occasion the Jews to expect the coming of their promised King shortly after. And amongst all the signs which the times intercurrent between Alexander's conquest of Syria, Tyre, and Palestina, and our SAVIOUR'S death, did exhibit; this to me is most remarkable, that after so many terrible blasts of God's wrath thus overturning every Castle and strong hold about Jerusalem, sweeping most Cities of their ancient Inhabitants, as the whirl wind doth their streets of dust; the Temple of Jerusalem should all this while hold up her head: that Temple whose foundation, and superstructions had been accused of sedition, and rebellion, whose demolition had been solemnly vowed by such Tyrants as had power given them over the City and strong holds of Jerusalem, power to practise all kind and manner of savage cruelties on the Citizen's bodies, and to expose their carcases to the birds of the air. The consideration hereof doth plainly testify such a powerful arm and watchful eye of the Almighty to defend his house as in the eight verse of this Chapter is literally charactered. And I will encamp about my house because of the army, because of him that passeth by, and because of him that returneth: and no oppressor shall pass through them any more, for now have I seen with mine eyes. He that could rightly spell the several passages in the forementioned Authors, and the disposition of Divine providence overruling the projects of Alexander and his Successors, in all these wars according to the literal predictions of the Prophet Zachary, and put them right together, could not suspect that which josephus hath registered in the latter end of the eleventh Book of Jewish antiquities, concerning Alexander's reconciliation to jaddah the high Priest of the Jews, and the extraordinary favours done unto that Nation, which not long before had mightily offended him.  
6. But this prediction of God's special providence in protecting his Temple against such as pretended mischief unto it, was literally fulfilled, not only in the times of Alexander, but in the attempts made against it by Nicanor, Antiochus, and other of his professed enemies, though not fully to be accomplished until the glory of this Temple came. For the Temple built by Zerubbabel sub auspiciis of jeshue the high Priest, did continue and flourish until JESUS the high Priest of the Covenant, into whose body the life and spirit of it was to be transfused, did visit and cleanse it. It must be granted that Herod the great did take down the Temple built by Zerubbabel, not with purpose to demolish it, but to make it more glorious to humane view, than Solomon's Temple had been. And this friendly dissolution of it, with purpose to re-edify it, did prefigure the dissolution of Christ's body and soul, and their reunition in glory and immortality. And I could willingly yield my assent unto Rupertus and Ribera, that the first verses of this Chapter were truly fulfilled in that victorious passage of the Gospel throughout the Cities of Syria and Palestina before mentioned: So they or their followers would grant me, that the swift victory of the Gospel, was as well occasioned, as portended by Alexander's speedy conquest of these Regions. For God did plague these neighbour Nations before the desire of all Nations came unto this Temple, that Jerusalem might take warning by them, and repent her of her sins. I have cut off their Nations, their Towers are desolate: I made their streets waste, that none passeth by: their Cities are destroyed; so that there is no man, that there is none inhabitant. I said, Surely thou (jerusalem) wilt fear me, thou wilt receive instruction, so their dwelling should not be cut off, howsoever I punished them, but they rose early, and corrupted all their doings, Zephaniah 3.6, 7. That this Prophecy unto what other times soever it be concludently appliable, doth in special refer unto the calamities brought upon the Nations by Alexander the great, is apparent from Zephan. 2.4, 5. But to return to the literal meaning of the Prophecy now in handling: 
* zach. 9.9  that, as I take it, is, as if the Prophet had spoken in more words to Jerusalem thus. Thine eyes in the generations following shall behold the flourishing pride of sundry Nations, each endeavouring to overtop others in height of glory and temporal state; each driving to keep others under by humane policy and strength of war. And whilst the sight of their mutual Conquests shall possess thy thoughts, thou wilt be ready in the pride of thy heart to say, Jerusalem and Judah, one day shall have their turn, and in that day shall the sons of jacob, the seed of Abraham and David, be like the Monarches of Greece or Persia, far exalted above the Kings of other Nations: every one (able to bear Arms) glistering with his golden shield, and leading the Princes of the Heathen as prisoners bound in chains, and their Nobles in fetters of iron. The beauty, and riches of their costly Temples shall deck the Chariots of my children, which their captives shall draw in triumph. But thou shouldest remember that the promised Prince of peace, of benignity, and Justice, should not be sought amongst the tumultuous hosts of war. Or canst thou hope, that the desire of all Nations, should be thy Leader or General to destroy themselves. It is glory and honour enough for thee; glory and honour greater than the greatest Conqueror on earth could ever compass, that the King of kings, and Lord of lords, shall be anointed and proclaimed King upon the hill of Zion: that the inviolable decrees of everlasting peace shall be given to all the Nations under heaven from thy Courts. And therefore whilst horses and Chariots, or other glorious preparations of war shall present themselves to thy view, suffer them to pass as they come, and rest assured that thy King, of whose coming thou hast often been admonished by the Prophets, is not amongst them. The manner of his coming unto thee, so thou wilt mark it, bodes far better tidings to thee, and all the Nations beside, than can accompany the prosperous success of wars, or any victory which is stained with blood. What King of Judah or Israel did ever levy an Army though in just defence of their Country and people, on so fair terms, that no poor amongst them were pinched with taxes for the supply? What victory did they ever obtain so good cheap, that many of their children were not enforced to sit down with loss, many wounded, others maimed, and some always slain? But lo, now I bring thee unusual matter of exultation, and uncouth joy. For behold, thy King cometh unto thee (whensoever he cometh) attended with justice for his guide, and salvation for his train. He shall execute judgement without oppression, he shall save thee (so thou wilt be saved) without destroying any; able and ready to make thy lame to go, to give life to the dead without hazard either of life or limb to any who rests within thy territories. Such shall be the manner of his coming, and such his presence, that the silliest wretch amongst thy children, may think himself more happy, than any King of Judah or Israel which was before him; so he will conform himself to his garb or demeanour. For he cometh unto thee poor and lowly, riding upon an Ass, and a Colt, the fool of an Ass, to wean thee from the vain hopes of the Heathen, from which the Prophets have so often dehorted thy forefathers. Some put their trust in horses, some in chariots: but thy confidence must be in the Lord thy God, who will always be thy King to defend thee, to protect thee, and strengthen thee, through his weakness. For by the weakness of his appearance, he will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off, and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: His Dominion shall be from Sea to Sea, and from the River to the ends of the Earth, Zach. 9.10. The mark whereat the Prophet Zachariah in this place aims, is the very same with that which the Prophet Haggai his coaevall had set up a little before him; Neither of them (as I take it) conscious of the others predictions. Yet now be strong, O Zerubbabel, saith the Lord, and be strong O jeshua son of josedech the high Priest, and be strong all the people of the Land, saith the Lord, and work, (for I am with you, saith the Lord of Hosts) according to the word that I covenanted with you, when ye came out of Egypt, so my spirit remaineth among you: fear ye not. For thus saith the Lord of Hosts, Yet once, it is a little while, and I will shake the heavens, and the earth, and the sea, and the dry land. And I will shake all Nations, and the desire of all Nations shall come, and I will fill this house with glory, saith the Lord of Hosts. The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, saith the Lord of Hosts, The glory of this later house shall be greater than the former, saith the Lord of Hosts. And in this place will I give peace, saith the Lord of Hosts, Haggai 2.4, 5, etc. And the Prophet Zachariah had touched (before) on the same string, Chap 2. ver. 10. Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion: for lo, I come and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the Lord. And many Nations shall be joined to the Lord in that day, and shall be my people: and I will dwell in the midst of thee, and thou shalt know that the Lord of Hosts hath sent me unto thee, etc. Every branch of these forecited Prophecies were exactly fulfilled according to their plain literal sense in our Saviour's triumphant ingress into Jerusalem, and visitation of the second Temple, which by the bounty of Herod the great, and of many other Nations, was made (even to secular eyes) more 
* Vide Riberam in secundum Haggaei.  beautiful and glorious, than the Temple of Solomon was. The extraordinary contributions of several Nations, and Princes of the Roman Empire for the beautifying of this second Temple, and Herod's special care in the right employment of his own and others expenses upon this glorious work, might have taught the Jews, had they not been blind, to expect that the desire of all Nation, their promised King, was speedily to come unto it: yet not to come in such pomp, specially of war, as they expected, but in such humility and meekness of spirit, as the Prophet Zachariah in the ninth Chapter and tenth verse hath expressed. And so, it had been foretold in the building of Zerubbabels' Temple. Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the Lord of Hosts. Who art thou O great mountain? before Zerubbabel thou shalt become a plain, and he shall bring forth the head stone thereof with shoutings; crying, Grace, grace, unto it, Zach. 4.6.  
7. Some parts of the forecited Prophecy there be which were not to be fulfilled in the exquisite literal, but especially in the mystical or spiritual sense, until our Saviour's resurrection from the dead, or the accomplishment of his consecration to be King, Priest, and Temple to all the Israel of God. But of these by God's assistance in the Article of his Resurrection. That, which we are now to follow, is the fulfilling of the ninth verse of the Prophet Zachariah.   

CHAP. XVIII. The fulfilling of Zachariah his Prophecy, Cap. 9 ver. 9 recorded by all the Evangelists; but most fully and most punctually by S. Matthew.  
1 THere was not any sacred prediction from the first promise of the woman's seed until this time, more capable of being counterfeited by subtle pretenders to the Crown of David, than this particular was: and yet the fulfilling of it, so we would take all circumstances related by the Evangelists into serious consideration, or scan the true Grammatical sense of the Prophet's words aright, is as concludently punctual, as the accomplishing of any Prophecy beside; any passage in the 53. of Isaiah, or the 22. Psalm not excepted. God by his allseeing providence did prevent the reduction of that possibility or facility rather of imposture, whereunto this Prophecy above others was exposed, into act. For from the day of our Saviour's triumphant coming into Jerusalem, neither City nor people had any just occasion of such joy or exultation as now they expressed; scarce any quiet hour from this neglect of that great salvation, which now was proffered, until the destruction of the City and Temple, and the dispersion of the Jewish Nation throughout the world. Among many other circumstances related by the Evangelists, all worthy of our serious consideration, this one in my mind is most remarkable; that the Owners of the Ass and of the Colt, or the neighbourhood then present, should suffer them to be untied and carried away before they saw the Disciples warrant so to do, subscribed by their Master's hand. But warrant they had none save only Parroll. And if any ask why you do so, say, The Lord hath need of them, etc. Matt. 21.3. and Mark 11.3. Had not this Lord, whose authority they avouched been a greater King than his Father David; had not his power and authority, not over their goods only, but over their minds and consciences, been more than Monarchical: he could not so plainly, and so peremptorily have fore-prophecied de futuris contingentibus, or given his Disciples full assurance that the Owner of these juments should do, as he foretold they would do. This was an Oracle of the same God, of the same power, and authority, which informed David, that the men of Keilah would betray him into Saul's hands, if he did commit himself to their trust. The men of Keilah were prevented from doing that, which the Searcher of all hearts saw they were intended or bend to do. But these men did as the Lord foretold they should do, when they intended no such matter.  
2. If we compare the Evangelicall relations concerning the manner of our Saviour's coming to Jerusalem with the Prophet's predictions, they agree so well that Zachariah in this particular may share well with Isaiah in that title of the Evangelicall Prophet. Yet in the manner of the Evangelicall Stories concerning this point, there is some variation in words, but no contradiction or contrariety in sense. Go unto the village (saith S. Matthew) over against you. And strait you shall find an Ass tied and a Colt with her: lose them and bring them unto me, Matt. 21.2. S. Mark relateth the same story thus; Ye shall find a Colt tied, whereon never man sat, lose him and bring him, Mar. 11.2. See Luke 19.30. This variation of words hath raised a doubt amongst Interpreters as well of the Prophet as of the Evangelists, whether our Saviour did ride part of the way upon the Ass, and part upon the Colt, or all the way upon the Colt alone. Such as think our Saviour did ride only upon the Colt, labour to salve the truth of the Prophetical prediction and S. Matthews relation, how it was fulfilled by a Synecdoche usual, as they allege, in the Hebrew Dialect. To say the King of Zion should come riding upon an Ass, and upon the foal of an Ass, is a speech as justifiable in grammatical sense, as that jonas should be sleeping in the sides of the ship (so are the words of the Prophecy) whereas he could not sleep but in one side of the ship at one time. But as for Synecdoches, metonymies, or other like words of Art, grammar, or rhetoric, unless they be reduced to some logical or rational maxim, they edify no better in Divinity, than an Allegory or mystical interpretation, which is not grounded upon some historical relation of matter of fact, according to the plain literal or grammatical sense. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the only foundation of this Synecdoche here pretended, must be that logical rational maxim [ad veritatem indefinitae propositionis sufficit veritas untus particularis] Unto the truth of an indefinite proposition, the truth of one particular is sufficient. He that can prove Socrates to be a learned man, may without impeachment affirm, that man is learned, or men are learned: for the expression of any particulars indistinctly apprehended (or confusedly known) by the plural, is usual not in the sacred only, but in modern Languges, We English men do not commit any solecism when we say, the Noble Sidney was slain in the Low Countries: albeit in strict propriety of speech, he was slain but in one of those Countries or Provinces. A man that had been present, or had a distinct Geographical apprehension of the place where he was wounded, would have named it in the singular, as at Zutphen. So it was said, judges 12.7. That jeptha died and was buried in the Cities of Galead; that is, as our English very well renders it, in one of the Cities of Galead, but in which one of them, that, it seems the Author of that sacred history did not think worthy to be taken into particular consideration, being a point wherein posterity without loss might be altogether ignorant. And certainly it was ignorance of their own Dialect, or the spirit of slumber, which occasioned some 
* Nunquam cohabites impiis, eò quòd fieri non possit, ut non ex illorum conversatione & tu impius evadas. Quod si m●raris: Considera quid acciderit jiphtah Gileaditae, qui licet iustus esset, tamen quia habitavit in tribu Epharaijm, & ipse ab eis ad impietatem pertractus fuit. Cum enim videret quòd filios & filias suas idolo Baal comburerent: inde quoque & ipse abiit, similique modo filiam suam occidit. Item cum videret eos operam dare homicidiis, factus est & ipse homicida, abiens & interficiens 40. duo mill●a, ob quod facinus tanquam impius punitus, non meruit sepulturam, juxta id quod dicitu●; Et sepultus est in civitatibus Gilead, judic. 12. Qui locus Scripture docet, di p●sa sin●e ●ossa ejus in omnibus civitatibus Gilead. In quocunque enim loco videbant ejus ossa, sepe●●ebant ea. Ben. Syrae. Sentent. Mor. 6.  Jewish Writers to gather from this plural expression, that Iephtha's bones were scattered throughout all the Cities of Galead, or respectively entombed in many several places. The Evangelists use the like speech when they say: The malefactors which were crucified with our Saviour did revile him; whereas in such distinct apprehension as S. Luke had of this circumstance, one of the two only did revile him, or at least continue in this wicked mind; but the party reviling being not so distinctly known by name or by other circumstances (as Barrabas was) to the other Evangelists as unto S. Luke, they make their expressions in the plural. It is a general rule worthy of every Commentators actual consideration, that albeit every Evangelist relate nothing but the truth, yet no one of them relates the whole truth concerning our Saviour's life and actions, his death and passion: nor do they always observe the order and method of all circumstances, or occurrences, as will appear hereafter. The manner of our Saviour's coming to Jerusalem, might be, and no doubt was more distinctly represented to the Disciples senses, than it had been to the Prophet Zachariahs' spirit. For lumen propheticum erat aliqualiter aenigmaticum; the light of prophecy was not always distinctly evident, but indefinitely. And this might be the reason why the Prophet foretells that our Saviour should come riding both upon the Ass, and the Colt, when as 
* Mark & Luke, in the forecited places and S. joh. chap. 12. ver. 14.  three Evangelists mention only the Colt. And albeit S. Matthew mention both, yet it may be replied, that he historically in that passage avoucheth nothing of his own observation, but only relateth the Prophet's words which he saw now fulfilled, although our Saviour had rid only upon the Ass, or upon the Colt.  
3. But however the Prophet's words in themselves considered, or compared only with the historical narrations of their fulfilling as they are extant by S. Mark, S. Luke, and S. john, may admit the presumed Synecdoche, or plural expression in steed of the singular: ye● to my understanding or observation, none of these three Evangelists affirmative for Christ's riding upon the Colt or foal of the Ass, is so exclusive, as S. Matthews relation of the same story is inclusive. Nor is S. jeroms', Maldonat's, or others inference from the expression of these three Evangelists so concludent, that he road upon the Colt alone, as the inference which may be drawn from S. Matthews relation that he road upon both. Ye shall find an Ass tied, and a Colt with her: lose them and bring them unto me: And if any man shall say aught unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them, and straightway he will send them. He further adds, All this was done that is might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophet, saying, Tell ye the daughter, etc. All the other three Evangelists affirmatives will not infer this negative, that our Saviour did not ride upon the Ass at all. The historical, literal, or legal tenor of our Saviour's Commission directed or given to his two Disciples, whom he authorised to take them, imply that he had instant use of both, though more special, or permanent use of the Colt or foal. And the execution of this Commission necessarily infers as much; And the Disciples went, and did as jesus had commanded them. And brought the Ass and the Colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon: or as the Original hath it, upon them, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Matt. 21.6, 7. His dismission of the Dam upon some short trial, and longer use of the young one (as sundry of the Ancient with good Modern Interpreters observe) did admirably prefigure the instant rejection of the Jews, and the speedy admission of the Gentiles here promised. The Gentile though never accustomed to the yoke of Mosaical Laws, by whose rites the anointing and consecration, the coming of this great King was foreshadowed; did beyond expectation willingly submit himself unto the Gospel or Kingdom of heaven here on earth, as the young Colt which never had been backed before this time, did gently bear our Saviour, notwithstanding all the noise and cry which had been made by the promiscuous multitude. When as the Jew resembled or typified by the old Ass, which had been used to the yoke and saddle, became (as it is probable, she did) resty and skittish ready to kick, and spurn, and endeavouring to throw her Rider. And in type or prognostic of this mystical truth, it is not improbable, that our Saviour relinquished the Ass after he had assayed her, and took her Colt, and road on him into Jerusalem, though no man had sat upon him before.  
4. However, the fulfilling of the later part of this Prophecy, whether it was fulfilled by Synecdoche, or in the plain literal, and legal construction of the Prophet's words; was most clear and evident unto the Apostles and Disciples senses. But whether the former part of this Prophecy concerning the titles of this King was so clearly fulfilled, admitteth some question which cannot be determined without further discussion of the grammatical sense, or Prophetical importance of these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The best and choicest Translations vary much partly about the signification, partly about the pointing of these words. And no Interpreter which I have read (though I have consulted many) doth give me any tolerable satisfaction for their Emphatical or Prophetical importance, save one or two. I shall for this reason crave pardon with humble submission of my opinion unto the judgement of the learned, to proffer more variety of Translations and Interpretations, than I have been accustomed, unto the Readers choice. The vulgar Latin renders it thus; Ecce Rex tuus veniet tibi justus, & salvator: ipse pauper, etc. Behold, thy King cometh, a just King, and a Saviour: he is poor, etc. referring the Hebrew pronoun to pauper. junius accords in part with the vulgar, justus & salute praeditus: with whom our later English accords, save only that it refers the pronoun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto justus & salvator, he is just and having salvation: whereas junius altogether omits the expression of it, and the vulgar refers it to that which followeth, he is poor, he is lowly or meek. The Translator of the King's Bible refers it unto justus, justus ille & salvator, that Just and Saviour. Arius Montanus in his Interlineary refers the same pronoun unto the first clause, justus, etc. But whereas others read, Salvator ille, he hath it, Salvatus ipse: So doth our former English, he is just, and saved himself. But Cramerus the Lutheran, ut Hunnii discipulum agnoscas, chargeth that Translation which our former English follows (as his Master Hunnius had Calvin in many others) with Judaizing, at least for giving advantage to the captious Jew. For what argument can it be either of glory to a great King, or of joy unto Subjects, to foretell that he himself should be servatus or salvatus. This expression implies danger unto himself more directly, then saving health unto others: it supposeth peril or hazard antecedent, but doth not necessarily argue victory for the consequent. And yet the words in the Original are formally passive. But Cramerus with some others would out of the grammatical rudiments which they had learned, instruct us, that Verbs of this form or conjugation sometimes admit a signification merely active, otherwhiles neither merely active or passive, but reciprocal, as the Septuagint renders this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, saving himself. So doth our later English in the marginal note. Yet if the Original in this place might be (as Cramerus would have it) reciprocal, the basis of these two contrary significations should be the passive. And though both versions saving himself, and saved himself meet in one point; yet it had been more handsome to have said salvatus a seipso, then servans seipsum. And so Vatablus in his annotations upon this place tells us, it may be rendered. Vertere potes (saith he) & servetur, sub: a see, pro servans se. But Masius a man more skilful than the vulgar Grammarians, hath so far impeached these grammatical curiosities about the peculiar force or value of Conjugations, that it is not safe to put a matter of so great a consequence, as the fulfilling of a Prophecy concerning Christ, upon their verdict. And however many other Verbs in this form, to wit, in Niphal be rather equivalent to actives, then truly actives, neuterpassives, or reciprocals: yet their use though it were more frequent than it is, cannot prescribe against the proper and natural signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place, which for aught I find is always a mere passive. Wherefore to wave these grammatical curiosities, this observation (I take it) is more real, and of better use. That as vulgar Philosophers usually ascribe the variety of effects unto the agents or efficients, which ariseth wholly from the matter or Patient. So Grammarians often labour to salve the regular use, or importance of words from the diversity of forms or conjugations in their derivatives, or multiplicity of significations in the primitive, when as all the variation proceeds wholly from the nature of the subjects unto which one and the same word in one and the same form or signification is applied. As for instance, when Melchisedeck saith, Benedictus sit Deus Abrahami, & Benedictus sit Abraham a Deo, etc. Blessed be the God of Abraham, and blessed be Abraham of the most high God: the formal signification of the Latin [benedictus] and the English [blessed] is one and the same: but the use, or importance much differ, whilst applied unto God and unto Abraham. For Abraham or man to be blessed of God, or to have good words bestowed upon him by divine goodness, always importeth some real donative whereby he becometh more happy than he was before. For in God benedicere is benefacere, his good word or blessing is always operative of some real good to the party whom he blesseth. But for God to be blessed by man, or which is all one, for man to bless God, can import no more than a testification of his love and loyalty towards his Creator, that he no way envieth, but heartily congratulateth his eternal happiness, and could wish if it were possible, that it might be greater, or that he could express his loyalty and thankfulness better unto him, who is worthy of all praise, honour, glory, and blessedness, etc.  
5. In like case admitting the proper and formal signification of the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be always one and the same, 
* Zach. 9.9  and punctually rendered by Arias Montanus [salvatus;] yet the importance of it, whilst our Saviour is the Subject and we the Agents, will much differ from the importance of it, whilst we are the Subjects or passives, and he the Agent or Donor. Salvatus applied unto us, always implies some real salvation of soul or body or of both, and is as much in English as to be saved or redeemed from death and danger. The same word again applied to the King of Zion by his Subjects, or by us sinful men unto our Saviour and Redeemer, can imply no more than our congratulation of his dignity, or an acknowledging of his power to save, or our hearty prayers that he would bestow his saving health upon us. If Arias Montanus or other Translators of the Hebrew had been tied to have used no other than Ciceronian or Terentian phrases, it would perhaps have been a solecism, to have put the Latin salvatus for salutatus. But the Latin Translators oft times use a phrase or dialect more ancient by much then Cicero or Terence, whose language though (unto such as peruse few other Writers than Tully or Terence, or others a little before or after them) it may seem harsh; yet is it more expressive of the Hebrew (the ancientest of Languages) than the modern Latin, as salvatus in this place is more significant, and holdeth better analogy with the propriety of the Latin Tongue, then if he had said salutatus. He whosoever he be, to whom we say, sis salvus, or jubeo te salvere, may according to the fundamental rules of Grammar Latin, though not according to the custom of Critics or Refiners of that Language, be more properly said to be salvatus then salutatus. And I make no question, but Montanus and others did use it in this sense, as the most punctual expression of the Original, unless they had said salvandus. However, he is properly said to be salvatus or salutatus, who is either really saved from danger or unto whom we wish all health and safety. The passive juratus is in its formal signification one and the same, whilst it denotes the party, or person, or matter by which we swear or protest, or the parties which make oath, not only according to the Hebraisms, or Ellenismes used by most Translators, but in the elegancy of the Latin or Roman refined dialect. So an elegant 
* Statius.  Poet expresseth Amphiaraus his scrupulosity, or rather observance of decorum, in not swearing by Apollo, but old Chaos in that region of darkness; Testor inane Chaos: quid enim hic jurandus Apollo? If he had sworn by Apollo, Apollo had been juratus, yet not juratus in that sense as a Jury with us are said jurati, that is sworn men, or men which take an oath being administered unto them: for it must consist of swearing men, or of swearers: a new title given by some Roman regular Catholics, (as they call themselves) unto such Seculars of their own Profession, as will take the oath of Allegiance, or acknowledge it to be administered unto them by lawful Authority. And yet I take it, he that takes a voluntary oath may be truly said to be juratus, not only to swear, but to be sworn, and that not in vulgar or legal English only, but in pure refined Latin, as in that of Prudentius; 
Tentavit Geticos nuper delere Tyrannos,  
Italiam patrio veniens juratus ab Istro.  According to the custom of refined Latin it would perhaps be a solecism to say a man that dies of poison were venenatus, albeit venenatus be a proper Latin word, not obsolete, whilst it denotes arrows or bullets, but in our English we speak as properly when we say a man was poisoned, as when we say a poisoned bullet, a poisoned shaft. And so no question according to the true intent of the Prophet Zachariah our Saviour was as properly said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is saved, or saluificated, whilst the multitude cried Hosanna, or wished all health unto him; as we are said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or saved by him. And if Montanus had as fully expressed this whole phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he doth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 salvatus, little could have been added to it by way of Comment.  
6. But to take the full importance of the whole phrase, or matter signified according to the sublimity of the Prophetical dialect or expression; that, I take it is thus. However the promised King of Zion was to come unto her so lowly in person, so poorly attired, so meanly furnished of strength or visible pomp, as might cause her Inhabitants rather to deride, then respect him: yet even in this plight or garb, he should be entertained with general applause, with louder acclamations, than had been used at the Coronation of David or of his Successors. The ancient form of such solemn acclamations had been: Vivat Rex, etc. Let the King live: but to our Saviour the multitude cry, Hosanna, Hosanna to the Son of David. And this peculiar kind of salutation or acclamation, is punctually foretold by the Prophet, and grammatically expressed by the Hebrew. For Hosanna, whether we take it as precatory or congratulatory, is an active which doth as exactly fit the passive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as ego saluto te, doth tu es salutatus a me, I salute you, and you are saluted of me. If Arias Montanus had said salvatus ille for salvatus ipse, the Translation had been a more full expression of the Majestic original phrase. The full expression or Prophetical importance of the whole phrase (if I mistake not the emphasis of the Hebrew pronoun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 especially when it comes in the 
* Vide Hebraicum contextum Prov. 19.21  rear or after the Substantive to which it refers) will amount to this height and higher, Ecce Rex tuus venit, Rex ille justus, etc. Et pro justis celebrandus. And I know not whether Castellio his version of this place do not imply as much, Ecce Rex tuus venit, qui est justus & victoriosus. It had been an ancient tradition or common prenotion amongst this people before the Prophet Zachariah was borne, that their King or Christ should be the Son of David, and David's Lord; A Priest after the order of Melchisedeck, who was King of Salem by office, and by title King of righteousness, or the righteous King. Now the Prophet forewarns this people, that the glorious King, whom Melchisedeck did by office and title foreshadow; should come to Zion and Jerusalem, not attended with horses and chariots, but as became the righteous and pacifical King (for so much his other title 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports) riding on an Ass, and the foal of an Ass, and have both his titles proclaimed though not by express words, yet by hieroglyphic or sacred heraldry. His lowliness, which is the only ground of pacifical disposition, was lively represented by the manner of his approach, riding upon the foal of an Ass, which in an instant had learned gentle conditions from his lowliness and peaceable temper, who first did sit upon him. His righteousness was really proclaimed by the congratulations, and presents of the people; Much people (saith S. john) that were come to the Feast, when they heard that jesus was coming to jerusalem, took branches of Palm trees, and went forth to meet him, (as yet not hearing whether he came on foot, or horseback) and cried Hosanna, blessed is the King of Israel, that cometh in the Name of the Lord, john 12.12, etc. And S. Mark telleth us; Many spread their garments in the way: and others cut down branches of the trees, And strawed them in the way. And they that went before, and they that followed, cried saying, Hosanna, blessed is he that cometh in the Name of the Lord. Blessed be the Kingdom of our Father David, that cometh in the Name of the Lord, Hosanna, in the Highest, Mark 11.8, 9, 10. Matt. 21.8, 9 Now the Palm tree was as well in profane, as in sacred Heraldry, as true an Emblem or hieroglyphic of righteousness or Justice, as the sword is of Authority, and power. Hence saith the Psalmist, justus ut palma florebit, the just shall flourish like a Palm tree. Why rather like this tree, 
Quòd verò ponderibus resistat & in adversum incurvetur, facere idem judices debent, atque reluctabundi seductores pellacesque omnes detrectare, neque mulieribus, neque vio●etiae ced re. Pierius in initio sui lib. I.. de hierog. & inquit Aristot. Si super arboris ejus lignum magnum quantumlibet pondus imponas, Palma minime deorsum cedit, nec infra flectitur, sed adversus pondus ●esu●git & sursum nititur in adversum fornicata  than any other? then like the Oak or Cedar? Pierius (to my remembrance) giveth us the ground, or reason of this sacred allusion: and it is this; For that the Palm three the more it is wronged, or pressed down, the less it is diverted from its natural course, but groweth higher, and spreadeth the more. And was for this reason, a fit Emblem of this righteous and victorious King, whose incomparable exaltation did grow from his unparallelled humiliation and depression.   

CHAP. XIX. Of the meaning or importance of [Hosanna to the Son of David.]  
1 THe diversity of Interpretations of many principal passages in Scripture, is for the most part as great, as the multiplicity or variety of importances, or significations of some one single word, in some large sentences and passages. The best is, that this word Hosanna, hath but two importances, which can breed any matter of difference, between Interpreters of Scripture, or any variety of Interpretations. Yet discord between Interpreters usually arise, without any difference, only from variety of significations in words more than compatible; yea most consonant between themselves; As some there be, who would have this word Hosanna, to be merely precatory or optative: as much as, The Lord send help or salvation; Others would have it to be merely (or especially) congratulatory: Whereas both opinions agree very well, though their several Authors, or Abetters have censured each other. That Hosanna in the intention of the Multitude, which carried or spread branches of Palms or Olives in the way, should (at least in the direct sense) be merely congratulatory, is probably alleged from the whole phrase, or structure of speech: for they did not cry, as the blind man in the way did, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Mark 10.48.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. O Son of David, have mercy upon me or save me: but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hosanna to the Son of David in the Highest. Both clauses import matter only of congratulation. Caninius first, & after him Beza amongst others, have out of their rabbinical learning well observed, that the branches of Palms, of Olives, or other trees which this people used in their solemn Feast of Tabernacles, or the like, in which they used the comprecations of the 118. Psalm, came by custom and concurrence of time to be called Hosanna; by such a manner or trope of speech, as the English and French do call the buds or flowers of Hawthorne, May. According to this importance, or signification of the word [Hosanna,] the meaning of the multitude or Disciples was, that they did bear these boughs, and use these congratulations in honour of the Son of David, now coming unto them in triumph.  
2. Some go a great way further, and would persuade us that the people, or multitude being sorry that they had so slighted our Saviour's presence, or invitations in the last feast of Tabernacles (john 7.) to which this solemnity of carrying branches was (at the least) originally proper, did seek to redeem their former neglect, and regain the opportunity of tendering their allegiance unto him, not as he was the Son of David only, but as the God of their Fathers, who had brought them out of Egypt into the land of Canaan, and redeemed them from Babilonish captivity, to honour him with solemn feasts, and other services in Jerusalem. But that the multitude, (either all, or most, or any) should have a more distinct explicit apprehension of his Deity, or of the great mystery of salvation which he was now to accomplish, than his Disciples and Followers had, is very improbable. That his very Disciples (though Actors in this business) had no such distinct apprehension of the great mystery imported by this solemnity, is unquestionable. For S. john, upon a distinct review of all the circumstances of this Solemnity, whether congratulatory, or precatory or both, tells us These things understood not his Disciples at the first, but when jesus was glorified, then remembered they that these things were written of him, and that they had done these things unto him, Chap. 12.16.  
3. Amongst the things which are written of him, this was one, that he should be acknowledged and publicly proclaimed for the Son of David, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the often promised and long expected Messias, and Redeemer of the whole world. And all this was acknowledged and proclaimed by the multitude, as well by the form of prayer which they used, as by their real congratulations. First that the word Hosanna was uttered by way of prayer by the multitude, is clear from that passage in the Psalmist, whereunto the word Hosanna with the matters of fact, which did accompany it, do refer. For so it is agreed upon by all sides, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psalm 118.25. is a solemn and formal prayer; Save now I beseech thee, O Lord: O Lord, I beseech thee, send now prosperity: to wit, unto the Son of David, and unto his people by him. And thus far at least, the apprehension or intention of the people, when they cried Hosanna to the Son of David, did reach. For they thought this was the day, which the Lord had made; and did therefore rejoice and were glad in it, as in the day of their long expected redemption from the hands of all their enemies. As they heard these things, he added, and spoke a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear, Luke 19.11. This prenotion, that the kingdom of God was now to be manifested did facilitate the assent or obedience as well of the owner of the Ass, and the Colt, whereon he road to Jerusalem, as of the Master of the family wherein he did eat his Passeover, unto the intimation or direction of our great Lord and Master. The one story concerning their present obedience, we have Matt. 21.5. The other more at large, Luke 22.7. to the 14. Nor did they err in taking this to be the day of their Redemption; but in the confused notion of the enemies, from which they were to be redeemed. They expected only a deliverance from the tyranny of the Romans, and other hostile Nations, over whom they hoped the Son of David should exercise royal and temporal Jurisdiction. And it is no wonder, if the multitude, whether of inhabitants of Jerusalem or strangers which went out to meet him and congratulate his approach, did apprehend no more than thus, seeing the two Disciples which accompanied him toward Emaus upon the day of his resurrection, had no better a notion of the redemption promised then this, though even this notion did fleet or vanish, after they had seen him put to death: We trusted that it had been he, which should have redeemed Israel, Luke 24.21. This argues, that their former trust was for the present extinguished, till he by opening the Scriptures unto them, did revive and kindle it.  
4. Again, when they cry Hosanna to the Son of David in the Highest, not from heaven: this no way argues that their salutation should not be formally precatory: especially if Maldonats' observation be without exception, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be equivalent (according to the Hebrew dialect) unto ab excelsis from the highest Heavens. However taking the word [Hosanna] as in its primary signification, forasmuch, as the Lord send help, or grant salvation; and the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the native Greek, in the highest: the natural meaning, or literal expression of the congratulation will amount to this, that God would be pleased to ratify their petitions for prosperity of the Son of David in heaven, not doubting but that God so doing, his blessings upon him and them might be established here on earth. For so they further express themselves in the Psalmists words, Blessed be the King that cometh in the Name of the Lord: Peace in heaven, and glory in the highest, Luk. 19.38. But though Maldonat with other judicious Commentators do clearly evince this form of congratulation, Hosanna, to be precatory: yet was Maldonat more to blame, than such as think it only to have been congratulatory, when he avoucheth that this solemnity of carrying branches of Palms and Olives, had no special reference to the feast of Tabernacles: and more to blame, when he thinketh that the feast of Tabernacles had nihil commune cum Christo, no type or figure of this solemnity, or that this solemnity did include no Emblematical acknowledgement or testification, that CHRIST JESUS was as truly the Son of God, as of David: as well David's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord, as his Son.   

CHAP. XX. At what time and upon what occasions the 118. Psalm was composed; And at what solemn Feast especially used.  
1 FOr giving such, as it may concern, more full satisfaction in the points late handled: and for setting forth the sweet harmony, betwixt the Prophetical song and the people's acclamations and cry at this great and last solemn Festivity: the best method I can conjecture, would be to make diligent enquiry at what time, and upon what occasions the 118. Psalm was first written, and at what solemn Feast it was principally used. Mollerus a man of commendable pains in this particular search, and one who had read very many, telleth us that the major part of learned Interpreters whom he had perused, are of opinion that this Psalm was composed by David himself, upon occasions of his victory over his enemies, and freedom from disturbance or danger from the house of Saul, upon the death of Ishbosheth. And for strengthening this conjecture, he referreth us to the 2. of Sam. 6. And Coppen, a most Ingenuous and exact Examiner of such Commentators, as he had read, seemeth rather to incline this way, then to the contrary. The main stream of Interpreters would carry me with them, did not the nature of the Subject now in hand, permit a peculiar liberty of dissenting from a major part, though otherwise most learned Interpreters. And having conferred this 118. Psalm as well for circumstances, as for matter and for the character of speech or language with the history of the 2. of Sam. 6. as with the 18. and 68 Psalm, which, it is evident, were both written at the time and upon the occasions, which Mollerus conjectures this 118. Psalm was composed; I find no congruity either of matter or style betwixt them. Many passages in the 118. Psalm there are, which literally refer unto the gates or building of the house of the Lord, not to the Ark or Tabernacle, which were only extant in the time of David. For he lived not to see the chief corner stone, whether the highest, or the lowest of the Temple laid or placed; much less to see the gates, at which the righteous was to enter, set up. Besides, although this 118. Psalm was written by the same Spirit, by which David wrote; yet the language or character of this Psalm doth argue, it was composed in a different age from that, wherein David lived and wrote the 18. and 68 Psalms. And as far, as my observation leads me, in the same age and upon the same occasions, that the Psalms of degrees (all save one) were first composed and first used. And those Psalms (it is to me clear) were written after this people's return from Babylon, and, as is most probable, after the death of Zerubbabel, when the glory of the house of David, was for a time eclipsed by the splendour of the house of Aaron. And certainly, if this Psalm had been composed by David himself, or any of his Successors, or other Prophet in this Nation, while the first Temple was standing, there would have been thanksgiving in special expressed for the house of David, as well as for the house of Aaron. But the form of thanksgiving in the first place runs thus; O give thanks unto the Lord, for he is good; because his mercy endureth for ever. Let Israel now say, that his mercy endureth for ever. Let the house of Aaron now say, that his mercy endureth for ever. Let them now that fear the Lord say, that his mercy endureth for ever, Psal. 118.1, 2, 3, 4. Nor is there any express mention in special, of the house of David, or of his Successors unto the end of this Psalm: though many passages in the same Psalm cannot according to the true literal sense be applied to any Person or Community, save only to the Son of David, who was also David's Lord. The thanksgivings are uttered or delivered not in the name of any one Person or Family, but in the name and behalf of the whole Community, as well Priest as people. And yet the same thanksgivings are punctually directed unto God the Lord: or as the multitude, not by distinct apprehension of their meaning, but by the disposition of Gods divine providence expound the Psalm, unto GOD Incarnate, the Son of David.  
2. But as I am not prone to be carried with a general stream of Interpreters, against probable discoveries of a safer course: so am I unwilling to be singular, or to venture upon narrow passages without a Pilot. And a more skilful Pilot in this case, I could not have wished for, then Theodoret, an ancient Father of great judgement, and well deserving the style of Theodoret the wise or discreet. Now this grave and most discreet Author in this particular argument, whereof we treat; at what times, and upon what occasions the Psalms were written: conducts me thus far, that this 118. Psalm was written after Israel returned from Babylon. Though the other stream which Mollerus, and others follow, be much broader; yet this narrow cut, which after Theodoret I take, will appear (I hope) upon due sounding deeper and safer. Theodoret's judgement is thus;  

Et hic etiam hymnus est ab iis qui salutem a Deo consecuti sunt, allatus. judaei namque post reversionem, cum omnes finitimi in unum coacti essent, atque etiam gentes alias & barbaras conflassent; deinde cum plagis a Deo illatis, profligati essent, secundum joelis & Ezechielis & Micheae & Zachariae vaticinationem, hunc hymnum de gratiarum actione Deo afferunt.   

This is one of those hymns which were composed by such as obtained salvation or deliverance. The Jews (after their return from Babylonish captivity) when all bordering Nations with other barbarous people at their instigation were gathered against them, after they saw them plagued by God, and their malicious projects defeated according to the Prophecies of joel Ezechiel or of Zachariah offer up this Psalm of thanksgiving unto the Lord.   
3. However S. jerom, Mollerus, and others do for particular circumstances of the Composers, time, and occasions of this Psalm, follow another current, than Theodoret did; yet we all meet in the main or Ocean, whereinto this Psalm and others do exonerate themselves. For thus Mollerus concludeth his Preface to this Psalm:  

There is no question but that this Psalm (as most others of David's) had more special reference to Christ, whose Person he did represent, or typify, and whose portraiture he sought to set forth; then unto David himself. And hence it was that as often as this Psalm was recited in the Jewish Synagogues, it was always accommodated to the Messias, and reckoned amongst the solemn prayers and supplications for his coming unto them, as Hierom testifieth. Now seeing by its frequent recital, it was so well known to the vulgar sort, hence was that gratulatory versicle, or song [Hosanna] taken up by them, at that time wherein Christ was entertained by the multitude, according to the state or custom of their King or expected Messias   

Nec dubium est, Davidem in hoc Psalmo, ut in plerisque aliis, magis ad Christum, cujus personam gerebat, quam adse respexisse, ejusque in se imaginem exprimere voluisse. Atque inde factum est, ut quoties post illud tempus hic Psalmus in Synagoga a judaeis logeretur, ad Messiam fuerit accommodatus, & inter eas preces, quibus adventus ejus petebatur, relatus; ut testatur Hieronymus. Cumque ex assiduâ repetitione popule esset notissimus, hinc sumptus est versiculus in pompâ illa, in qua Christus tanquam Rex hujus populi f●iit exceptus, ut scribitur Matth. 21. Mollerus in argumento hujus Psalmi.   
4 Now seeing it is confessed by all, aswell expressly by the Jews, as by matter of fact related by the Evangelists, that this 118. Psalm did contain a peculiar prophecy or testimony prophetically typical of the promised Messias his coming to Jerusalem, to ratify or fulfil whatsoever was foretold or portended by this Solemnity, wherein it was first used: no time, or season can with greater probability be allotted, no occasion more fitly pretended for the first composing of it, than the extraordinary joy of the whole Community of the people of Juda and Israel, aswell Priests as Laics, upon the erection or finishing of the second Temple. For within the compass of this season, Haggai had prophesied that the desire of all Nations should come unto that Temple. The precise time according to exact calculation of his coming to Jerusalem, and of his death there, had been notified by Daniel not long before. The sacred history of the times, wherein Zerubbabel, jeshua, Haggai, and Zechariah lived, bear plentiful record, that the people of Judah, Benjamin, or Israel had no just cause, or great occasions of rejoicing according to that scale of joy and gladness, which is charactered in the 118. Psalm, immediately after their return from Babylonish captivity. For both neighbour Nations, and the principal Officers of this side Euphrates, of those kings unto whom they were subject, did partly by violence, partly by malicious suggestions for diverse years prohibit the erection of the Temple, and the re-edifying of Jerusalem. More fear, than joy did possess this great people, when they begun to erect the Altar of the Lord, as may appear from Ezra 3.4. And that was diverse months before the foundation of the Temple was laid: at which time indeed there was much joy, especially amongst the people, and younger sort; Yet joy mixed with many tears of the Ancient, especially Priests and Levites, which had seen the former Temple, (at least the foundation of it.) Ezra 3.12, 13.  
5 However, it is probable that this 118. Psalms was in part composed upon the sight or view of the first foundation of the second Temple. For Ezra tells us that the Priests and Levites, after the ordinance of David King of Israel, sung together by course in praising and giving thanks unto the Lord, because he is good, and his mercy endureth for ever toward Israel. And in this form of thanksgiving the 118. Psalm begins and ends, O give thanks unto the Lord, for his mercy endureth for ever. Let Israel now say that his mercy endureth for ever. ver. 1. O give thanks unto the Lord, for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever. ver. 29. I am not forgetful, nor can the Reader be ignorant that there is another Psalm, videlicet 136. in which this form of praise is more perpetual, as being the close or fall of every verse. But that Psalm (as I have many inducements to conceive) was composed long before the foundation of the Temple was laid. But other Psalms of thanksgiving there are beside these two, which were composed upon special occasions, and afterwards continued in their solemn feasts with further additions, and amplifications, as the like occasions of public joy did minister. For later Prophets, or men otherwise inspired by the holy Ghost for that purpose, to intersert, or add more plain or fuller expressions of david's, or former Prophet's intent or meaning in their form of thanksgiving, or to paraphrase upon them, was never unlawful, although they had added the same curse, to such as should add unto, or diminish their writings, which is annexed unto the law of Moses, and the book of the Revelations. For no addition is forbidden, but such as includeth a vitiation of the text, or such as pretendeth Divine authority, when it hath it not.  
6 But however this 118. Psalm or most part of it might be begun upon the occasions forementioned by Ezra; yet some passages in it there are, which in particular refer unto some one of the three great and anniversary solemnities, as that; This is the day which the Lord hath made, we will rejoice and be glad in it. Save now O Lord I beseech thee, etc. ver. 24, 25. Now after the foundation of the Temple was laid, there was no solemn feast, in which this people's expression of joy and thanksgiving was so remarkable or so peremptorily required, as in that feast of Tabernacles or booths recorded by Nehemiah, cap. 8. A feast of Tabernacles there was some few months after the foundation of the Temple was laid by Zerubbabel and jeshua the son of jozadeck, recorded by Ezra 3.4. etc. But that feast of Tabernacles was solemnised▪ secundùm quid, only in respect of the peculiar daily sacrifices, which the Law in that month appointed to be offered There is no mention in Ezra of their dwelling in booths, either in their public streets, upon their public houses, or in the Courts of the Lords house, which was not at that time builded. This part of that great solemnity had not been observed from the days of joshua the son of Nun, until Nehemiah had put his peremptory commission for re-edifying Jerusalem, in execution. Nehemiah which is the Tirshatha, and Ezra the Priest the Scribe, and the Levites that taught the people, said unto all the people; This day is holy unto the Lord your God, mourn not, nor weep: for all the people wept, when they heard the words of the Law, etc. And they found written in the Law, which the Lord had commanded by Moses, that the Children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month. And that they should publish, and proclaim in all their Cities, and in jerusalem, saying, Go forth unto the Mount, and fetch Olive branches and pine branches and myrtle branches and Palm branches and branches of thick trees to make booths. So the people went forth, and brought them, and made themselves booths, every one upon the roof of his house, and in their courts, and in the courts of the house of God, and in the street of the water gate of Ephraim. And all the congregation of them that were come again out of the captivity, made booths, and sat under the booths: for since the days of joshua the son of Nun, unto that day, had not the Children of Israel done so, and there was very great gladness. Also day by day from the first day unto the last day, he read in the book of the law of God. And they kept the feast seven days, and on the eighth day was a solemn Assembly according unto the manner, Nehem. 8.9, 10, 11. etc. This great day of the feast was that anniversary solemnity, wherein our Lord and Saviour, after the revolution of many years (how many I leave to the calculation of Chronologers;) did make that solemn proclamation unto the people assembled at the feast of Tabernacles, john 7.37. In the last day, that great day of the feast, jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, (as the Scriptures have said) out of his belly shall flow rivers of running water. But this spoke he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him, should receive. For the holy Ghost was not yet given, because that jesus was not yet glorified.  
7 It is very observable, which is recorded by Saint john, Chap. 7.14. That about the midst of the feast, jesus went into the temple and taught: and so taught, that the jews marveiled, saying, How knoweth this man letters seeing he never learned? But to my apprehension, it is more observable, and wanteth not a mystery (though for the present I cannot sound it;) why our Saviour should begin to teach in the Temple in the midst of the feast, not from the first day until the last, as Ezra the Priest and Scribe had done in the same feast mentioned by Nehemiah. His friends and kinsfolks had advised him to be at Jerusalem to show himself at the beginning of the feast: Now the jews feast of Tabernacles was at hand. His Brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go unto judea, that thy Disciples also may see the works which thou dost. For there is no man that doth any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly·s If thou dost these things, show thyself unto the world, etc. Then jesus said unto them, My time is not yet come; but your time is always ready, etc. Go ye up unto this feast. I go not up yet unto this feast, for my time is not yet come. When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. Howbeit after his teaching three or four days at the least, and his solemn invitation of all men to come unto him in the great day of the feast; he was not publicly acknowledged for the Christ; but so acknowledged by some, and with demur or contradiction of others, Then the jews sought him at the feast, and said, Where is he? And there was much murmuring among the people concerning him. For some said, he is a good man; Others said, nay, but he deceiveth the people. Howbeit no man spoke openly of him, for fear of the jews. John 7.11, 12, etc. But this verdict of him, was given up before he taught in the Temple. After which time their suffrages varied, not only one from another, but from themselves. For upon that part of doctrine which he delivered from the 15. verse to the 25. Some of them of jerusalem said, Is not this he whom they seek to kill? But lo, he speaketh boldly, and they say nothing unto him: Do the Rulers know indeed, that this is the very Christ? Howbeit we know this man, whence he is: But when Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence he is. Then cried jesus in the Temple, as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and whence I am, and I am not come of myself, but he that hath sent me is true, whom ye know not. But I know him: for I am from him, and he hath sent me. Then they sought to take him: but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come. And many of the people believed on him, and said, when Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these, which this man hath done? john 7.25. etc. But in the great and last day of the feast, many of the people, after they had heard his solemn invitation, said, Of a truth, this is the Prophet: Others said, this is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee? Hath not the Scripture said, that Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethleem, where David was? So there was a division among the people, because of him. And some of them would have taken him, but no man laid hands on him. ver. 40, 41, etc. For when the chief Priests, and Pharisees asked of the Officers, whom they had employed upon the demur or debatement of the people to attach him, verse 32. Why have ye not brought him? The only answer they could get, was this, Never man spoke like this man. verse 45 46.  
8 But however, in this great feast he suffered such contradictions of sinful men, open contradictions one to another, and secret contradictions in most individuals to their own consciences. For as he had told them john 7.28. That they both knew him, and whence he was, and that he came not of himself. Albeit their passions would not permit them so to acknowledge him. Yet his entertainment for the present, was not so harsh and churlish (at the people's hand especially) as it was at the next solemn feast, in which he again did publish his Commission, to wit, in the feast of the Encoenia or dedication of the Temple, immediately ensuing the forementioned feast of Tabernacles. There was a division (saith Saint john) again among the jews for these sayings. And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad: why hear ye him? Others said, these are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind? And it was at jerusalem the feast of the Dedication, and it was winter. And jesus walked in the Temple in Solomon's porch. Then came the jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed me not. The works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me, etc. joh: 10.19, 20, etc. Upon this avouchment, that God was his Father, and that he and his Father were one, the Jews took up stones to stone him. jesus answered them, many good works have I showed from my Father: for which of these works do ye stone me? The jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy, and because that thou being a man makest thyself a God. But he escaped out of their hands, and went away again beyond jordan, into the place, where john at first baptised. And there he abode, and many resorted unto him, and said, john did no miracle, but all things that john spoke of this man were true. And many believed on him there. verse 39, 40, etc. more than had done at Jerusalem, unto which he did not come, till the great and last feast of the Passeover, albeit he were invited, or advised to repair thither, rather than to remain in Herod's dominions. Luke 13.31. Then came certain Pharisees (Inhabitants of Jerusalem, or their Complices) saying unto him, Get thee out, and depart hence for Herod will kill thee. And he said unto them, Go, tell that fox, etc. It cannot be, that a Prophet perish out of jerusalem, etc. verse 33. He finally resolves them, Ye, (to wit) of jerusalem, Behold your house is left unto you desolate: Ye shall not see me until the time come, when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the Name of the Lord. verse 35. And after this manner he was saluted by Men, Women, and Children: by all sorts (unless it were the Scribes and Pharisees) at his coming to this great and last Passeover, whereof I now treat. However their crucifying of him some few days after, whom they acknowledged for their Lord and Messias, did both deserve and portend that utter desolation of City and Temple, which he had foretold in the words immediately going before, O jerusalem, jerusalem, which killest the Prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thee, etc. Behold your house is left unto you desolate. But of the full importance of these words, I have delivered my opinion elsewhere more at large. That Christ after the feast of the Dedication mentioned john 10, did remain where john at first baptised, until some few days before the Passeover; is clear from that remarkable story concerning the raising of Lazarus from death. john 11.1. etc. When he had heard therefore that he was sick, he abode two days still in the same place, where he was. Then after that, saith he to his Disciples, Let us go into judea again. His Disciples say unto him, Master, the jews of late sought to stone thee; and goest thou thither again? jesus answered, Are there not twelve hours in the day? If any man walk in the day, he stumbleth not; because he seeth the light of the world. But if a man walk in the night, he stumbleth, because there is no light in him.  
9 It is observable, that immediately before, or in the time of these great and solemn feasts, his fame was published for some rare miracle. When Christ cometh (saith the people) in the feast of Tabernacles, will he do more miracles than this man hath done? john 7.31. The late miracle which occasioned the contradiction or variety of opinion at the feast of the Dedication of the Temple, was the restoring of one, who had been blind from his birth, to perfect sight. You have the story at large john 9 The last and greatest miracle, which he did about Jerusalem immediately before this last Passeover, and that which occasioned him to be proclaimed the Christ, not by himself as at other times, nor by his Disciples only, but by the unanimous consent of that mighty Assembly, besides the Priests and Scribes and Pharisees, was the raising of Lazarus to life after he had been four days dead. And thus far I can assent unto some modern Writers, that the Multitude then assembled, especially the strangers did purposely seek at this feast to redeem their former contempt or sleight esteem of him at the Feast of Tabernacles and Dedication before mentioned, by their forwardness to entertain and salute him, as their glorious King, the long expected Son of David.   

CHAP. XXI. That the Messias was to be proclaimed King of Zion at some one or other of their great and solemn Feasts, was a prenotion or received opinion amongst the jews.  
1 FRom the Evangelicall history of our Saviour's appearances at the solemn Feast celebrated at Jerusalem, and from the debates between his Auditors, especially in the last year of his presence there; the Intelligent Reader will easily collect without further advertisement, that it was a common prenotion or received opinion amongst this people, that their expected Messias should be manifested or acknowledged at some one or other of their anniversary Feasts; of which the Passeover was the principal, or (as Chrysostome with some other of the Ancients instile it) Metropolitan. But in which of these three solemn Feasts, the Son of David should be proclaimed King, and made (by God) their Lord, and Christ, was if not to all, yet to most of them, even to his followers (whether Apostles or Disciples) uncertain, until the event did determine the doubt unto such of them, as God did grant eyes to see, and ears to hear, and hearts to understand the mysteries of salvation; respectively prefigured by these three solemn Feasts, and really accomplished in this great Feast of the Passeover, wherein they crucified JESUS of NAZARETH (their late proclaimed King,) and in the Feast of Pentecost next following. The full intent, and purport of this last observation, as well the affirmative, as negative part, to wit, [the certainty that he was to be proclaimed King at some one of those Feasts: and the uncertainty at which of those he should be so proclaimed] is included in those words of S. john before cited to another purpose; These things understood not his Disciples at the first; that is, they did not lay them to heart, nor rightly apprehend the melodious harmony between the solemnity of that time, and the events fore-pictured by that, and other solemnities. But when jesus was glorified, then remembered they that these things were written of him, and that they had done these things unto him, Chap. 12.16. that is, they first considered, and then remembered, that his glorious exaltation was foretold, typically prefigured by that solemn Feast, and really acknowledged by the multitude.  
2. That the solemnity of dwelling in booths, used in the Feast of Tabernacles, or the exigence or occasion in whose remembrance that Feast was instituted (which was their special relief from extremity of heat and thirst in the wilderness;) had special reference to the Feast of Pentecost: is too apparent to be contradicted by any good Christian, from that of our Saviour, john 7.37. In the last day, that great day of the Feast (to wit, of the Tabernacles) jesus stood, and cried, saying, If any man thirst, etc. This spoke he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive. For the holy Ghost was not yet given, because that jesus was not yet glorified. But shortly after his glorification, the Spirit of God, the true water of life, was poured out more plentifully upon all flesh capable of it, than water had been unto Israel in their extremity of thirst in the wilderness; or then that water, which was used (I know not whether by precept or tradition) to be poured out upon the Altar in the Feast of Tabernacles, especially upon that great day of the Feast, wherein our Saviour spoke these words. But in what place of Scripture it was foresignified, that waters should flow out of their bellies that believed on him, is not pertinent to our present purpose. God's special protection, not of Israel only according to the flesh, but of his universal Church from spiritual enemies, under the shadow of his wings, was more peculiar than the Palm trees or Willows of the brook, or booths made of them, could afford to the sons of jacob, against the parching heat of the Sun, after our Saviour was glorified. As for those words forecited, Levit. 23.43. I made the children of Israel to dwell in booths, when I brought them out of the land of Egypt: they refer (if good Writers be not mistaken) to Exod. 12.37. The children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth; that is a place of booths, or Tabernacles, or as to a Northern Borderer might be more fully expressed, to a place of Shields or Summer houses. Yet (if I be not mistaken) the forecited place of Leviticus concerning the occasion of instituting the Feast of Tabernacles or Shields hath reference also to that of Exod. 15.27. And they came to Elim, where were twelve wells of water, and seventy Palm trees, and they encamped there by the waters.  
3. Out of the former discussion it is apparent, that the feast of Tabernacles had reference unto the feast of Pentecost, and that the commandments of carnal rejoicing in that feast, were spiritually accomplished in the Pentecost next following our Saviour's passion. But what special reference had the same feast of Tabernacles unto the solemnity of the Passeover? Surely the same, which other solemn feasts of the Seventh month (which was a month of legal solemnities,) had. Now that the feast of Atonement or Expiation, which was the tenth day of that month, (next after the feast of Trumpets, and some four days before the feast of Tabernacles) was punctually accomplished at the feast of the Passeover, wherein our Saviour was crucified; Maldonat himself, the most rigid Opposer of the harmony betwixt these solemnities, and the last feast of this Passeover, would not have denied, if this interrogatory had been put unto him. It is true, that the mysteries foreshadowed at this Feast by the escape Goat, by the washing of the high Priest, and by some other Ceremonies, were fulfilled in die suo, that is upon the tenth day of the seventh month, in which our Saviour (as with the consent of best modern Writers I have elsewhere observed 
* See Christ's answer to john. ) was baptised. But for the mysteries prefigured by the Sacrifices, whose blood was brought into the Sanctuary upon the tenth of the seventh month; these were not accomplished, until the entrance of our Redeemer CHRIST JESUS, into the most Holy place, was visibly signified by the rending of the Veil in the Temple. It is most true again, that the legal feasts of Trumpets, which was the first solemnity of the seaventh month, was Evangelically fulfilled by S. john Baptists Proclamation and Baptism in the beginning of the same month. But as for the feast of Tabernacles, albeit the solemnity thereof was in part fulfilled at our Saviour's appearance, and Proclamation of his celestial Ambassage by himself, upon the great day of that Feast, as was but now observed: Yet the full accomplishment of the solemnities then used, or of the mysteries prefigured by their public rejoicing in that feast especially, was not exhibited, until our Saviour's triumphant ingress into Jerusalem four days before the feast of the Passeover, wherein he suffered for us. Many amongst the multitude, at the feast of Tabernacles immediately before, did acknowledge him for the expected Messias, or for the Prophet, whom God had promised to raise up amongst them like unto Moses. None of them then did either out of express apprehension of his Deity, or by Emblematical significations of their allegiance unto him, acknowledge or proclaim him to be the God of their Fathers, who had spoken to Moses in the wilderness: or that very God, unto whose honour, the feast of Tabernacles was first instituted, and so continued to their posterity. This acknowledgement was first made (though unwittingly) by the multitude, which came to greet his welcome, when he came from Bethany to Jerusalem over the Mount Olivet. But how was he at that time (though unwittingly) so acknowledged by the multitude?  
4. Although man be a reasonable and projecting Creature; yet the cunningest contrivances of wisest men, are always moderated by the All-seeing wisdom of their Creator. And the execution of their projects, although they reach unto, or hit the mark proposed by them, do often glance or fall upon some other Object, than they thought of. And oftentimes, as well the intention, as contrivance for its execution, are put upon them by secret instinct. As in that good woman, which poured the precious ointment on our Saviour's head, whilst he sat at meat in the house of Simon the Leper. Matt. 26.7. Few I think upon good consideration, will suspect any further intent, than a longing desire to testify her love, her loyalty, and observance of him, as a gracious man and a special Benefactor. Yet in the disposition of Divine providence, working in her by secret instinct, to testify her love rather in this kind, then in any other; she did exhibit an undoubted presage of his death and burial approaching, as our Saviour himself interprets the fact: When his Disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste? for this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor. When jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me. For ye have the poor always with you, but me ye have not always. For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial. Verily I say unto you, wheresoever this Gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her, Matth. 26.8, 9, 10, etc. As he was willing to receive the accustomed funeral rites of his Country, at this woman's hands, before his death: so was it his pleasure to have his Coronation over the kingdom of David, the Dedication of his glorious Temple, his triumph over the grave, death, and hell, solemnly celebrated, before his resurrection from the dead. For it was lawful for this Lion of juda to triumph over death, before the victory, which was to be purchased by his death. The honour done unto him at this solemnity, and the severity of his sentence against Jerusalem in the midst of this Jubilee, (me thinks) exhibits such a glimpse of his second appearance in Majesty unto judgement, as the transfiguration on the Mount did of his glory, after his resurrection. He had told the Jews, john 5.23. As the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them: Even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgement unto the Son: that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. A full proof of his power to pierce the monuments by his word, and to make the graves give up their dead; had been a few days before this solemnity, exhibited in his raising of Lazarus: which as was before observed, did specially occasion the multitude assembled at Jerusalem to meet and congratulate him, not as the Son of David only, but as David's Lord. For, greater honour (though they intended not so much) had not been done, either by David before the Ark of the Lord, or by their Forefathers unto God himself in the feast of Tabernacles.  
5. That the feast of Tabernacles was a feast of joy, instituted to the honour of that God, who had redeemed Israel from Egyptian bondage, who had protected them in Succoth, and in the wilderness in their whole journey towards Canaan; is a point unquestionable either amongst good Christians or malignant Jews. That the carrying of Palm branches in triumphant manner, skipping, dancing, or singing, was the peculiar character or expression of that joy, wherewith this people was commanded to rejoice before the Lord their God in this feast of Tabernacles above all others, may be ratified by the tradition and practice of the Jews, whilst they had liberty, and opportunity to celebrate this feast, especially from Nehemiah his time. And in as much as the great multitude assembled at the feast of Passeover, wherein our Saviour did accomplish the laws and rites of the Paschall lamb; did present him with this kind of honour accustomed in the feast of Tabernacles: they evidently declare unto the world, though not by express confession, or distinct apprehension of his eternal Deity (as was said before;) yet by gesture, and deportment put upon them by secret instinct, that this JESUS whom they thus welcomed in the Mount of Olives, was that very God and Lord of hosts, who had given them victory over Pharaoh and his host in the red Sea, who had protected them and refreshed them in the wilderness in all their distresses, and in their whole journey to the land of Canaan: that very only God in memory of whose gracious goodness towards them, the feast of Tabernacles was first instituted by Moses, afterward more solemnly celebrated by joshua, and upon some interruption in matter of ceremonies, revived, or restored by Nehemiah.  
6. As for the doctrine of the later Jews (such I mean, as from our Saviour's time, have recollected the practice of their Forefathers in this feast of Tabernacles;) I refer the ingenuous Reader to the Commentators upon Leviticus 23. and upon Nehemiah. The garb and gesture of the Jews in bearing of Palm branches at the feast of Tabernacles, (if we may believe these men's relations;) was not much unlike the deportment of the ancient Grecians after victory, whether in serious wars or in Olympic games: or rather the deportment of the ancient Grecians was by superstitious imitation borrowed from the laws, and customs of the ancient Hebrews. The practice of the Grecians, and most other Nations in their victories is recorded by Pausanias.  

Wreaths or branches of Palms, are a set reward for many Prizes; and in every place doth adorn the right hand of the Vanquishers: which custom is said to have had its first original after this wise. It is reported that Theseus being returned from Crete, did institute certain games at Delos in the honour of Apollo, and did reward the Victorers with Palms: Of which Palms Homer also maketh mention in those verses, wherein he recites the mournful Oration of Ulysses to the daughter of Alcinous.   

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pausanias in Arcadicis Lib. 8.   
That the bearing of Palm branches in their right hands, was a general Emblem (amongst most Nations) of victory; I willingly assent to this learned Antiquary, for Palmam obtinere is as much in Latin Writers as Victoriam obtinere. But that this devise should take its original from Theseus, I cannot be persuaded; because the sacred story of the old Testament, and the Prophecies or Visions in the New, do testify this custom to be more ancient than Theseus amongst God's people, and an Emblem of the victory of God's Saints over death and the grave. To omit other places, that of S. john, Apoc. 7. is most pregnant: After this I beheld, and lo, a great multitude which no man could number, of all Nations and kindreds and people, and tongues stood before the Throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and Palms in their hands. And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God, which sitteth upon the Throne, and to the Lamb verse 9.10. This manner of congratulation used by the Saints, is but a more distinct and full expression of the people's voice, when they cried Hosanna to the Son of David, which as was observed before, was both precatory and congratulatory: and did withal, according to the propriety of the Hebrew, import thus much; Lord grant salvation to the Son of David, that he may save us. So that both the people (though they unwittingly and more unconstantly) and the Saints of all Nations expressly and constantly do honour the Son, even as they honour the Father.   

CHAP. XXII. That the honour done to our Saviour at his coming to jerusalem, did (though not in the distinct apprehension of the multitude or of his Disciples) concludently declare him to be the Son of God, or the God of their Fathers.  
1 THe former Assertion concerning the real exhibition of that honour unto the Son of David, at this memorable Passeover, which by the intendment of the Law, Levit. 23. was directed unto God alone in the feast of Tabernacles, is more remarkably implied in the undoubted accomplishment of the feast of Dedication, next before the same Passeover: especially if we compare the often mentioned congratulations of the people crying [Hosanna to the Son of David] with our Saviour's actions and doctrine (both of them being accurately recorded by the Evangelists) between his entering into the Temple, and the time of his Agony. The feast of the Dedication, or Encaenia in the ninth month heretofore handled in part, was a Feast instituted in imitation of the feast of Tabernacles, whose anniversary celebration was immediately and peremptorily commanded by God himself; Moses at that time being his sole Agent or Ambassador: whereas the feast of Dedication or Encenia was instituted by the visible Church at a time, wherein there was no Prophet in Israel, no man endued with the spirit of Moses; nor no immediate or extraordinary Revelation from God. For a little before the institution of the feast of Dedication, the Author of the 74. Psalm had thus complained; We see not our signs, there is no more any Prophet, neither is there among us any that knoweth how long. And this Psalm, as best Interpreters are of opinion, was composed in the time of Antiochus his raging tyranny over Jerusalem, over the people of God, and his Temple. Both parts of this observation may be confirmed by the Author of the first Book of Maccabees; Then judas appointed certain men to fight against those that were in the Fortress, until he had cleansed the Sanctuary. So he chose Priests of blameless conversation, such as had pleasure in the Law: Who cleansed the Sanctuary, and bare out the defiled stones into an unclean place. And when as they consulted what to do with the Altar of burnt offerings which was profaned; they thought it best to pull it down, lest it should be a reproach to them, because the Heathen had defiled it. Wherefore they pulled it down, and laid up the stones in the Mountain of the Temple, in a convenient place, until there should come a Prophet to show what should be done with them, 1. Maccab. 4.41, 42. etc. And after they had cleansed the Sanctuary, they restored the holy vessels, and furnished the Temple of the lord On the five and twentieth day of the ninth Month (which is called the Month Casleu) in the hundred forty, and eighth year, they arose up betimes in the morning, and offered sacrifices according to the Law upon the new Altar of burnt offerings, which they had made. Look at what time, and what day the Heathen had profaned it, even in that day it was dedicated with songs, with citherns, and harps, etc. ver. 52. Moreover judas and his brethren with the whole Congregation of Israel ordained that the days of the Dedication of the Altar should be kept in their season from year to year by the space of eight days from the 25. day of the month Casleu with mirth and gladness, ver. 59 The manner of celebrating this Feast, is more fully expressed by the Author of the second Book of Maccabees Chap. 10.5, 6, etc. Upon the same day that the strangers profaned the Temple, on the very same day, it was cleansed again, even the 25. day of the same month, which is Casleu. And they kept 8. days with gladness, as in the feast of Tabernacles; remembering that not long before they had held the feast of Tabernacles, when as they wandered in the mountains and dens like beasts. Therefore they bore branches, and fair boughs and Palms also, and sang Psalms unto him that had given them good success in cleansing his Temple. They also ordained by a common Decree, that every year those days should be kept of the whole Nation of the Jews. And so it was continued unto the last year of our Saviour's pilgrimage here on earth.  
2 It hath been long ago well observed by the learned and judicious Hooker, and (if my memory fail not) touched upon by his Ancient, the learned Examiner of the Trent Council: that albeit the feast of the Dedication was not instituted by Moses, nor ratified by any of his Successors in the Prophetical function; yet was it graced by our Lord and Saviour's presence and observation of it, as appears from john the 10. So far was he from censuring sacred solemnities, though not immediately instituted by God but by the ordinary authority of the visible Church: so long as their institutions did not vitiat, but rather enlarge their laws and ceremonies registered by Moses (or to use the phrase of the Hebrew Rabbins) did not contradict the stations of Mount Sinai. For he came to Jerusalem at this feast (though celebrated in the Winter) and taught the people, not to take the solemnity for a will worship, but to expound the true intent and prefigurations of it, to try whether they would acknowledge him to be that God who had given their foreelders good success in cleansing the Altar and Sanctuary, from the pollutions of the heathen. But so far was his own people from acknowledging thus much, that they took up stones to throw at him for his Doctrine. Yet at the feast of the Passeover next ensuing, they did by matter of fact or Emblematical expressions of their loyalty towards him (being thereunto led by secret instinct beyond their actual apprehension) acknowledge him for their very God, who had given them victory over Antiochus, over Gorgias, and other relics of his malicious Associates or instruments. For thus much their bearing of branches of Palms, of Olives, or other trees used in the honour of God, at the feast of Dedication, or that other of Tabernacles, and their crying Hosanna unto him did concludently import by way of such benign interpretation of their meaning, as loving Fathers make of their lisping children's expressions, or other significations of their desires by bodily and visible gesture, though not by articulate voice. Immediately after he had in the substance of man received from them those honorary presents, which were due to God alone, he went into the Temple to cleanse and purify it from the abuses of Money changers or Merchandisers, wherewith upon politic pretences or sophisms of state for present gain, it was at this time no less polluted by the seed of Abraham, than it had been by Antiochus, or other heathens before the feast of the Dedication was instituted. Once before, (as we read john 2.) he had reform the like abuses, but then in the Name and Authority of his Father: but now he visits the same Temple, and gives sentence in his own Name, It is written, (not my Father's house, but) my house shall be called the house of prayer, but ye have made it a den of Thiefs. Mat. 21.13.  
3 This second reformation, he executed so peremptorily, that the chief Priests and Elders of the people came the next morning into the Temple, as he was teaching, and demanded of him, By what authority dost thou these things? Mat. 21.23. To this question he answers only by a cross interrogatory, unto which they could not reply; I will ask you also one thing, which if ye tell me, I likewise will tell you, by what authority I do these things: The baptism of john, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned among themselves, saying, If we shall say from heaven, he will say unto us, why did ye not then believe him? But if we shall say of men, we fear the people: for all held john as a Prophet. And they answered jesus and said, We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things. If they had (as their consciences did suggest unto them) acknowledged the Baptism of john to have been from heaven, they must withal have acknowledged him to have been the second Adam, or Redeemer of Mankind; to have descended from heaven truly heavenly; not the Son of David only, but the true Son of God, their Lord, and God; as the little children the Evening before (though not perhaps by express apprehension) had proclaimed him: and so proclaimed him that the chief Priests and Scribes could not contradict his most divine exposition of their meaning, or rather of the Psalmist, whose prophetical hymn God had appointed them now to act; When the chief Priests (saith Saint Matthew) saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying in the Temple and saying, Hosanna to the Son of David; they were sore displeased, and said unto him, Hearest thou, what these say? As if they had thus meant, We see thou art ready to play at small games, rather than sit out, being thus content to solace thyself with the applause of little children, which know not what they say: as lately thou didst with the congratulations of Idiots and Fishermen thy followers. But children and fools (such as they accounted our Saviour's followers) do oft times speak the very truth: and he who was truth itself, doth justify these little children, as God's Ambassadors for this purpose. For so he replies, Yea, have ye (who boast so much of your skill in Scripture) never read, Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise? And he left them as silent for any matter of just reply, as he had done their father the Devil, when he sent him away with that Item or Scriptum est, Avoid Satan: for it is written, thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. And however the malice of these chief Priests and Scribes did in the next morning revive, yet the testimony alleged by him in justification of the children, was so pregnantly concludent of his purpose, that Satan himself had he been present, could not have replied unto it.  
4 For that 8. Psalm, as the Jews cannot deny, was composed in honour of the God of Israel: that it was also prophetical, and to be fulfilled in time, is to all Christians apparent from our Apostles allegation of another place to the like purpose Hebrews 2.6, 7. of whose fulfilling hereafter. The first part of the prophecy, (that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God their Lord, 
In the 7. Book, last Chapter of the last section.  which as hath been before observed, was the peculiar title of God the Son, or of God to be manifested in the flesh) was never punctually fulfilled, until the children cried Hosanna to the Son of David, in the Temple. In these congratulations, they did by divine instinct, or disposition of the Allseeing providence, proclaim the expected Son of David to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that very God their Lord, in whose praise this Psalm was conceived. The Babes than did spell the Prophet's meaning not amiss: But our Saviour, and the present circumstances of the time, did put their lisping syllables together, more rightly, and fully answerable to the meaning of the Prophetical vision. For so it followeth in the same Psalm, that this God their Lord, did therefore ordain his praise out of the mouths of babes and sucklings, because of his enemies; that he might still the Enemy and Avenger. Psalm 8.2. And so the malicious Priests and Scribes were put to a Non plus upon our Saviour's allegation of this prophecy in justification of himself, and of these Infants, whose testimonies they sought to elevate, and to impute the acceptance of it to his folly. Now albeit our Saviour left them at this Non plus for the present, yet within a day or two after, he putteth the very Pharisees, the most learned of them, to a greater non plus, by another testimony, parallel to this of the 8. Psalm, While the Pharisees (saith S. Matthew) were gathered together, jesus asked them, saying, What think ye of Christ? Whose Son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David: He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sat thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his Son? And no man was able to answer him a word: neither durst any man (from that day forth) ask him any more questions. Matth. 22.41, 42, etc. All this argues a full conviction of their consciences: and that unless they had suffered their splenatick passions to conquer their consciences for the present; or had not hoodwinked their intellectuals with malicious habits of their hearts: they must of necessity have confessed as much, as the little children (in this expression) before had done, to wit, that he was not only the promised Son of David, but that the promised Son of David was to be David's Lord, this whole people's God, and Lord. For it is observable, that David in the beginning of the 110. Psalm saith not, jehova said unto jehova, but jehova said unto Adonai, Sat thou on my right hand; not thereby denying, that this Adonai was to be jehova, but that he was to be (as the Author of the 8. Psalm saith) both his God and his Lord: It is again (to my present apprehension) observable, that after Nehemiah had revived the solemnity of the feast of Tabernacles, and moved the people to renew the Covenant, which their forefathers had made, for faithful observance of God's Laws given by Moses: they nuncupate this their solemn vow unto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Lord our God. And the rest of the people (to wit, all besides those, who had sealed to the Covenant before, with Nehemiah,) the Priests, the Levites, the Porters, the Singers, the Nethinims, and all they that had separated themselves from the people of the Lands, unto the Law of God: their Wives, their Sons, and their Daughters, every one having knowledge and understanding. They clavae to their Brethren, their Nobles,, and entered into a curse, and into an oath, to walk in God's Laws, which were given by Moses the servant of God, and to observe, and do all the Commandments of the Lord our Lord, and his judgements and his statutes, Nehem. 10.28, 29, etc. But this solemn vow and Covenant confirmed by oath of keeping Gods Laws, was more shamefully broken by this perverse and gainsaying generation, than those Laws themselves had been by Antiochus or other Heathen, which had never sworn unto them. For the chief Priests, the Scribes, the Elders, notwithstanding the former convictions of their consciences, hold on to persecute this God their Lord, unto whose honour their forefathers had dedicated this vow, with greater cruelties and more malicious indignities, than Antiochus had used towards the meanest of his people; and so at length to bring that curse annexed to the former vow, upon themselves and upon their children unto this day.  
5. Thus much of the Prophecies or foresignifications of his triumphant ingress into Jerusalem, and of his entertainment there, until the Feast of the legal Passeover, whose mystery he did accomplish by his death: Points not handled either so fully, or so punctually, as was requisite, by any Commentators, Postillers, or others whom I have read. And this hath emboldened me to enlarge my meditations upon this small part of my Comments on the Creed. As for the Prophecies, types, or other foresignifications of what he did, or suffered from the time of his sacred Supper, until his resurrection from the dead, these have been so plentifully and so punctually handled by many, especially by the learned Gerard, that much cannot be added without a great deal of superfluous pains. And yet I know, it will be expected, that I say somewhat of this argument.    

SECTION 4. The Evangelicall relations of the indignities done unto our Saviour by sinful men, and of his patience in suffering them, respectively prefigured and foretold by the Prophets and other sacred Writers: Or a Comment upon the Evangelicall History, from the institution of his Supper unto his death and burial.  

CHAP. XXIII. Of the betraying of our Saviour, of his apprehension, and dismission of his Disciples: And how they were foretold or prefigured in the old Testament.  
1 OF the sweet Harmony between the institution, occasion, and celebration of the legal Passeover, and the continuation of the Lords Supper or Sacrament of his body and blood instituted in lieu or rather in remembrance of the accomplishing of it; I have in other meditations delivered my mind at large. And if if it shall please the Lord God to grant me life and health; what I have either uttered in Sermons, or otherways conceived concerning this Argument, shall be communicated to this Church wherein I live, (if not to others) in the Article of the Catholic Church, which did begin to be on earth from our Saviour's resurrection, or from his ascension into heaven and descending of the Holy Ghost. At the accomplishment of the Legal Passeover by the institution of the grand mystery or Sacrament prefigured by it; our Lord and Saviour was betrayed by his unfaithful friend and servant judas, yet by his prodition consecrated to be that Lamb of GOD, which the Paschall Lamb did prefigure; that Lamb of God, which was to take away the sins of the world, of which sins the annual offering of the Paschall Lamb, or other legal Sacrifices whatsoever, were but anniversary commemorations, or remembrances that sin did still reign throughout the world. The treason of judas was expressly foretold, (and perhaps prefigured by treason practised against the Psalmist) Psal. 41.9. Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lift up his heel against me. By whom, or upon what occasion soever, this Psalm was composed, certain it is, the Psalmist according to the literal and historical sense did act his own part with sensible feeling of present infirmities, which did mystically prefigure more just occasions, which the promised Messias should have to take up the same complaint. judas did eat of his bread: did swallow the very sop, which was prepared for himself at that very time, when by the instigation of the Devil, he resolved to betray him. So that this Psalm (as hath been observed before) was fulfilled in CHRIST both according to the mystical, and the most punctual exquisite literal sense. So was that other complaint, whether of the same Psalmist, or of some other; For it is not an open enemy that hath done me this dishonour: for than I could have borne it. Neither was it mine adversary that did magnify himself against me: for then peradventure I would have hid myself from him. But it was even thou my companion, my guide, and mine own familiar friend. We took sweet counsel together: and walked in the house of God as friends, Psalm. 55.12, 13, etc. judas had often accompanied our Saviour whilst he taught in the Temple, but especially at this last feast of the Passeover, wherein he did for four days together frequent the Temple, from morning till evening, disputing with the learned, and catechising the vulgar and ignorant. And our Saviour to notify this Prophecy to be exactly fulfilled by judas, saluteth him in the name of a friend, while he comes to betray him.  
2. His treachery against his friendly and loving Lord, was much the fouler, by reason of the long communion with him both at table and at sacred offices. This treachery was expressly foreshadowed by Achitophel's treason against David; of whom it is probable, the former complaints were literally meant. Both the treasons were abominably wicked, but Ahitophels' more generous, judas most basely wicked: for he had no provocation to meditate revenge upon his Master, who had never done him, nor any living soul wrong, but went about doing good to all, and healing all that sought to him for help, though possessed with Devils. But this kind of healing, judas did not seek, but rather through entertainment of greedy and covetous projects, did invite the Devil to enter into his heart, at that very time, wherein the door of saving health and entrance into the kingdom of heaven was to be set open to all. Ahitophel had some pretence, or provocation to revenge himself upon his Master, by reason of the indignity done unto his family, and staining of his blood by David, in defiling his near kinswoman or Niece, Bathsheba. Yet was Ahitophels' malice towards David's person more bitter: for he sought his life, and resolved to wreak his foehood upon him in the highest degree; and had achieved his purpose, so Absalon would have harkened so well to his second advice, as he did to his first. His first advise, which was full of revengeful retaliation for David's folly with Bathsheba, we have recorded the 2. of Samuel 16.20. Then said Absalon to Ahitophel, Give counsel among you what we shall do. And Ahitophel said unto Absalon, Go in unto thy father's concubines, which he hath left to keep the house, and all Israel shall hear, that thou art abhorred of thy father: then shall the hands of all that are with thee, be strong. So they spread Absalon a tent upon the top of the house, and Absalon went in unto his father's concubines, in sight of all Israel. Moreover Ahitophel said to Absalon, Let me now choose out twelve thousand men, and I will arise, and pursue after David this night. And I will come upon him, while he is weary, and weak handed; and I will make him afraid: and all the people that are with him shall flee, and I will smite the King only. And I will bring back all the people unto thee: the man whom thou seekest, is as if all returned: so all the people shall be in peace. And the saying pleased Absalon well, and all the Elders of Israel for a while. But after Ahitophel saw this his second and more deadly project, defeated by the contrary counsel of Hushai; he gave his enterprise and himself for lost: and in deep melancholy (yet willing to set his house in order) went immediately, and hanged himself. judas in like manner, after the chief Priests, and Elders had dashed his plot, which was only to gain some money, and their favour for his grateful service without any desire of blood; did cast away the hire of his treason, and himself with it. But of his casting down the money in the Temple, and the manner of his fearful end, there will be fitter occasion to say somewhat 
* Chap. 26.  hereafter.  
3. David after he had been assuredly informed of Absaloms' conspiracy against him, forsook Jerusalem: and he, and all his train or necessary attendance went on their bare feet, with their heads covered and weeping, over the brook Kidron, and along the mount of Olives, 2. Sam. 15.23, 30. And thus the Son of David a little after he saw judas resolved to betray him, or rather after it pleased him to take notice of the Conspiracy against him, between judas and the chief Priests and Elders, marched the same way with a lesser train, accompanied only with his Disciples, but with more full assurance of their deliverance from present danger, than David's great train had: because he carried the true Ark of the Lord in his breast, whose type or shadow, David being uncertain or doubtful of the event, sent back again to Jerusalem with the Priests that did wait upon it. Yet he himself went over the brook Kidron with a sadder heart, than David his father had done. David, and his train, though much greater, and better able to resist the violence of the Pursuer, than his train was; marched further in that night wherein they fled from Absalon, than the mount of Olives. The Son of David took up his station in a garden, near about the mount of Olives, and there expected the encounter of the Arch-Ahitophel (which had vanquished the first Adam in a garden) now attended with a greater host of infernal Associates, than Ahitophel did require of Absalon for the surprisal of David, and his train, about the same place or not far beyond it, 2. Sam. 17.  
4. When I behold my Saviour in that heavy plight and dejected posture, described by the Evangelist, prostrating himself on his knees and face to the earth, yet sending out these ejaculations unto heaven; Father if it be possible, let this Cup pass from me. Me thinks I see the exquisite accomplishment of the Psalmists complaint, charactering his own woeful case for the present, yet by way of prophecy or prefiguration of more just cause, which the promised Messias should have of uttering the like complaint, who was, as he saw to partake more deeply of his grievances and afflictions, though not of his passion or impatience in them. For this Son of Righteousness, was willing to suffer with all submission to his heavenly Father's will, whatsoever any of his forerunning shadows had suffered, either immediately from the hand of God, or by the violence of men; and to suffer them without any token of grudging or impatience. The complaint of the Psalmist, who did foreshadow the dejected estate of the Son of God, in that hour of temptation, we have set down, Psalm 38.14. My sins are gone over my head, and they are like a sore burden too heavy for me to bear. But the heavy burden, not of the Psalmists sins alone, but of the sins of the world, were now laid upon the Son of man in the garden, and did deject him to the ground. But how patiently soever he did bear or fall down under this burden; yet he stood in need of comfort from heaven, as his forerunners in far less anguish had done. And if we would take St. Luke's relation of the Angels coming to support and comfort him in this his weakness, into serious consideration; we may have a brief, yet a most true and punctual Commentary upon that Prophecy, Psalm 8. Thou hast made him for a little while, lower than the Angels, to wit, as he was the Son of man: though never ceasing to be the Son of God. For the most valiant General that is, which stands in need of Support or help from his meanest Soldier, is for the time being, lower than he is, which lends him his hand, or helps him up being thrown down or prostrate. Now this our chief Leaders Agony, and the time between his apprehension and his death, was the only time that little while, whereof the Psalmist speaks, wherein CHRIST JESUS, as man, was made lower than the Angels, lower than the ordinary sons of men. For he was, as another Psalmist in his Person complains, a worm, and no man. But immediately after this bitter Agony, the strength and vigour of the Son of righteousness, which for a time was eclipsed or overcast with a bloody sweat, did break forth afresh, and though in the night time, did no less dazzle and astonish the armed band, which came with judas to apprehend him, than the light which shone at midday did S. Paul, when he was armed with authority to attach his Followers. For immediately after, that Cup which he prayed against, was passed from him; He knowing all things (saith St. john) that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them that came to apprehend him, Whom seek ye? They answered him, jesus of Nazareth. jesus saith unto them, I am he. And judas also which betrayed him, stood with them. Assoon then, as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground. Then asked he them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, jesus of Nazareth. jesus answered, I have told you, that I am he. If therefore, ye seek me, let these go their way. That the saying might be fulfilled which he spoke, Of them which thou gavest me, I have lost none, Joh. 18, 4, 5, 6, etc. Here was a true document both of his royal and spiritual power: of his royal power, in that he could command them to forbear any violence towards his Disciples; yea not to oppose violence offered unto one of their company. For Simon Peter (as St. john saith) having a sword, drew it, and cut off one of the servants of the high Priests right ear: the servants name was Malchus, 10, 11. verses etc. St. Luke recordeth, that he touched his ear and healed him: so far was he from all desire of revenge upon his enemies. This was an act of his power spiritual: so was that likewise in protecting his Disciples from danger, as well of soul, as of body. For as S. john (to my apprehension) intimates, if they had been put unto the same fiery trial, unto which he himself was exposed, they had denied him and their former faith. Therefore he commanded his Apprehenders to let them go their way, that the saying might be fulfilled which he spoke (some few hours before,) Of them which thou gavest me, have I lost none, John 18.10. So he had said, john 17.11. And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee Holy Father, keep through thine own Name, those whom thou hast given me; that they may be one, as we are. While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy Name: those that thou gavest me I kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition. Either judas was never one of them, whom his Father had given him, or at least, at this time, had given himself to his Father the Devil.  
5 But as one, and the same prophecy, may be often filled by events much distant in time: so may diverse prophecies, much distant for time, be accomplished in one and the same event, in the same point of time; as in this dismission of JESUS his Disciples, both his own predication (as Saint john tells us) was fulfilled, and another prophecy likewise, as we may gather from S. Mark, or rather from our Saviour's exposition recorded by the Evangelist Mark 14. jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night. For it is written, I will smite the Shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered. This smiting of the Shepherd, was amongst other prophecies, both foretold, and prefigured, (as is probable) by the death of josiah: unto which most refer that of jeremiah, Lamen. 4.20. The breath of our nosethrills, the Anointed of the Lord, was taken in their pits; of whom, we said, under his shadow, we shall live among the heathen. Some there are, which refer this complaint, unto the Captivity of Zedekiah, but not so pertinently or considerately, as most other of their meditations or observations would occasion the Reader to expect. For the Prophet jeremiah, did never conceive such hope of Zedekiah or jehoiakim, as the deep strain of this particular throne or throb doth import. No son of good josiah, was either in life or death, such a type of the Lords promised Anointed, as himself had been. From the hour of his death, until the return of his people from Babylonish Captivity, Jerusalem and Judah did not see one joyful day: the light of God's Countenance did not shine upon them, as the history of the Old Testament, especially of the Books of Kings and Chronicles do sufficiently testify. Nor did this Nation from the day of our Saviour's death, enjoy one quiet or secure day: not one hour, wherein there either was not apparent danger, or some secret breeding of new calamities: nor shall they enjoy any, till it please him whom they crucified, to restore them again to the land of their Inheritance, from which they are scattered: or at least, to their spiritual state, from which they are fallen.  
6 That the forementioned lamentation or throne, did in the literal and historical sense refer unto the untimely death of good josiah; that the calamities which ensued upon his death, did typically portend just matter of greater sorrow for the death of the Lords Anointed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [the Messias:] that one place of the Prophet Zachariah (to omit others) persuades me: They shall mourn for him, as one who mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first borne. In that day shall there be a great mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddo. Zachar. 12.10, 11. etc. For in the valley of Megiddo, josiah was slain, as it is recorded, 2 Chron. 35.22, 23. And all jerusalem, and judah mourned for josiah, and jeremiah lamented for josiah, and all the singing men, and the singing women spoke of josiah in their Lamentations to this day, and made them an ordinance in Israel: and behold they are written in the Lamentations. This disaster occasioned, by his own oversight or forwardness to fight with Necho, befell josiah, after he had wrought that remarkable reformation in the house of the Lord, and after he had celebrated the Passeover, with such solemnity, as had not been seen before in Jerusalem, nor after. It was the eminency of josiah his zeal and fidelity, in setting forth that solemnity and other services of God, which occasioned this people, even the Prophet's first to conceive, that they should prosper under his shadow, and after these hopes had failed, to lament his death in such passionate expressions, as the faithful amongst his people, even our Saviour's Disciples did his death. But we trusted, that it had been he, who should have redeemed Israel. Luke 24.20. The extremity of sorrow upon our Saviour's death, foreshadowed by the Lamentations for josiahs' loss, was fulfilled pro illâ vice, in that compunction of heart and spirit, in Saint Peter's Auditors, Acts 2.37. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their hearts, and said unto Peter, and the rest of the Apostles, Men and Brethren, what shall we do? But the full accomplishment of those mournful Lamentations for our Saviour's death, whether foreshadowed or foretold or inchoated, whether in the Old Testament, or in the New; is not to be expected before the conversion of the Jews, which will not be public or national, until they seriously and publicly repent them of their own sins, and of the sins of their forefathers, for putting the Lord of life and King of glory, to a bitter and shameful death. Nor is the Nation of the Jews only, but all the kindreds of the Earth to bewail him and repent: for all were causes of his death. Behold he cometh (saith Saint john) with clouds; and every eye shall see him: and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Rev. 1.7.  
7 A fitter Subject for meditations, to make either a private Christian truly wise, or wise men (especially Governors, whether Ecclesiastical or civil) truly Christian; I could not commend unto the one, or other, (though bound so to do upon my deathbed,) then the sacred history, concerning the estate of Judah, from the death of good josiah, to the end of the Babylonish Captivity; and the history of josephus and others, who have decipherd the estate of the Jews, since they put the Lord of life to death. This parallel between Jerusalem's two progresses to her first and second destruction, was the main theme of my first ministerial meditations, the contents whereof would be too laborious to collect, and their expressions too long to be interserted in this Treatise. To return therefore to the former path, from which I have somewhat, though not impertinently digressed.  
8 Of that glory of Christ, which shall be revealed, when every eye shall see him, when they that crucified and pierced his body, shall mourn after such a manner, as Zacharie and St. john in the places forecited import: He himself in the hours of his greatest humiliation (immediately after his agony in the garden, and (as I take it) before judas did deliver him up to the high Priest and Officers) did exhibit some rays or glimpses by striking the Armed band, which came to attach him, backwards down to the ground, with the sole words or breath of his mouth. And again by the deliverance of his followers from such rage and tyranny, as they practised against him, that the words of the Prophets (not their projects) and his exposition of their meaning might be fulfilled, I will smite the Shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered. This prophecy we have Zachar. 13.7. The accomplishment of this prophecy, was in part exemplified by the scattering of his Apostles and Disciples, upon his apprehension and death. And so were the words immediately following in the Prophet, punctually verified and really exemplified, in recollecting them again after his Resurrection, and the feast of Pentecost next ensuing. The full accomplishment of the prophecy, as it concerns the scattering of the flock or sheep was not publicly declared or exemplified before the destruction of the second Temple, and dispersing of the Jewish Nation. The other parts of the same prophecy, must be afterwards accomplished in the conversion of the Jews.   

CHAP. XXIIII. Of the predictions or prefigurations of our Saviour's sufferings after his apprehension in the High Priests hall, etc.  
1 ALL these rays or glimpses of the Sun of Righteousness, did interpose themselves in the days of his humiliation and obscurity, before he was led bound to Caiaphas the high Priest. But after judas of a close Ahitophel or cunning traitor, became an open Dalilah, and had betrayed his Master into their hands with a kiss: this Samson the Sun of righteousness, became like another man, or like the moon in eclipse. More weak and impotent for any attempt of resistance or escape, than Samson was, after the razor had gone over his head, and taken off the Ensign of the Nazarite. These enemies of the God of Israel, did sport themselves more cruelly, with the bodily miseries and calamities of the true Nazarite, than the Philistines had done themselves with Samson, until he resumed his former strength by dying. So then Samson in his strength and weakness or dejected estate, was a lively type of JESUS of Nazareth in both his estates and conditions of life, whilst he lived here on earth. No type at all, not so much as a shadow of Christ's humility and patience in all his sufferings, but rather a foil by his impatience to set a lustre upon the unparallelled meekness of this true Nazarite of God by an Antiperistasis. Sampsons' last prayers unto the God of his strength were, that he would give him power at the hour of his death, to be revenged on his Enemies, for the loss of his eyes. Jesus of Nazareth, the true Nazarite of God, when he came unto the cross on Mount Calvarie, the stage and theatre for his enemy's sport and triumph over him in this solemn feast, prays heartily, even for those that hoodwinked him, and bid him prophecy, saying, Who was it that smote thee? And for the Roman Soldiers, which were the Executioners of their malicious merriment, he prays for both in such a sweet and heavenly manner, as no Prophet had ever done for his Persecutors, Father forgive them, for they know not what they do. He did not so much as either lift up hand or voice, or conceive any secret prayer against one or other of his persecutors, during the time of his lingering, but deadly pains; as knowing, this was the time wherein his body was to be made as an anvil, that he might do the will of his Father by the Sacrifice of himself, and sufferance of all other indignities, more bitter to a mere man, than twenty deaths, though of the cross. The effect or purpose of Gods will in this sacrifice (as our Apostle instructs us) was our Sanctification. But the will of God, which he was now to do, was his will passively taken, to wit, for the body of CHRIST offered up once for all, as our Apostle interprets the meaning of the Author, or rather of the Holy Ghost, who did inspire the Author of the fortieth Psalm with the spirit of Prophecy.  
2. As in perusing many other Psalms, so in this, I cannot but bewail the negligence of most Interpreters, as well ancient as modern, for not enquiring more accurately after the Author, but especially the historical occasions of composing it. I had many years ago sundry probable notions or conjectures, that this Psalm, though inscribed a Psalm of David, or revealed to David 
* Vide Genebrardum in Psal. 3.  (for this inscription will well bear both senses) as some other Psalms which have the same Inscription; were (if we may believe good Authors) penned or paraphrased upon by jeremiah, for the people's use in the Babylonish captivity. But these conjectures, and the perusal of such notes, as I had then gathered concerning the Author of this Psalm, I now wave, or rather altogether omit. But whether the Author of this Psalm (suppose David) did act his own part, as having some special Commission from the Lord to instruct the people, that to do Gods will in some peculiar service then required, was better than sacrifice, much better than burnt offering: or whether he spoke this divine vision or rapture, in the person of the Messias alone; this (however) is most certain that the 6, 7, & 8. verses of that 40. Psalm, do contain a concludent Prophecy of the abolition of legal sacrifices, by the sacrifice of Christ's body. The argument or demonstration is most divinely gathered, and irrefragably pressed home to this purpose by our Apostle, Heb. 10. from the 4. verse to the 11. It is not possible, that the blood of Bulls and Goats should take away sins. Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offerings, thou wouldst not, but a body hast thou prepared me: in burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin, thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (In the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above, when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldst not, neither hadst pleasure therein, which are offered by the Law: then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will (O God:) he taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will, we are sanctified, through the offering of the body of JESUS CHRIST once for all.  
3. The only difficulty about the reconciliation of the Psalmist in the original, and the Translation of the Seventy, which the Apostle follows, Heb. 10. and his approbation of it, makes it to me in this particular, altogether as Authentic as the Hebrew, or a better expression of it, then modern Interpreters without him could make. The resolution of this difficulty, will much depend upon the literal meaning or importance of the Hebrew phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some Latin Interpreters render it thus, aures perfodisti mihi: others, aures perforasti mihi: others, aures aperuisti mihi, thou hast digged through, boared, or opened my ears. And some of these conceit an allusion in the literal sense, to the legal custom of boaring the ears of such, as were content to continue perpetual servants to their present Masters, and not use the privilege of the year of jubilee. But this conjecture is rejected by many modern Writers, and in particular to my remembrance by Pineda. Aures perfodere (saith the Tigurine Note upon this place) symbolicâ oratione est in servitutem mancipare, as much, as to make one a perpetual servant. This Interpretation I take, supposeth the former allusion to such as were made perpetual servants by boring their ears. But our Saviour, although for a time he took the form of a servant upon him, and was qualified for the performance of the hardest part of this service, by opening the ear; yet was he not made, nor did he become a perpetual servant, but shortly after to be made both Lord and CHRIST.  
4. Ribera (who doubtless had read very many and with great judgement,) saith, Of all the Interpreters which he had perused, Genebrard comes nearest to the meaning of the Holy Ghost. To exhibit Genebrards' Interpretation in his own words:  

Aures mihi aperuisti, id est, corpus, per Synecdochen, e Paulo Heb. 10. Mihi aptasti corpus humanum in utero virgineo. Rabbini non satis perceptâ metaphorâ, Aures fodisti sive aperuisti mihi, ad tuae obtemperandum voluntati aurem revelasti, retexisti▪ ab aure abstulisti velum & tegmen, ut acutiùs audiret. Effecisti ut te audirem, ac tuae voluntati libens parêrem. Me docilem & obsequentem ad audiendum reddidisti. Chald. Aures ad auscultanda tua praecepta formasti mihi. Nostris congruenter. Quia enim agitur de corporatione sive incarnatione Domini, est metaphora simul & Synecdoche, ad quorum troporum difficultatem explanandam Apostolus appositissimè posuit Corpus aptasti mihi. Est enim primùm metaphora a figulis, qui manu fodicant & ducunt argillam, e quâ cupiunt vas aptare, currente rota, Quare Deus & figulus, & fictor, & plastes nuncupatur, ut alludatur ad Genes. 2. quando ex humo humanum corpus duxit. Est deinde Synecdoche, pars pro toto, aures pro corpore: Sed aurium praesertim meminit, quia de obedientia agebatur.   
The sum of his exposition is, that the Psalmists meaning is most Elegantly expressed by the Apostle, if we admit of a Synecdoche in the Psalmist and a Metaphor both in the Psalmist and Evangelist. The Metaphor, aures perfodisti, is borrowed from the Potter, who first works or kneads the clay, or earth, whereof he makes his vessel, as if perfodere were as much as fodicare. And so God who is styled the former or fashioner of all things, did work or frame the body of Christ in his mother's womb, as he had done the first man's body of red earth or clay. The Synecdoche consists in this, that he mentioneth the ear for the whole body: for though the whole body were so form by GOD, yet the Psalmist maketh mention only of the ear, because he treateth there of obedience.  
5. What further improvement of Genebrard his expression either Ribera, or others of that Church, whereof they were members, have made; I leave it to the diligent Readers further enquiry. Genebrards' expression in his own words, is somewhat fuller, then that which junius hath in his parallel between the Apostle and this Psalmist; but neither any whit dissonant from the other. If either of them or Ribera had diligently read some Writers of Reformed Churches (their Ancients in time) upon the 10. of the Hebrews, any one of them might have spoken more fully and punctually to the question, than all of them do. For if we take it as granted, which the Tigurine note upon the forecited fortieth Psalm imports, to wit, that to open the ear, is a speech symbolical: the symbolical sense of it, is best expressed by the Prophet Isaiah, in that portion of Scripture, which was appointed by the ancient Catholic Church, and retained by our Orthodoxal English, for the Epistle on Tuesday (in hebdomade sancta) or week before Easter. The exegetical exposition of the Hebrew, to open the ears, made by the Prophet, implies a qualification or rather consecration of the whole body, for suffering all manner of grievances, that could be inflicted upon it: and that this qualification was to be wrought by the ear, as it is the sense of discipline, whether active or passive, whether of understanding or of patience in suffering. Nor are the Seventy Interpreters in this point to be blamed, (especially the Translation being so well approved by our Apostle, Heb. 10.) for their variation in words from the Hebrew, but rather to be admired for their divine expression of the intent, and meaning of the Holy Ghost, as well in the fortieth Psalm, as in the tenth to the Hebrews. The Psalmist doubtless did foretell, and the Prophet Isaiah did perhaps both foretell and forepicture the indignities done unto our Saviour's body in the high Priests Hall, by the Jews: and in the Common hall or Session's house, by the Roman Soldiers, and upon the Cross by both. This Prophet more particularly foretold his undaunted patience and resolution, in suffering whatsoever they did, or could inflict upon him. To parallel the Prophet with the Evangelists, the Prophet's words are these; The Lord God hath opened mine ears, (aperuit aures, not aures perfodit, or perforavit) and I was not rebellious, neither turned away back. I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off my hair. I hid not my face from shame and spitting. For the Lord God will help me, therefore shall I not be confounded; therefore have I set my face like a flint, and I know, that I shall not be ashamed. He is near, that justifieth me, who will contend with me? Let us stand together: who is mine adversary? let him come near to me. Behold the Lord God will help me: who is he that shall condemn me? Lo, they all shall wax old, as doth a garment: the moth shall eat them up, Isaiah 50.5, 6, etc. This resolution or undaunted patience (which is the effect or consequence of opening the ear) doth fully import corpus aptatum, not an humane body, only framed or fashioned in the womb, as Christ's was, but a body qualified, or fitted by the discipline of the ear, for all manner of sufferings, as the body of a servant, to do his Master's will, though by suffering the most cruel death or torture, that could be inflicted upon him. And such was the body of Christ, wherein he executed that part of his Father will, by which we are sanctified once for all. But the circumstances precedent and subsequent to the Prophetical passages, will occasion the attentive Reader to dispute with himself, at least to move the like question to that, which the Eunuch proposed to Philip, as whether he spoke all this only in the person of Christ, or respectively both of Christ, and of himself? That the Prophet when he composed that divine passage, had an explicit prevision of the indignities, which should be done unto his Lord; and of his admirable resolution to suffer them with inimitable patience; there is no question but (as hath been oftentime observed before) the spirit of the most Evangelicall Prophets (of which rank Isaiah was a special one) were usually elevated unto raptures or previsions of our Saviour's sufferings, by their own like sufferings. They had not only a clear foresight, but a true feeling of them (though in a far less measure, and lower degree, than Christ himself had;) Ye stiffnecked, and uncircumcised in hearts, and ears (saith St. Steven) ye do always resist the holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so due ye. Which of the Prophets have not your fathers persecuted? And they have slain them, which showed before of the coming of the just one; of whom ye have been now the betrayers, and murderers, Acts 6.51, 52. If these later Jews did to our Saviour CHRIST, as their fathers had done to the Prophets his forerunners; then the Prophets did suffer the like indignities of the former generation, as Christ did of the latter. They were not only forerunners or foretellers of him, but types or shadows of him in all his sufferings. No Prophet was more cruelly dealt with, than the Prophet Isaiah. None did partake more deeply of the royal Son of David's affliction, than this Prophetical son of David: for Isaiah was of the royal blood a near kinsman to wicked Manasses, who caused him to be sawed to death, if we may believe Ecclesiastical Stories.  
6. Isaiah, in the beginning of this 50. Chapter, brings in the Lord thus debating with the unbelieving, rebellious people of his time, Where is the bill of your Mother's divorcement, whom I have put away? Or which of my Creditors is it, to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have you sold yourselves, and for your transgressions is your Mother put away. Wherefore when I came, was there no man; When I called, was there none to answer? Is my hand shortened at all, that it cannot redeem? Or have I no power to deliver? Behold, at my rebuke I dry up the sea: I make the rivers a wilderness: their fish stinketh, because there is no water, and dieth for thirst. I cloth the heavens with blackness, and I make sackcloth their covering. Verse 1, 2, 3. etc. But in the 4. verse he altereth the person, if not of the Speaker, yet of him to whom he speaks; The Lord God hath given to me the tongue of the learned, that I should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary. He wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ears to hear, as the learned. This was the Prophets own comfort in particular, and in this qualification, he was a type or shadow of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, who had thus qualified him. And so no doubt he was in that resolution, which he took upon him from the opening of the ear, verse 4. before cited. In both places it is remarkable, that he doth not instile the God of his strength, and comfort by the Name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or by the Name of 4 letters only, but thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Lord God hath given me the tongue of the learned: the Lord God hath opened mine ear. And this, as was observed before, was the peculiar title of God the second person in the Trinity, or God to be incarnate: unto whom the Prophets his forerunners in all their anguishes and distresses, did under this peculiar title direct their prayers, as then seeing that this Lord God was to bear their sorrows; and to be partaker of all their infirmities, that he might be a faithful Comforter, and such an high Priest as our Apostle describes Hebr. 2. They entreated him by the foresight of his future sufferings, as the faithful now do beseech him to be compassionate towards them by the memory or experience of his afflictions past. There is no incongruity then to say, that this prophecy of Isaiah was literally and respectively meant of himself, as of the type: but really fulfilled of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom he praiseth, not only in the mystical, but also according to the most exquisite literal sense. For however, this Lord God had opened his ear, yet the resolution, which he professed was greater, than he had occasion to put in practice, at least with such undaunted patience, as our Saviour did. Yet do we never read, that our Saviour in the days of his humiliation or hour of his agony, did direct his prayers unto GOD, under the title of 
* See Cap. 15. par. 3. & 4.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his Lord, and God, but unto God as his Father. And this is to me a pregnant argument, that not only the forecited place of Isaiah, but many other hymns or Psalms, especially in or after David's time, were literally meant of the Prophets, which composed them, especially in respect of this circumstance of the person or party to whom they prayed, seeing our Saviour in his prayers to God did never use the same title they did. The Prophet David himself had many and just occasions in his own person to conceive that excellent prayer, Bow down thy care, O Lord, and hear me: for I am poor and needy, etc. Psal. 86. Yet were the occasions, and matter of this Psalm really accomplished in the Son of David, whom David here as in the 110. Psalm twice instileth his Lord and God, as verse 12. I will praise thee, O Lord my God, with all my heart, and I will glorify thy Name for evermore. And verse 15. And thou, O Lord, art a God full of pity & compassion, & gracious, long suffering, and plenteous in mercy and truth. Moses had said the same in effect long before: only he doth not give the title of Lord, nor intimate such a clear distinction of the persons in the Trinity, as David in this 110. Psalm did. For David (as was observed before) had a clear prevision, that albeit the Messias or promised seed was to be his Son, yet was withal to be the Son of God: therefore to be that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, unto whom he and other holy men did continually pray in their calamities, and so much magnify, either for their comfort or strength to endure their grievances.  
7. But to return to the forecited place of the Prophet Isaiah, the words immediately following the forecited place, verse 8. [He is near that justifieth me: who will contend with me? etc. Behold the Lord God will help me: who is he that shall condemn me?] were literally, and respectively meant not only of Christ's forerunners, but of his followers: and are so applied by our Apostle, Romans 8.30.31. If God be for us, who can be against us? And again verse 33. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect? It is God that justifieth: who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather that is at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. The Apostle in this had the same confidence in Christ the Lord and in his sufferings, which the Prophet Isaiah had in the Lord his God, to whom he directs his prayers. And so may all others have, that faithfully believe in him: that is, all such, to whom their own consciences can testify such a true conformity unto Christ in his sufferings, as our Apostle Paul and the Prophets were conscious of in their Souls and Spirit. And any other mark of Election, besides this, I know none: nor will it be easy for the Reader whosoever he be, to find any other in the day of trial or temptation.  
8. The Evangelicall parallel to the Prophet Isaiahs' prediction, we have in part Luke 22.63, 64. And the men that held jesus, mocked him, and smote him, and when they had blindfolded him, they struck him on the face, and asked him, saying, Prophecy, who is it that smote thee? Thus they dealt with him in the high Priests Hall, before his examination or sentence given against him. And so again they used him at his examination john 18.19. The high Priest asked jesus of his Disciples and of his doctrine: jesus answered, I spoke openly to the world, etc. Why askest thou me? Ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold they know what I said. And when he had thus spoken, one of the Officers which stood by, struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high Priest so? Unto this indignity he replies with such meekness and patience, as no Prophet in like case ever used, only thus, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me? To the like indignities done unto by him the Roman Soldiers & by Herod, he maketh no reply at all. So that however the forecited words of the Prophet Isaiah, and of the Psalmist, Psalm 40. and the 86. might be respectively verified of themselves; yet were they never exactly fulfilled, save only of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Lord to whom they direct their prayers. None of them ever had a body so fitted, or their ears so opened by the Lord God, as this Lord God himself had, a temper of body and mind not movable to any passion either by indignity of speeches which he heard, or by the blows which he suffered.   

CHAP. XXV. The unjust proceedings of the high Priest and Elders against the Son of God, were punctually foretold by the Prophets.  
1 BUt was it any where else foretold beside in those passages of the Prophet Isaiah and the Psalms forecited, that the Lord of glory or God the Redeemer of Israel should suffer all those indignities, should be despitefully arraigned, unjustly examined, and sentenced to death by his native subjects and by the Gentiles? If thus much had not been both foretold and foreshadowed both by Moses and other Prophets, our Saviour would not have censured those two Disciples whom he did vouchsafe to accompany to Emaus, saying, We trusted that it had been he, who should have redeemed Israel. His tax of this their present distrust or dull belief, is more sharp, than any reply or answer, which he made unto such malicious Infidels, as from the time of his apprehension did deride, beat, scourge, and crucify him, for avouching he was the God of Israel or King of the Jews. For unto these two Disciples he said; O fools and slow of heart to believe all that the Prophets have spoken. Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself, Luke 24.25, 26. I can no way dislike, but rather approve of Maldonats and other learned Commentators wishes upon this place, that, if so it had pleased the Lord, the Evangelist had related unto us, either the places which he expounded to them, or his expositions upon them. But (as I have heretofore advertised the Reader, and shall take occasion hereafter to put him in mind) it seemed not expedient to the wisdom of God, to have the full exposition, either of our Saviour or the Apostles themselves, upon those Scriptures which they allege, extant upon undoubted record: but rather to exhibit us certain hints or just matter of sober and serious search of the Scriptures, which they allege. Amongst other sacred passages, which our Saviour expounded to those two Disciples, I make no question, but the eighty second Psalm was one. To omit all enquiry who was the Author of the Psalm, whether Asaph (whose inscription it bears) or David himself: or what special occasions, the Author of it, whosoever he was, had to compose it, whether his own experience in suffering wrong: or some observation of gross partiality or corruption in the course of Justice towards others: the Psalm itself is Prophetical, and was never so punctually verified at any time before or since, as it was at our Saviour's examination by the high Priest and Elders, and at his arraignment before Pontius Pilate; yet the full accomplishment of the last clause will not be, until the final day of Judgement: God standeth in the Congregation of the Mighty (saith the Psalmist) he judgeth among the Gods. How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted, and needy: deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hands of the wicked, Psalm 82.1, 2, 3, 4. Here was a fair caveat put into the Courts of Justice by the Psalmist, not to pass sentence upon the Messias for saying he was the Son of God, or for making himself equal with God: not to accept of the person of Barrabas before him, who now as GOD did stand amongst them. But besides this caveat of the Psalmist, the circumstances of time, and the manner of their own proceedings against him, did warn them, as Pilat's wife did him, to beware how they had any thing to do with that just and holy man. And our Saviour himself vouchsafeth to be the remembrancer, that however he now stood to be Judged by them, yet he was that very God, which the Psalmist foretold should be their Judge, and the Judge of the whole world: For so the Psalmist concludeth; Arise O God, and judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all Nations, verse 8. This universal Inheritance and power to judge the earth, was bestowed upon our Saviour at his resurrection, after they had judged him for saying he was the Son of God.  
2. After they had sought many false witnesses against him, but could find none whose testimonies did agree, or if they agreed, did reach home to convince him of any capital crime: they sought to entrap him by his own confession, which being judicially made and taken, they knew to be a full and legal conviction. The high Priest, failing in his intended subornations against him, said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us, whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God, Matth. 26.62, 63. And unto this interrogatory ministered unto him, by the high Priest ex officio, not in a criminal cause, but in a point of belief or doctrine, he vouchsafeth a full and punctual answer, as to his competent Judge quoad haec; such an answer, as he did not vouchsafe either to Herod, when he was brought before him, nor to the high Priest and Elders, when they examined him before the two false witnesses, which at the last cast were brought against him: These circumstances we have related in the forecited place of St. Matthew: At the last came two false witnesses, and said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the Temple of God, and build it in three days. The high Priest said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? But jesus held his peace, Matth. 26.60, etc. And S. Luke tells us, Chap. 23.9. When Herod questioned him in many things, he answered him nothing. But as soon as the high Priest adjured him by the living God to tell him the truth, whether he was the Christ, the Son of the living God; jesus saith unto him, thou hast said. Nevertheless I say unto you, hereafter shall you see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high Priest rend his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy: what further need have we of witnesses? Behold, now ye have heard his blaspemy: what think ye? They answered, and said, He is guilty of death, Matth. 26.65, 66. All these circumstances are related by S. Luke, but not in the same order, which S. Matthew doth, for (as hath been heretofore observed) albeit we are bound to believe, that every Evangelist wrote nothing but divine truth, yet every one of them, did not record the whole truth, with all its circumstances, nor relate either our Saviour's answers or his enemy's practices against him, in the same order of time, in which they were made or exhibited. St. Matthew refers, or rather intermingles the fulfilling of Isaiahs' Prophecy for spitting in his face, for buffeting him, and smiting him with the palms of their hands, with the relation of his answer to the high Priest, and his Associates censure against him: Then did they spit in his face, etc. Matth. 26.67, 68 S. Luke tells us that they which held him overnight, when Peter denied him, did mock him and smite him, etc. Luke 22. ver. 63, etc. And again that the high Priest put the forementioned Interrogatory to him, in the morning, after Peter had denied him. And verse 66. this is most probable, that the high Priest and his Complices being hypocrites, would at least be careful to observe the outward or visible form of Justice, which was not to examine men, or produce witnesses against them after midnight or in the Evening. For this was one of the gross abuses practised by their idolatrous forefathers; the full measure of whose grosser sins, this last generation did make up by a precise and rigid reformation of them. The consciousness of their curiosity, and care to eschew their forefathers open sins, was the principal root of their Pharisaical hypocrisy.  
3. But we need not to rely upon probabilities, concerning the time wherein they examined our Saviour: for that is plainly and assertively set down by S. Luke 22. Assoon as it was day, the Elders of the people, the chief Priests, And Scribes came together, and led him into the Council, saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them; If I tell you, you will not believe. And if I ask you, you will not answer me, nor let me go, verse 66, 67, etc. St. Luke although he most exactly observes the order of the process, and circumstance of time, omits the adjuration of the high Priest, and the production of the false witnesses against him. But to recompense this omission, he interserts one reply of our Saviour to the adjuring interrogatory, which St. Matthew expresseth not, but unto which his other expressions must have special reference, if we will make true Grammatical construction of them. For upon this interrogatory, Art thou the Christ? tell us, as S. Luke hath it, he said unto them, If I tell you, you will not believe, and if I also ask you, you will not answer me, nor let me go. And here S. Matthews ellipticall expression of the answer following, doth somewhat raise or quicken St. Luke more full expression; St. Luke saith, Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God. 
* Ver. 69.  St. Matthew relating the same answer, saith, Nevertheless I say unto you, hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting, etc. 
* Matth. 26.64.  This adversative particle, Nevertheless, refers to that of S. Luke which S. Matthew omits, If I tell you, you will not believe me, etc. Though there be some variation in the words, yet they agree as well as a sharp and a flat in music: whatsoever is omitted by either is but as a rest in song. The full tone or harmony betwixt them, amounts to this: However ye will not believe what I say: nor deal ingenuously with me, yet at your peril be it: For I must tell you the truth which you know in part, but will not know; but which hereafter ye shall more than believe. For ye shall see the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God, etc. This they knew well to be a seat only for the Son of God, and therefore, whereas before they had only interrogated, whether he was the Christ, they put the second interrogatory to him, as St. Luke relateth them plainly and distinctly, though St. Matthew put them both into one; I adjure thee by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ the Son of God, Matt. 26.63. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am, Luke 22.66, and the 70. And upon this confession they proceed against him. Now this answer or confession implies these two fundamental points of belief: The first, that this JESUS of Nazareth, whom they now convented, was the Christ. The second, that although he was the Son of man, yet being the CHRIST, he was likewise the Son of God, not by adoption but by nature or primogeniture. For unless this had been the meaning of their Interrogatory and of his answer, they could not have condemned him of blasphemy, for avouching himself to be the Messias: that is, the Son of God in such a sense, as Abraham or David or Adam in his integrity had been, or any of the pure Angelical Substances are. They took it as granted, nor did he deny it, that he made himself such a Son of God, as was equal with God. And this to their apprehension was blasphemy; a capital crime, and so they censure it. So then here was God standing in the Congregation of the Mighty. These earthly Gods did judge him, and he again judgeth them: at lest he declareth himself to be that Judge, which was to judge them and the Gentiles too. But as the Psalmist in this forecited Psalm had fore-prophecied, They know not neither will they understand: they walk on in darkness; all the foundations of the earth are out of course. They indeed were Gods, and all of them children of the most High: yet all to die like men, and fall, as former great ones had done. But not the sons of God after such a manner as he was, who albeit he was to die like man, yet not to fall like one of the Princes, but to rise again by power of the Godhead to judge the earth.   

CHAP. XXVI. The false accusations made by the Priests, and Elders against the Son of God, when they brought him before Pilate, foretold by our Saviour himself and by the Prophets.  
1 AS the Son of man, and the Son of God was willing to bear our sorrows, and take all our infirmities upon him; to the end he might be a faithful Comforter of all such, as mourn: so it was his pleasure likewise to suffer this most gross and detestable civil wrong from the earthly powers of Justice, that he might be most exquisitely qualified, even according to his humane nature, to do right unto such as suffer like wrong: and justice upon all unjust Judges, especially upon such as persecute others, as he was persecuted for bearing testimony unto the truth or fundamental mysteries of our Salvation. But however these earthly Gods, or Rulers of the Jews did sentence him to death for blasphemy: yet were they not by divine providence permitted to put this sentence in execution according to that manner of punishment, which Gods Law did award to Blasphemers. For by the award of that Law he should have been stoned to death. But as S. john instructs us in this remarkable point of God's special providence; When Pilate willing to free himself from guilt of innocent blood, bid them take him, and judge him according to their law, they replied, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death. john 18.31. How true or pertinent this answer was, I will not here dispute. But thus they answered, as the same Evangelist there tells us, that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, signifying what death he should die, and by whom. This saying or prophecy of our Saviour to which St. john refers, is punctually set down by S. Matthew 20.17, 18 jesus going up to jerusalem, took the twelve Disciples apart in the way, and said unto them; Behold, we go up to jerusalem, and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief Priests, and unto the Scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him. Unto this death of the cross they brought him, by their importunate, and subtle solicitations of Pilate, to proceed against him upon another capital crime, than they by their pretended law had condemned him for. For they pronounced him as worthy and guilty of death (by their law) for blasphemy: whereas, now before Pilate they frame a new accusation against him, for rebellion against Caesar; because he professed himself to be King of the Jews, as in truth he was, for royal pity and compassion towards them: but without any purpose to move the people to take arms, or to exercise any royal authority over them, or any others upon earth, because his kingdom was not of this world.  
2 Whilst the high Priest and Elders sat as Judges in their own Council-house, they suborned false witnesses against him: but whilst they accuse him before Pilate, they themselves become the most malicious and falsest witnesses that ever were produced, or offered themselves voluntarily to testify in open Court against any living man, in a cause criminal or capital. All these malicious practices against him, were clearly foretold by the Psalmist his forerunner in the like sufferings, and in particular (I take it) by David himself Psalm 35. False witnesses did arise, they laid to my charge things that I knew not. They rewarded me evil for good, to the spoiling of my soul. But as for me, when they were sick, my clothing was sackcloth, I humbled my soul with fasting, and my prayer returned into mine own bosom. I behaved myself, as though he had been my friend or brother, I bowed down heavily as one that mourneth for his mother. But in mine adversity they rejoiced, etc. ver. 11, 12, 13. etc. Thus did the Composers of this Psalm and of some others, to the like effect complain: every man respectively in their own persons, and upon just occasions. And however they did not in their murmuring complaints, yet in the causes or occasions of the sufferings, they did really prefigure juster occasions & more grievous matter of complaint, on the behalf of their expected Redeemer. And he must have uttered the like complaints in a far higher strain, if he had been but a mere man, not armed with patience or long suffering truly divine. The indignities done unto him by Pilate and the Roman Soldiers, by Herod and his men of war, were perspicuously foretold by David Psal. 2. Why do the Heathens rage, and the people imagina vain thing? This parallel between the prophecy of David, and the historical events answering to it, not the Apostles only, but other inferior Disciples did unanimously acknowledge upon the deliverance of Peter and john and the rest of the Apostles from such violence intended against them by the Rulers, and Elders of the Jews, (as had been practised by them upon our Saviour,) for working of a miracle in his name: When they had further threatened them, they let them go, finding nothing how they might punish them, because of the people: for all men glorified God for that which was done. For the man was above forty years old, on whom this miracle of healing was shown. And being let go, they went to their own company, and reported all that the chief Priests and Elders had said unto them. And when they heard that, they lift up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art. God which hast made heaven and earth, and the sea and all that in them is: who by the mouth of thy Servant David hast said, Why do the heathens rage, and the people imagine vain things? The Kings of the Earth stood up, and the Rulers were gathered together against the Lord and his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy child JESUS, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together for to do whatsoever thy hand and thy Counsel determined before to be done. Acts 4.21, 22. etc.  
3. All of our Saviour's Persecutors, whether Jews or Gentiles, per dicta & facta malè ominata, did read their own doom and the doom of all such, unto the world's end, as shall continue the course that they begun. The Roman Soldiers clothing him in a purple robe, by putting a crown of thorns upon his head, and by crying, All hail unto the King of the Jews, did act that part in jest or comical merriment, which they must one day act in earnest, and more than tragical sorrow. For he had sworn it long before, That all knees should bow unto him, and in that day, they which crowned him with thorns, shall see him crowned with Majesty and glory. Herod in sending him back to Pilate in a white or candid robe, did bear witness of his innocency and integrity: and withal of Herod his father's scarlet sins, in putting so many poor Innocents' to a bloody death, upon the notice of his Nativity. And as for Pilate and the Roman state, by whose authority he was scourged with rods here on earth; he whose seat is in the heavens, did even then laugh them to scorn, and since hath broken the whole race of Roman Caesar's, with a rod of iron, and dashed them and their Monarchy to pieces, like a Potter's vessel. What more shall be done against these cruel Actors, or Abetters of their cruel practices against this King of Kings; I leave it wholly (with all submission) to his sole determination. But that the Indignities done unto him by the Jews, by the Roman or other heathen Governors; and the visible revenge, which hath since befallen them, were punctually foretold by David, Psalm 2. the testimony before cited, Acts 4. is a proof most authentic and most concludent.  
4. Yet of all the sufferings which he suffered under Pontius Pilate, besides the indignities done unto him in the extremities of his pains upon the Cross, (at which Pilate was not present;) the rejection of him by the Jews, when this heathen Governor out of a good nature or well meaning policy, had proposed him with an infamous thief or murderer, was far the worst, and doth deserve the indignation of all that loved him. And this circumstance is pressed home to them by S. Peter, Acts 3.13, 14. The God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jaacob; the God of our Fathers hath glorified his Son JESUS, whom ye delivered up, and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he determined to let him go. But ye denied the holy One, and the lust, and desired a Murderer to be granted unto you, and killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised up from the dead, etc. In this preposterous, and sacrilegious choice, they did the Devil a more peculiar and more immediate service, than their Idolatrous forefathers had ever done, either in adoring the brazen Serpent, (which was the most perverse Idolatry, that ever they committed) or in sacrificing their sons & daughters to the infernal spirits. In those services, they declare themselves to be servants to Devils: In this sinister choice they prove themselves to be the Devils own sons: and exactly fulfil our Saviour's prophecy or discovery of their inclinations, before they themselves did know them. For when Jesus had told such Jews as did in a sort believe on him, that they were servants to sin, and could not be made free, but by the Son, who abideth in the house for ever: they cholerickly reply, that they were the sons of Abraham. Our Saviour rejoins, Ye are of your Father the Devil, and the lusts of your Father you will do, he was a murderer from the beginning. john 8.30. etc. and the 44. And so they now desire Barrabas, one whose name imports the son of their father: and by quality, the son of the Devil, an infamous murderer, to be delivered unto them, in memory of their deliverance out of Egypt: and importunately solicit the murder of the Son of God, of that very God, who had delivered them out of Egypt: who spoke to Moses in Mount Sinai; that Lord God, unto whom joshua and all the Judges that succeeded him, were but Generals in the time of war; unto whom in time of peace or counsel for direction of public affairs, the best of the Priests and Prophets unto the days of Samuel, were but Deputies. For the Lord God of Israel all that time was their immediate and proper King. Governors and Deputies they had successively many, but none endued with royal Authority, besides him. No matter of consequence whether of war or peace, was undertaken by their Governors without special revelation or answer from him by Urim and Thummim, until samuel's old age; Then all the Elders of Israel, gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah, and said unto him, Behold thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a King to judge us, like all the Nations. But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, give us a King to judge us: and Samuel prayed unto the Lord, 1. Sam. 8.4, 5. This unseasonable ill aboding desire, did displease the Lord unto whom they prayed, as much as it did Samuel. And yet so far is he from forcing obedience by irresistible coaction, that he persuades Samuel to descend to their importunate suit, but first to make protestation against it; Now therefore hearken to their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and show the manner of the King, that shall reign over them. ver. 9 This protestation against their petition, and his pathetical forewarning of them, what hard usage they should find under the King, whom they would choose, are set down at full from the 10. of this Chap. unto the 19 Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel, and they said, Nay, but we will have a King to rule over us, that we may be like all Nations, and that our King may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles. And so after Samuel had rehearsed their resolution in the ears of the Lord their present King, notwithstanding the protestation, and their forewarning concerning their future King's manner of government, they are permitted for the hardness of their hearts, to go to a free Election of a new King. Yet the calamities and oppressions which Samuel forewarns would follow upon this their not approved Election, was scarce so much as verified in the days of Saul, of David, or Solomon: never exactly fulfilled by any King of their own nomination, or by any King imposed upon them, until they solemnly and openly disclaim their Native King; (that very God whom Samuel in all this business had consulted) and cried, We have no King but Caesar. After this nomination of Caesar for their King, whatsoever calamities foretold by Samuel, were in any part verified by their own unruly Kings, were most exactly accomplished by the race of Caesar's, unto whom they solemnly dedicated that allegiance, which was due to jesus their ancient Lord and King. At the same time, and not before, were the words of the Lord unto Samuel Chap. 8.7, 8. exactly fulfilled. The Lord said unto Samuel, harken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them. According to all the works which they have done, since I brought them out of Egypt, even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods; so do they also unto thee. But of the fulfilling of this prophecy, both according to the literal sense, and prefigurations or matter of fact: and how the Priests and Scribes with their projects against our Saviour, did bring Jacob's dying curse, or ominous predictions against Simeon and Levi upon themselves, and their posterity; more hath been said in the Commentaries of the first Book 
* Sect. 3. Chap. 11. par. 9, 10. etc.  of the Creed, than I now exactly remember: more at least then I will trouble the Reader with a repetition of what he may find there published.   

CHAP. XXVII. Of such repentance as Judas found: of his casting down the thirty pieces of silver in the Temple: and of the difficulties or variety of opinions, by which of the Prophets it was foretold.  
1 ONe historical relation concerning judas and his fearful end, there is, which is by S. Matthew, (who of all the four Evangelists citeth the testimony of the Prophecy, wherein part of it was foretold) left somewhat ambiguous for the circumstances of time, wherein it happened. Some perhaps would at the first sight, conceive from St. Matthews words, that judas did cast down the hire of his treason in the Temple, immediately after the chief Priests and Elders had bound our Saviour, and led him to Pontius Pilate the Governor. But if we consider other circumstances of time related by S. john, and S. Luke, it is far more probable that judas was not touched with sorrow or grief: whether of mind or of body or of both, until our Saviour was sentenced to the death of the Cross by Pontius Pilate. For the first thing, which the chief Priests and Elders did, after they themselves had past sentence on our Saviour, was the delivery of him to the Secular power, and their importunate solicitation of Pilate to put their sentence in execution. It was a memorable document of deadly hypocrisy in the Priests and Elders, that they would not enter into the Common-hall or public Court of Justice to indite him there, being immediately after to celebrate the usual service for that day in the Temple. It was again an extraordinary courtesy in Pilate towards them, that he would vouchsafe to take their accusations in the pavement or Court adjoining to the Pretorium. But as well the courtesy of the one, as the hypocrisy of the other, friendly conspired to accomplish the will of God, which was to have his only Son made that day a sacrifice of atonement for the sins both of the Jews, and Gentiles; whereas if Pilate had stood upon points of Authority or prerogative: it is more than probable, the Priests and Elders would rather have deferred their accusations for that instant then have entered into the Pretorium or Common-hall. But having once obtained their desire in the Pavement, they immediately returned into the Temple, where judas attended them. And having resolved (as he thought) to have set his house or worldly business in such order, as Ahitophel had done his; he went forth and hanged himself. So that albeit judas had seen his Master dead in law, that is, sentenced to death by the high Priest and Pontius Pilate, upon the Jews importunate accusations and testimonies against him: Yet the Traitor having no witness produced against him besides his own conscience, No Judge or appointed Executioner besides himself: did die an accursed death, before his Master had made an atonement for the sins of the world. So the Psalmist by way of imprecation had foretold; Let sudden destruction come upon him unawares (or as others) let destruction come upon him, and let the net, that he hath made for others, catch himself: into that very destruction let him fall, Psalm. 35.8. How this imprecation though not directed against judas alone, did punctually fall upon him, will better appear anon in the discussions, how the imprecations reiterated in the 109. Psalm, were most punctually fulfilled in him. That which for the present I intended to advertise the Reader of, is briefly this; That if we refer the time of judas death, unto this point of time intimated, the parallel betwixt St. Matthews relation of his fearful end, and other sacred passages in the Evangelists and Apostles, will be more clear. St. Matthews relation ye have in the 27. Chapter. 3. Then judas which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief Priests and Elders, saying; I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood: And they said, What is that to us? See thou to that. And he cast down the pieces of silver in the Temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. And the chief Priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful to put them into the Treasury, because it is the price of blood. And they took counsel, and bought with them the Potter's field to bury strangers in. Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood unto this day. (Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the Prophet jeremiah saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value: and gave them for the Potter's field, as the Lord appointed me.)  
2. But where this casting down of the thirty pieces of silver in the Temple, was foretold or by whom, there is, and hath been great variety of opinions amongst learned Interpreters, as well Ancient as Modern; so great, that many of them have rather soiled, than any way cleared the meaning of the Evangelist: and left the investigation of the truth, more difficult to the ingenuous and sagacious Reader, then if they had not meddled with it, or left it (untouched) to his private search. The first difficulty is about the Grammatical signification of some words in the Original. The second pitcheth upon a misnomer of the Prophet, as whether that Prophecy, which the Evangelist said was fulfilled in this fact of judas, was uttered or written by Zachariah, or the Prophet jeremiah, or respectively by both. The third, admitting thus much was either only foretold, or both foretold, and forepictured either by jeremiah or by Zachariah or by both, whether they spoke in their own persons or in the person of judas or of Christ or of both. The first difficulty or rather discord about the literal sense of the Prophet's words, as they are related by the Evangelist, hath been occasioned partly by the Translation of the Septuagint, and partly by the Author of the vulgar Latin. For whereas we read as well in St. Matthew, as in the Prophet Zachariah, And I cast them ad figulum, to the Potter; the vulgar Latin hath it, And I cast them ad Stataarium, to the Statue maker in the house of the Lord. The Septuagint thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cast them into the furnace or to the metal-melter. The Greek might import (though not so directly as the Latin) a Potter's furnace. But if we take Statuarius (which is the expression of the vulgar Latin) in its proper sense, for a Statue maker whether in stone or of metal wrought with tool or molten, there could be no use of such an Artificer in that Temple, wherein all Statues or Images of what stuff soever they could be made were most strictly forbidden; Or in that people among whom the erecting or making of them was a crime capital. To avoid this absurdity in their Authenticated Translation, the Sectaries of the Romish Church by the [Statuary] would have us understand GOD himself, who is the former or fashioner of all things. And for this Interpretation, they allege some ancient Greek Fathers, but whose Authority, they themselves will sleight, or pass such censures upon their Authors, as they will not permit us in like case to do, whensoever they make against their pretended Catholic tenets. The most learned Interpreters in the Romish Church, do partly bewray, and sometimes openly profess, that this Interpretation is too far fetched, and far wide from the meaning of the Prophet (whosoever he was,) as he is alleged by the Evangelist. What then could move so many of them to embrace, or rather not to disclaim these roving collections? Only the authority of the Trent Council, which hath so fettered them in this and other like points, that they dare not say that their reasonable Souls are (under God) their own: but are content to sacrifice learning, reason, and common sense to many illiterate resolutions of wilful, partial, and corrupt men in that Council assembled. If the ingenuous Reader will not believe me in this particular, let him take the pains to satisfy himself, by observing how Ribera and Castrus with some other men very well learned, and ingenuous (so far as they durst) have utterly lost themselves in their Commentaries upon the 11. of Zacharie.  
3. Concerning the second difficulty, many both in the Romish and reform Churches, will in no case admit of a misnomer in the Evangelists writing, but will have the words cited by him to be the Prophet jeremiahs' own words, though no where extant in his own works, which now we have. Yet in some other works of his, which no Christian living this day, hath seen: but of which S. Hierom had seen an Hebrew Copy, as he himself relates; but unto which it doth not appear that he gave any credit, it being imparted to him by one of the sect of the Nazarens. The words of the pretended prophecy answer so punctually and identically to every apex or title of S. Matthews quotation or paraphrase upon the Prophet; as we may more than suspect, justly presume that passage which S. Hierom relates, to have been squared on purpose to S. Matthews allegation, after the publishing of this Gospel. For such supposititious or bastard books, were obtruded upon the Church before S. Hieroms' or Origens' days.  
Amongst many Interpretations upon this 11. of Zachariah, which junius in his parallels hath diligently recited, he approves only of one or two: the one, that Zachariah was binomius, had two names, jeremiah and Zachariah, a thing not unfrequent in sacred histories, especially where their names, whether they be two or more, have but one signification or importance. Now the etymology of jeremiah and Zachariah, according to his Interpretation of them, have the very same signification. The other which after this, junius likes best, is that Zachariah had the Prophet jeremiah for his Master or Instructor, though not viva voce, yet partaker of his spirit by tradition or undoubted relation of his prophetical predictions, from such as had been acquainted with jeremiah, during the time of Zedechiahs' reign, or in the beginning of the Babylonish captivity. This good Writer was afraid lest jeremiah should have lived too long, if he had been acquainted with Zachariah, upon his return from Babylon, or about the building of the second Temple, as some others before junius had avoucht, whose opinion in the main point he likes well of, to wit, that albeit the testimony alleged by S. Matthew be distinctly found in the Prophet Zachariah, yet is ascribed by the Evangelist himself purposely to jeremiah, because Zachariah had learned it from jeremiah, as Daniel had done the end of the captivity.  
4. For my part, if I could be fully persuaded (as I am not to the contrary) that the reason why S. Matthew did purposely ascribe these words in the Prophet Zachariah, unto jeremiah, was because the Prophet Zachariah had jeremiah in this and many other Prophecies for his Instructor or guide; I should think it no solecism to say, that Zachariah had been acquainted with jeremiah himself, either about the beginning of the Babylonish Captivity, or that jeremiah had lived until this people's return to Jerusalem and to the Inheritance and possessions of their forefathers. For that diverse of that generation, wherein jeremiah prophesied, and whilst the first Temple was standing, did live so long, as junius thinks it improbable jeremiah should live, is clear from that of Ezra 3.12. Many of the Priests and the Levites, and chief of the Fathers, who were ancient men, who had seen the first house; when the foundation of the house was laid before their eyes, wept with a loud voice: and many shouted aloud for joy. Howbeit, I am not of opinion, that men in those days did by strength of nature make up so many years here on earth, as this history implies these many Priests and Levites did, but rather that God by his special providence and goodness, did at this time reiterate or renew that Covenant of life, which once he made to Phinehas and Eleazar. And jeremiah and Baruch the son of Neriah, had this special privilege bestowed upon them, that their lives should be given unto them for a prey, 
* See Jer. 45. ver. 5. & 39  in all places whither soever they went. Again, it is very probable, seeing jeremiah during the time of his imprisonment did by the appointment of the Lord buy the field of Hananeel his uncle's son, and cause the Evidences subscribed to be put up by Earuch in an earthen vessel, that they might continue many days: that he expected to see the return of this people from captivity unto the possessions of their Fathers: that he himself did hope to enjoy the benefit of this his bargain, which he made in a strange time, as worldlings would think. But so he made it for the confirmation of this people's faith in God's promises, that fields and possessions, which then lay desolate, should be repossessed by this people and their posterity: and Inheritances should be sold and alienated to the next of kindred, (as this of Hananeels was to jeremiah) according to the Law.  
5. Maldonat in his Comments upon St. Matthew is very free, and not afraid, as junius and other good Writers are, to admit of a misnomer, neither occasioned by the Evangelists forgetfulness, nor from mistake of letters, or abbreviatures by the Transcribers, but rather by a voluntary intersertion of the Prophet jeremiah his name by some bold Transcriber or Interpreter, when as the Evangelist had only said, The Prophet, (as his usual manner is) without any intimation what Prophet it was, leaving that wholly to the diligent Readers search or observation. For so he doth in that remarkable Prophecy; Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, etc. he saith no more, than all this was foretold by the Prophet, without any mention or intimation of Isaiahs' name: nor doth he name the Prophet Hosea, when he records the fulfilling of his Prophecy, Out of Egypt have I called my Son, Matt. 2.15. And in verse 23. of the same Chapter, he shall be called a NAZARENE. He giving the reason why joseph, by the disposition of the Divine providence did divert his intended return unto Bethleem, where Christ was born, and took up his dwelling in Nazareth, saith this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophets, not so much as intimating the name of any one Prophet, by whom this was foretold. And if the curious Reader would observe his allegations of Prophetical testimonies, throughout his whole Gospel, he shall find the Prophet's name, (whose testimony he most faithfully records) concealed or omitted three times as often, as it is expressed. And in those few places, wherein the Prophet's name, whose authority he allegeth, is expressed, it may without any danger be questioned whether they were so expressed or interserted by Interpreters or Transcribers. For the addition of names, or change of some vowels, doth no way vitiate the divine truth of Prophecy; though the custom of later Interpreters or Translators, be far more commendable to express the Prophet's name, or the Chapter and verse, to which the Evangelical story refers, in the margin, not in the body of the Text, However the misnomers of persons or places inserted to the body of the discourse, doth no way corrupt the true sense, and meaning, either of historical or Prophetical truth: the error is imputable only to the Transcriber or Interpreter, not to the Author.  
6. But for this place now in question, I know it is objected by good Writers, (both as well of the Reformed, as Romish Church) that the most ancient copies of St. Matthews Gospel now extant, have the name of jeremiah, not of Zachariah: and therefore it is a presumption at least, that the name was not interserted by any Interpreter or Transcriber, but expressed by the first Author himself. Yet this is a presumption only, no just proof, because there may be for aught we know, more ancient copies of S. Matthew, than any man of later years hath seen or published to the world; as of later years some copies of the Septuagint and of St. john's Gospel, have been communicated unto the Christian world, which are more ancient, than those which in former ages were most common. Again, no man can make such proof, that any Greek Manuscript of S. Matthew now extant is more ancient than the Syriack Testament, in which the name of the Prophet jeremiah is not to be found, although the substance of S. Matthews Text concerning the fulfilling of this Prophecy be plain, and full. Lastly, I think, scarce any of the Romish Church would affirm, that such Manuscripts, as they have seen, are more ancient, than their first vulgar Latin Translation of the Books of Moses. And now, if it be no prejudice to the substance of truth in their most ancient Translation, to intersert names, and places, not so much as heard of in Moses his time, nor added by the Seventy Interpreters: or other expressions of the Hebrew names (used by Moses) by the Grecians: but new names imposed by the Grecians upon places otherwise called in more ancient times: it can no way disparage the true sense or meaning of S. Matthew, although very ancient Interpreters or Transcribers have interserted the name of jeremiah instead of Zachariah into the body of his Text. But where doth the most ancient vulgar Translator make any such intersertion of names into the body of Moses his writings? To omit other places, so he doth Numb. 34.11. where we read, as the Hebrew verbatim hath it, And the coast shall go down from Shepham to Riblah, the ancient vulgar Latin makes this intersertion, 
Vide Nebrisensis quinquagenam. C. 14.  de Sephama descendent termini in Reblata contra fontem Daphnen; The coast or border shall descend from Sephama to Riblah over against the fountain called Daphne, that is, to that Antioch where Christ's followers were first named Christians. It is not probable that the first Author of the vulgar Latin was more ancient, than that Hebrew copy of those Apocryphal books ascribed to jeremiah, by the sect of the Nazarenes. Now this testimony alleged by St. Matthew, being extant in that Apocryphal book before any Latin Translation of the Bible; and more ancient than any Greek transcript of S. Matthew, as yet publicly known: the Interpreters Greek or Latin might with the same confidence intersert the Prophet jeremiah his name into the body of the text, as the vulgar Latin doth the name of the fountain Daphne into the history of Moses. The most ancient and best Authority, which the Author of the vulgar Latin can pretend for this intersertion, is from the Author of the 2. Book of Maccabees. I could not therefore condemn Maldonat for speaking inconsequently either to the truth itself, or to the Authority of the Romish Church, wherein he lived, for his ingenuous free opinion concerning this misnomer in the text of S. Matthew, which is a far grosser error in Transcripts or instruments of the Law then of the Gospel.  
7 But whether we admit of Maldonats or junius opinion, as the more probable: the third difficulty proposed will not be dissolved by one, or both; And that was, how the Author of the prophecy, whose accomplishment S. Matthew records (were it jeremiah, Zachariah, or some other) should sustain the person of judas the Traitor, and the person of our Saviour CHRIST, who was betrayed, of whom the forecited Prophecy was to be literally fulfilled. That it was fulfilled by judas fact, is granted by all: but how it was fulfilled of our Saviour, is a question, which most Interpreters leave undetermined. For the resolution or determination of it, there might be another question premised, to wit, whether he or they, whosoever they were, who did foretell judas his casting down the thirty pieces of silver to the Porter in the Temple, did foresignify this by way of vision, or did withal fore-picture it by like matter of fact. But the resolution of this latter question (neither altogether impertinent, nor absolutely necessary) might be referred to the determination of the like question, moved by Interpreters upon that of Hosea 1.2. Go, take unto thee a wife of whoredoms, and children of whoredoms: for the land hath committed great whoredom, departing from the Lord However they have determined or shall determine that question concerning Hosea, as whether indeed he did take a wife of fornication unto him, or only spoke symbolically, (as if his sayings were to be construed for his deeds) neither part of the determination will determine the present difficulty, how either jeremiah or Zachariah should represent either our Saviour Christ or judas, either by word or deed. The shadow of this seeming stumbling block, hath affrighted some learned Commentators out of the right way, into which they had upon good deliberation entered. To instance in one, it was well observed by Castrus upon the 11. of Zachariah.  

Nihilominus sicut Zacharias in sua personâ referebat Christum, ita & facto suo. Nam quemadmodum pro suo munere pastoritio exigebat pretium, fidem, & pietatem ex corde, & datum est pretium vile, triginta argenteorum: ita Christus postalabat à Iudaeis pro suo Evangelizandi munere, ut sibi crederetur, & ut Deus coleretur: At illi pretio triginta argenteorum eum estimaverunt. Et sicut Propheta indignatus quòd tam vili pretio fuisset aestimatus, & pretium projecit, et eos qui pretium illi dederunt: ita Christus projecit judaeos, & tradidit Romanis devastandos. Ne verò dicamus Zachariam judae personam & Christi simul retulisse, videtur veriùs diversam esse prophetiam Zachariae & Jeremiae. Nam & Hieronymus super 27. Matthaei sic ait, Legi nuper in quodam Hebraico volumine, quod Nazareae sectae mihi Hebraicus obtulit, Jeremiae apocryphum, in quo haec ad verbum scriptareperi.   
Zachariah, he grants, did represent Christ both by personal office and by matter of fact. Zachariah did demand faith, & hearty piety of his flock for his prophetical pains amongst them, and they tender him a base reward, thirty pieces of silver: So Christ required of the Jews for his Evangelicall function amongst them, only this, that they would believe him, and worship God: and they value him at 30. pieces of silver. Again, as the Prophet with indignation renounced both the base stipend which was offered to him, & the flock which did tender it: so Christ cast off the Jews which had thus disesteemed him, and delivered them over to be destroyed by the Romans. But (saith this Author) lest we should grant that the Prophet Zachariah did by the same fact or resolution represent both the person of Christ and of judas, it is more probable that the prophecy of Zachariah is different from that of jeremiah, which S. Matthew allegeth. For Hierom upon the 27. of S. Matthew tells us, he had lately read a book of jeremiah in the Hebrew tongue, which one of the sect of the Nazarens had imparted unto him, in which he found S. Matthews allegation word for word. Thus far Castrius.  Desinit in piscem mulier formosa supernè. 
He begins his verdict in the spirit of wisdom and discretion, continueth it perplexedly, and concludeth it according to the foolishness or forgetfulness of the flesh. For that inconvenience which he so much feared, will be never a whit the less, albeit we grant him, that S. Matthews words, do not refer to the forecited place of Zachariah, but to those books of jeremiah, which S. Hierom had seen; or to any other Prophet whatsoever, whether his works be extant or lost. And thus being blencht in his right course by the shadow, he falls foul upon that very stumbling block, or rather a far worse than that, which he sought to avoid. For by his conclusion the often forementioned allegation of S. Matthew cannot be literally, or concludently referred to any Prophet at all.   

CHAP. XXVIII. The clear resolution of the third difficulty proposed: of the fearful end of Judas, and how it was both forepictured, and foretold.  
1 SHall we say then that either Zachariah or any other sacred Author of the Prophecy alleged by S. Matthew did represent both the person of judas the Traitor, and of JESUS CHRIST whom he betrayed? There is no necessity to avouch thus much: nor would it be any absurdity to grant all this and somewhat more. The parallel between the Evangelist, and the prophecy of Zachariah, as now it is extant, (whether in the Hebrew or Septuagint) whether he only foretold the event, or foreacted it also by like matter of fact, (which latter is more than probable,) is most exact. For Zachary (as he himself affirmeth) did require his stipend for his prophetical function, and they weighed him thirty pieces of silver, Zacharie 11.12. But this stipend, after he had received it, was so contemptible in the sight of the Lord, that he said unto him, Cast it unto the potter, a goodly price, that I was prized at of them. And so he took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the Potter in the house of the Lord. In thus undervaluing the Prophet's person and pains, they did undervalue the goodness and person of that Lord, whose Ambassador he was. judas in like sort goeth to the high Priests, and asked of them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? and they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver. Matthew 26.15. This was the highest price, which this last and worst generation of Israel, did set upon the chief Shepherd of their souls; not the hire or stipend for his pains: for these they set at nought. And by this act they did exactly fulfil both the Prophet Zachariahs' words, and the measure of their forefathers sins, in undervaluing his ministerial labours and person. The same Lord which commanded Zachariah to cast his contemptible stipend unto the Potter, did now cause judas to throw down the price, for which he sold and delivered his Lord & Master unto the chief Priests and Officers, in the same house of God or Temple, after he had seen that it was the price of his Master's blood, not the stipend only of his treachery. That judas did thus far repent, as to acknowledge his sin in saying, I have sinned in betraying innocent blood, this was the Lords doing, or (as the Evangelist saith) that which the Lord appointed him to do. Matthew 27.12. And no Christian need be afraid to say, that judas was moved or appointed of the Lord, as Zacharie was, to cast down the thirty pieces of silver in the Temple, to the end, that his prophecy, and his fact might be exactly fulfilled. Their forefathers in offering unto Zachariah thirty pieces of silver for his hire, did forepicture that their ungracious posterity would set as low a price upon the Lord himself. And those words of the Lord unto the Prophet, verse 13. A goodly price that I was prized at, have the same sense, & importance with the like words (before cited) 
* Chap. 26 parag. 4.  unto Samuel, They have not cast thee off from being King, but me. If we compare the 13. verse of the 11. of Zacharie with the 12, and consider the alteration of the persons speaking, they will bear this sense or importance; or rather require this construction; Be content to forgo thy stipend: for they have not only undervalved thee and thy ministerial pains, but they have undervalved me. For as this present generation hath done by thee, so and much worse will their ungracious posterity deal with me. This is the very brief or abstract of S. Matthew Chap. 27. ver. 9, 10. (Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the Prophet saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value: and gave them for the Potter's field, as the Lord appointed me.) These last words cast a scruple or rather a stumbling block in many Interpreters ways, how the Prophet Zachariah should be appointed of the Lord to buy the Potter's field. But this is presently taken away, if we consider, that the Evangelist in the 9 and 10. verses doth make a paraphrase or exegetical exposition upon the Prophet's words. Now it was ever lawful, yea the office of the Apostles and Evangelists, not only to quote the Prophets, but to paraphrase upon or expound aswell the literal as mystical sense of their words, or portendments of their facts. And if we consult the Prophet himself in the original, or in the Translation of the seventy; that exposition which we have made as well of his words, as of S. Matthews paraphrase, is most naturally emergent out of the Grammatical signification of the words, and the persons speaking. When the Prophet speaks unto the people in his own person, he saith, If ye think good, give me my stipend or hire, 
* Zach. 11.12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Septuagint  not my price, as some render the Original. But when the Lord speaks thus unto him, Cast it to the Potter, he saith not a goodly stipend, that I was rewarded with, but a goodly 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gloriosum pretium, quo appretiatus sum. Zach. 11.13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  price, that I was prized at of them. And this distinction of the words persuades me, that the Prophet did really demand, and they did really pay his stipend. And in this their undervaluation of his person, and pains, they did portend their posterities disesteem of the great Prophet the Lord himself.  
2. One scruple yet remains, which if I did not, every observant Reader of the Prophet would cast in his own way: and it is this; what the Prophet had to do with any Potter in the house of the Lord? Some interpreters without any mention of this scruple, give this reason why God commanded the Prophet to throw his stipend to the Potter, because his person or profession was as contemptible, as the stipend was. But if this was the true reason the party to whom he threw it, was not contemptible only for the meanness of his person or profession, but contemptible amongst others of his own trade. For the word in the Original hath a note of demonstration prefixed unto it: not a Potter, but the Potter. This scruple (if I mistake not) is already cleared in the former Book. 
See the 7. book of Comments on the Creed.  For as Vatablus with the consent of some ancient Hebrew Rabbins observe, the ancient reading of the Hebrew was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto the Treasury, or unto the Treasurer. But in succession of time there happened a variation in reading, not by negligence of Transcribers or Translators, but by God's special providence, [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉]. And this substitution of one letter for another, or alteration of the signification of the words, did most divinely character the devolution of the thirty pieces of silver, designed by judas to the Treasury or Corban, unto the buying of the Potter's field to bury strangers in it. Both judas, for casting them down for the Temples use; and the chief Priests, in otherwise disposing of them, did as the Lord had appointed them. Neither of them did amiss in all this. The height of their sin was in buying and selling the Lord of life, specially at so low a price. This the Lord did not appoint, or ordain them to do: yet did he ordain their most wicked deeds, and direct their malicious intentions to an happy end: to the redemption of all our souls, and to the fulfilling of this Prophecy. And so he did ordain judas his resolution to make away himself, unto the confirmation of our faith, and to the fulfilling of another Prophecy, not much observed (for aught I read) by most Interpreters. The first and last act that judas did, after he had cast down the thirty pieces of silver in the Temple, is recorded by S. Matthew, 27.5. And he cast down the pieces of silver in the Temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.  
3. This last act was prefigured, (as most have observed) by the fearful end of Ahitophel. But was the manner of his dying, (which was somewhat more fearful, than Ahitophels') any where else foretold? Yes, it was most remarkably fore-prophecied Psalm 109. with its circumstances, or sad consequences. First, that the imprecations throughout that Psalm were literally meant of judas, though his name be not expressed in it, is clear from St. Peter's speech unto the Assembly of Christ's Disciples, for proceeding to the election of another Apostle, in judas his place; And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the Disciples and said, (The number of the names together were about an hundred and twenty) Men, and Brethren, this Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the holy Ghost by the mouth of David spoke before concerning judas, 
S. Matthew adds, and saith it was called the field of blood unto this day: which argues that he wrote his Gospel a long time after S. Peter made his Comment upon the Psalmist.  which was guide to them that took jesus. For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry. Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity, and falling headlong he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out: and it was known unto all the dwellers at jerusalem, insomuch, as that field in their proper tongue is called Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood. For it is written in the Book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein. And his Bishopric let another take, Acts 1.15, 16, 17. Albeit the chief Priest did bargain for the field to bury strangers in, yet in as much, as the money wherewith they bought it, was judas his goods, not theirs; St. Peter held it no solecism to say, that this man, (to wit, judas) did purchase a field with the reward of iniquity. And seeing this field was purchased of a Potter, it is but one and the same manner of speech, which S. Matthew useth (by way of paraphrase upon the Prophet Zachariah,) that judas did cast down the thirty pieces of silver to the Potter in the house of the Lord. S. Matthew relates only judas his hanging of himself: S. Peter adds further, that falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. It seems, or rather it is evident, that either the rope or the gallow tree did break: the later is more probable, if any heed be to be given to an old tradition, that he made choice of an Elder tree for the gallows; a very brittle wood, and such as bears no good fruit, unless it be that which is called the Jews-eare. But although we be bound to believe, that most of the imprecations in this Psalm were literally, and concludently meant of judas; yet it may be questioned, whether they were literally meant of him alone, or directly intended against his person by the Prophet David. And however it was lawful for the Prophets to pray directly against particular persons living in their own time (which for any Christian living to do is most abominable:) yet for the particular imprecations of this and some other Psalmists, which were not fulfilled till after ages, I cannot but highly approve of Genebrards' resolution upon this Psalm. The extract of his resolution is, that however David might have just occasions to supplicat for revenge upon some enemies to him, and to his Government, and to the God of Israel whose Deputy he was: Yet his direful imprecations throughout this Psalm, aims at the whole host of impiety, or the body of impious men. And seeing judas was the chief or highest member of that huge body with whom he fought: the curses which he sent forth at random (in respect of future ages) did fall perpendicularly and most punctually, in fullest measure, upon this eminent Traitor to his King and Country; to his Lord God.  
4. All the imprecations throughout this Psalm are Prophetical, and have been (at least respectively) long ago fulfilled; but in which of them, the manner of this Traitors fearful end was in particular punctually foretold, is not so clear, as that the ordinary Reader will easily see it. Nor can he be much holpen by any discoveries of most Interpreters. Many besides judas have hanged themselves: many have been surprised by sudden death, or smitten by God's revenging arrow, with sore diseases in a moment. Yet have we read of none, in whose death, self intentions and secret acute diseases did so concur as they did in judas. His own intention was only to hang himself, and this he effected. But certainly there was somewhat more in it, than could naturally follow from this attempt; as that he should burst asunder in the middle, that all his bowels should gush out, and hasten his death before the ordinary time of expiration by the ordinary course of nature in such, as die that unnatural and accursed death, which he sought after. But the Psalmist had thus prophesied and prayed against him, Psalm 109.17. As he loved cursing, so let it come unto him: as he delighted not in blessing, so let it be far from him. As he clothed himself with cursing, like as with his garment; so let it come into his bowels like water, and like oil into his bones. Yet do we not read, nor have we any occasion to suspect, that judas being a Companion of the blessed Apostles till his death, and a continual follower of Christ the blessed whilst he lived on earth; was accustomed to swear, curse, or blaspheme. His demeanour amongst them (doubtless) was civil, not profane. How then were the Psalmists words punctually verified of him; He loved cursing: he delighted not in blessing? The meaning is, (as in many other places of the Psalmists) that however he did not openly swear, curse, or blaspheme, or bewray his hate to goodness: yet in his heart he did abhor the ways, which tend to peace and happiness, and set himself not immediately or directly to cursedness. How then is he said to have loved cursing? Because through avarice, and stiff adherence to sinister private ends, which he had secretly proposed unto himself; he was diverted from the ways of peace and happiness, (which is the end, that all men in the general seek and wish for) unto the crooked paths which wind to cursedness and malediction. As his addiction to these paths was secret and hid, so was the disease whereof he died. It gathered secretly, though suddenly within his body. It soaked like oil into his bones, and into his bowels like water. And as a good Author (whose words, and name I now remember not) hath conjectured, he died of a dropsy more acute and sudden, than that disease naturally is. Yet however it bred within him, by causes natural or supernatural, it might be the true and natural cause of his bursting in the middle, and of the gushing out of his bowels. Of his sudden disease and destruction, other Psalmists had likewise prophesied. 
See Psal. 55.16.  Now that these and the like Prophetical imprecations might be exactly and remarkably fulfilled in him; the righteous Lord would not suffer him to die merely of strangling or suffocation, but smote him with these secret and sudden diseases; of what kind soever they were.   

CHAP. XXIX. Of the Harmony betwixt the Evangelists narrations or history [from the time our Saviour was sentenced to death, until his expiration upon the Cross:] and the Mosaical prefigurations or Prophecies concerning his death and sufferings.  
1 THere is no knowledge comparable to the knowledge of CHRIST, nor is there any other part of this knowledge more useful than the contemplation of his Cross. A Theme of which no private Christian can meditate too often, or too much, so he follow the directions of the learned for his practice. Of this argument a great many Interpreters have writ very much, and a good many very well, both for the doctrinal part, and for the useful, which must be grounded upon the doctrinal. The expressions of my meditations upon this point, or (which is all one) the use or application of this grand Article of belief, (for whom he died) or what is to be done by them, who intent to be true partakers of this common salvation purchased by his Cross: These and the like I must defer, until I have set down (as God shall enable me) the doctrinal points of his humiliation (whereof the Cross is the period,) and his exaltation, which was accomplished by his ascension. That which must confirm and cherish our belief, as well of his cross, as of his resurrection and ascension; is the clear harmony between the Evangelicall histories themselves, and the predictions or prefigurations of what they jointly or severally relate, recorded in the books of Moses and the Prophets, or the historical volumes of the old Testament.  
2. He bearing his Cross, (saith S. john) went forth unto a place called in the Hebrew Golgotha, Chap. 19.17. When they had mocked him (saith S. Mark) they took off the purple from him, and put his own clothes on him, and led him out to crucify him; and they compel one Simon a Cyrenian, who passed by, coming out of the Country, (the father of Alexander, and Rufus) to bear his Cross, Chap. 15.20. Betwixt these two relations of S. john and S. Mark, there is some variation, no contradiction, no such appearance of contradiction, as might be picked between S. Matthew and the other Evangelists about his riding unto Jerusalem upon the Ass, and the Colt, as S. Matthew saith: or (as the others express) upon the Colt only. But that appearance of contradiction (as hath been set down before) will easily vanish, to him that peruseth the Prophet Zachariah & the Evangelists, with an observant and clear eye. For he might ride part of the way upon the one, and part upon the other. In like manner seeing his progress from the Common hall unto Golgotha, was divisible, as the local distance between them was, our Saviour himself might bear his Cross some part of the way, or for a while: and Simon the Cyrenian perhaps a greater part of the way, or for a longer time. Again, seeing the Cross itself was not only divisible but actually divided, our Saviour might bear one part of it all the way, and Simon another for the most part of the way between the Praetorium and Golgotha. Nor is it probable that either of them should for any time, or for any portion of the way bear both the whole Cross, and the Chapter whereon the title of his accusation was engrossed by pillar [jesus of Nazareth King of the jews.] That our Saviour did bear his Cross out of the Praetorium or place of Judicature, is clear from the forecited place of S. john. And it is more than probable, that he did bear it all along the City, till he came to the public gate, where the Soldiers meeting with Simon coming out of the Country, compel him to go back again with them, and bear the Cross to Golgotha. And as they came out (saith S. Matthew) or rather as they were coming forth (not from the Praetorium or Common-hall, but from the gates of the City) they found a man of Cyrene, him they compelled to bear his Cross. It is clear again from S. Luke 23.26. that Simon did bear the Cross, JESUS going before him. Whether our Saviour did faint under it at the gate through feebleness of body, or by long watching, I will not dispute, much less determine; though some good Writers give this reason why Simon was compelled to bear it, being first laid upon our Saviour. But whether for this reason or some other, they took it from our Saviour's shoulders, and laid it upon Simons; there was a mystery in it, and at least, an Emblematical expression of what our Saviour before had said, If any man will be my Disciple, let him take up his cross, and follow me. For this Simon questionless either had been one of Christ's Disciples before, or at this time became one, as his two sons Alexander and Rufus were, when S. Mark did write his Gospel. But it is very probable that they knew him for one of his Disciples, and for this reason compelled him to bear his Cross, being not willing of himself to do them any service in such a wicked employment. Now though this man did meet JESUS, when he was going out of the gate, (as we would say) by mere 2chance or fortune, that is, without any intention or forecast on his part so to do; yet even this contingency was determined, and the thing itself intended by Divine providence, that we might have a visible pattern set by this man, (though against his will) of that duty or service, which the Apostle prescribeth to all that intent to be Christ's true Disciples. jesus, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. Let us go forth therefore unto him without the gate, bearing his reproach, Heb. 13.12, 13. We must do that willingly which this man was compelled to do; that is, renounce our intended ways, and follow him, as this man did, bearing his Cross.  
3. After he was come to Golgotha, but before he was nailed to the Cross; they gave him wine mingled with gall (as S. Matthew saith) or (as S. Mark) with myrrh. With what intention they ministered this bitter cup unto him, he best knows: Not for his comfort (as I conjecture) but rather to add gall unto wormwood, or to make the potion more loathsome unto him by these two bitter ingredients. For thus much the Psalmists words, (which were now in part fulfilled of him) imply: I looked for some to take pity, but there was none, and for comforters but I found none. They gave me also gall for my meat, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink, Psalm. 69.20, 21. Whether the other two which were crucified with him, had the like cup ministered unto them, is uncertain: but the Evangelists take no notice of what was done to them. Myrrh mingled with wine being in some cases a strengthener, might be offered to them, that they might die more courageously: and our Saviour's mingled with myrrh and gall, that the Psalmists complaint might be more remarkably fulfilled in him, posuerunt fell in escam meam. When he had tasted of this bitter cup; (saith S. Matthew) he would not drink, 27.34. They gave him to drink (saith S. Mark) wine mingled with myrrh, but he received it not, 15.23. To taste of it, and not to drink of it, (as S. Matthew saith) was not to receive it, or not to accept of it: so that there is no appearance of contradiction betwixt these two Evangelists; both of them relate the same truth: but neither of them the same truth fully. S. Mark omits the mingling of the wine with gall; S. Matthew the mingling of it with myrrh, and his not receiving of it: or rather to taste of it, not to drink of it, was both to receive it, and not to receive it.  
4. That the Lord was crucified betwixt two malefactors, all the Evangelists agree without any variation in words: but the circumstance or order of time wherein they were crucified, is not so punctually set down by any of the Evangelists, as the circumstance or order of place. They were crucified all together, one near to another; yet one after another in respect of time. Then were there two thiefs crucified with him (saith S. Matthew) one on the right hand, and another on the left, 27.38. This seems to imply that our Saviour was the first that was crucified. So doth S. Marks relation, Chap. 15.27. And with him they crucified two thiefs, one on the right hand, and another on the left. Nor doth S. Luke any way vary from these two Evangelists, Luk. 23.32, 33. And there were also two other malefactors led with him to be put to death. And when they were come to the place which is called Calvary; there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and another on the left. The crucifying of the Son of God between two notorious malefactors, (as bad, if not worse than Barrabas was) upon a cross, (as is probable) somewhat higher than the other two, was so plainly foretold by the Prophet Isaiah, Chap. 53. that his Prophecy needs no other Comment, then that which S. Mark hath made upon this circumstance of place, wherein he was crucified. And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors, or, as the vulgar hath it, Et cum sceleratis reputatus est; He was not only sentenced to death, but reputed also by the multitude as a notorious Malefactor; and for this reason crucified in the middle, and upon an higher Cross. For this prerogative, or preeminence of place in capital punishments, was by the custom of those times, and by other Nations since, allotted to the principal offenders or Ringleaders in mutinies, treasons, or rebellions. Now our Saviour (as the superscription of his Cross doth witness,) was put to death for high treason. This is jesus of Nazareth (or Jesus the Nazaren) the King of the jews. This was the entire title, or full inscription, as the Reader will easily conceive, if he compare the four Evangelists together, albeit none of them taken alone doth express so much.  
5. It might more easily be questioned then resolved (for the Evangelists say nothing expressly one way or other) whether Pilate himself did write this title, or caused it to be written by some under-Officer of the Court: or whether it were first written in the Court of Justice, or at the place of execution. Pilate (saith S. john) wrote a title, and put it on the Cross, and the writing was JESUS of NAZARETH King of the Jews. john 19.19. The superscription of his accusation was (saith S. Mark) The King of the jews, Chap. 15.26. To me it seems probable that this title was written or dictated by Pilate in the place of Judicature, because I find no probable reason to conjecture that Pilate should be present in person at the place of execution. It is probable again from S. Matthew, that the table or chapter, wherein this title was written, was not set up till after he was crucified: Sitting down, they watched there, and set over his head his accusation written, This is jesus the King of the jews, Matt. 27.36, 37. And S. john's words Chap. 19.20. to my apprehension do more than intimate, that few or none besides Pilate himself did know of this inscription, before the Cross was pitched, and our Saviour nailed unto it. This title (saith he) then read many of the jews: for the place where jesus was crucified, was nigh to the City. To what these last words should refer I cannot conjecture, unless it be to give us notice, that the Jews which read this title might speedily inform the high Priests what Pilate had written, and they as speedily entreat Pilate (as they boldly did) to correct or amend this superscription: for so it immediately follows in the Evangelist; Then said the chief Priests of the jews to Pilate, Write not, the King of the jews, but that he said, I am the King of the jews. But Pilate answered, What I have written, I have written, verse 23. The same Lord who had made Caiaphas not long before to prophesy, did now guide Pilat's hands and thoughts (though not to prophesy, yet) to proclaim unto the world in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, that this harmless man whom they had first condemned in their own Consistory for blasphemy against God; and afterwards indicted of high treason against Caesar; was indeed their true and lawful King: a greater and more just King then Caesar himself was; and (as the Centurion afterwards confessed) the very Son of God. Whether the title and inscription of the crimes, and names of the parties crucified were usual amongst the Romans, or used at this time only, and that over our Saviour's head alone, I leave unto the Readers search, or to such as have leisure to study Roman rites or Antiquities.  
6. Pilat in all probability did write, or cause to be written this superscription, to avoid the calumniations of the Jews before the Roman Caesar, unto whose accusations he had been the more liable, if he had suffered the crime pretended by them to have slept, or buried it in silence without any public Record, that he had punished JESUS of NAZARETH, as a traitor to the Roman Emperor. After this inscription of his accusation was set up over his head, they that passed by reviled him wagging their heads, saying, Thou that destroyest the Temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God come down from the Cross. Likewise also the chief Priests mocking him, with the Scribes and Elders said: He saved others, himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the Cross, and we will believe him: he trusted in God, let him deliver him now, if he will have him; for he said, I am the Son of God, Matt. 27.39, 40, etc. All these, and the like indignities done unto him betwixt the time of the inscription over his Cross until the sixth hour, are so clearly and punctually foretold by the Author of the 22. Psalm, that it might well be questioned, whether the Psalmist did speak all this in the person of Christ alone, or respectively of himself: that is in other terms, whether this Psalm was merely prophetical as that 53. Chap. of Isaiah (for aught I conceive) is: or typically prophetical. I rather assent unto their opinion, who grant this Psalm to be meant (for the most part at least) of David himself; or of the Author of it, whosoever he was, according to the literal or historical sense, though more exactly by much to be fulfilled according both to the mystical and exquisite literal sense in that Son of David, of whom David himself and most of the Prophets in their extremest sufferings were but types or shadows. Unto whose Poetical or hyperbolical expressions of their personal grievances in their several generations, the personal sufferings of the Son of God were in succession of time to be commensurably fitted, after such a manner, as a body in his groweth is to the garment which in its infancy was far too wide for it. Some passages in this Psalm there are, which cannot in any sense befit our Saviour, but the Psalmist alone; some again which fit our Saviour much better than they did this Psalmist or any other prophetical type or shadow of him. Such are the casting of lots upon his vesture; the piercing of his hands and feet. But what occasions soever this Psalmist had to utter the like complaints, there is no character either of desperation or murmuring against his God in these his afflictions throughout this whole Psalm: Much less was there any inclination either to despair or impatience, in the Son of God in whom alone this Psalm was exactly fulfilled. Neither was this Psalm, or any other to be fulfilled in him, or by him according to the characters of impatience or least intimation of doubt or despair in this Psalmist; but according to their cheerful embracements of their present afflictions and crosses, according to their confidence and hope of deliverance from them, and exaltation or restauration into Gods most special favour after them. All the delineations or characters of heroical qualities in the Psalmists, were to be substantially and exactly fulfilled in the Son of God. The conclusion of the latter part of this Psalm from the 21. verse to the end is full of hope and comfort on the Psalmists own part; and a divine Prophecy of the victory, which the Son of God, of whom he was the type or shadow, should obtain over death, pains, and sorrows more grievous than he himself did suffer. In this vision of the Son of God's victory over all these, David did foresee and rejoiced to foresee his own redemption from the present griefs and sorrows of heart, with which he was compassed. Briefly, this 22. Psalm from the beginning to the end lies under the self same observation with the 
* See the 7. book of these Commentaries. sect. 3. cap. 28. sect;. 5.  sixteenth Psalm, which without all question was penned by David himself.  
7. But seeing it is to be confessed by all, that the most part of our Saviour's sufferings upon the Cross, whether inwardly in body, or in cursed speeches, revile, and taunts; are most clearly foretold in that 22. Psalm: This ministered to me an occasion of a new quaere, why our Saviour (during all the time of his lingering pains upon the Cross) should rehearse only the first words of this Psalm: and why them only, after all the rest, which did literally and exactly concern him, had been visibly and audibly fulfilled in his bodily sufferances, grievous pains, and other indignities done unto him. Why did he not repeat that part of this Psalm, [They pierced my hands and my feet,] when they first nailed him unto the Cross? or why not the 18. verse, They parted my garments, etc. at that instant, wherein the Soldiers cast lots, whose his vesture should be? or why not the 7. and the 8. verses of the same Psalm, All they that see me, laugh me to scorn: they shoot out their lips: they shake their heads, saying, [He trusted in the Lord;] at that very time, when they that passed by, and the Priests and Elders that stood by the Cross, reviled him, wagging their heads? All these indignities were done unto him before the sixth hour, and in the open Sun: whereas he did not utter the words of complaint, wherewith the Psalmist beginneth his Psalm, until the ninth hour. When the sixth hour was come, (saith S. Mark) there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour. And at the ninth hour jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi lamasabacthani, which is being interpreted, My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me? Mark. 15.33, 34. S. Matthew relateth the same story, in the same order, and circumstance of time, only with this variation in words, Eli, Eli lamasabacthani? Matt. 27.46. S. Mark it seems, relateth the words in the Syriack or Chaldee then usual: S. Matthew in the same syllables our Saviour spoke them, and as they are in the Psalmist; for Eli comes nearer to the name of Elias then Eloi: and might more easily occasion that mistake in the multitude, which both the Evangelists relate; then if he had cried Eloi: for that was the usual appellation of God in those times. Some of them that stood by (saith S. Mark) when they heard it, said, Behold he calleth Elias, Mark 15.35. Some of them (saith S. Matthew) that stood there, when they heard that, said, This man calleth for Elias. And straightway, one of them ran and took a sponge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave it him to drink: the rest said, Let be; let us see, whether Elias will come to save him, Matth. 27.47, etc. Between S. Matthew, and S. Mark in this last clause, concerning vinegar which was given unto him; there is some variation in words. And one ran (saith S. Mark) and filled a sponge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying, Let alone, let us see whether Elias will come to take him down, Mark 15.36. S. Mark appropriateth that speech unto the party, which ran to give him vinegar, which S. Matthew ascribeth to the rest of the multitude seeking (as his words seem to import) to inhibit him from doing that which he did. This variation in words betwixt these two Evangelists, hath occasioned a question more proper to the Schools of Physic then of Divinity, as Whether the drinking of vinegar be more effectual to prolong life, or hasten death in bodies fainting, specially for want of blood. S. Marks relation seemeth to imply that the intention of the party, which ran to give him vinegar, was to prolong his life for a while, to try whether Elias would come, and take him down from the Cross. But from S. Matthews relation of the same story, it is probable that the multitude which heard him utter these words. My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me? did presume that vinegar would shorten his life; and for this reason, as much as in them lay, did inhibit the other to give him vinegar, lest it might have been replied, that Elias would have come to relieve him, if he had not hastened his death. But vinegar as it is thought by Galen himself, (if some good Commentators do not misquote him) mingled with hyssop, is a strengthener; and that the vessel of vinegar which S. john saith stood by the Cross, was set there on purpose to keep such as were crucified from fainting. However, there is no contradiction between the Evangelists. For the multitude did therefore inhibit him, that ran for vinegar, lest by thus doing, he should prolong his life; as if they had said. Seeing he calls for Elias, stay thine hand, and see whether Elias will come to recover him in his fainting. And he which gave him vinegar, after he had given it him, did conform himself unto the rest, as if he had said; I have done this kindness for him to prolong his life a while, let us see whether Elias will come and take him down, and free him from the Cross. The truth is, that albeit he which made such haste to minister vinegar unto him, did do this feat at the same time, or about that instant wherein our Saviour cried out, Eli, Eli lamasabacthani; yet this exclamation did no way cause him to make such speed, but rather moved the rest which heard these words (perhaps better than he did,) to dissuade him from doing that which he intended upon another occasion. That which moved him to do, as he did, was another speech of our Saviour's uttered by him, when he was on the Cross; either immediately before, or immediately after he cried out, Eli, Eli, etc. though not with such a loud voice, as he uttered that. And this speech is mentioned only by S. john 19.28, 29. jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the Scripture might be fulfilled said, I thirst. Now there was a vessel full of vinegar, and they filled a sponge full of vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. When jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished. So that the intention of him that filled the sponge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth, was to quench his thirst whereof he complained. But whether St. john meaneth the same thing by hyssop, which the other two Evangelists mean by the reed: or whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Ecclesiastical Greek, be the same with that which we call hyssop, or rather rosemary, which is rather a frutex, than an herb, and better resembleth a reed then hyssop; let professed Critics, or such as have leisure to peruse Herbalists, or such as write of plants, determine. Many probabilities there are, and to my remembrance alleged by Gerard (not the famous Herbalist) but that learned Divine yet living, which half persuades me that the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Ecclesiastical Greek seems to be derived, was the branches or stalks of Rosemary. But these are points, wherein a man may be altogether ignorant without any detriment; or very skilful without any great advantage to the knowledge of JESUS CHRIST, and of him crucified. But unto this Ocean of celestial knowledge, the fulfilling of every prophecy, of every legal ceremony, of every historical type or shadow, maketh some addition.  
8. Amongst other prophecies or testimonies typically prophetical, which remained to be fulfilled after our Saviour cried out with a loud voice, Eli, Eli lamasabacthani; that complaint of the Psalmist, 69.22. was one; They gave me also gall for to eat, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink. He saith not, They gave him gall to eat in his hunger: and for this reason haply he would not receive the wine which was mingled with gall by way of scorn or mocking (at S. Luke instructs us, 23.36.) as being then neither hungry nor thirsty. But S. john informeth us, he received the vinegar offered unto him at the ninth hour, because he was in extremity of thirst. At this hour and not before, that of the Psalmist 22. was remarkably fulfilled in him; My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws: Thou hast brought me to the dust of death, verse 15. As after his fasting forty days in the wilderness, he was tempted with hunger: so after his lingering pains upon the Cross, he was truly thirsty: and upon this sensible experience of the greatest bodily grievance that can befall a man, he said, I am athirst, but not with a loud voice or exclamation. Whether he first said, I am a thirst, and then cried out with a loud voice, My God, My God why hast thou forsaken me? Or first cried out. My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me? and then said, I am athirst, I will not dispute, because I cannot determine. The later of the two seemeth to me more probable. However; neither his speech nor exclamation intimate any touch of impatience, much less of despair; but only a desire to give the world notice that this 22. Psalm was specially meant of him; and that all which was meant of him concerning his humiliation or indignities done unto him upon the Cross, were now fulfilled; and that there remained one or two sayings of the same or some other Psalmist to be fulfilled before his death, especially by receiving the vinegar. For when he had received it, (saith S, john) he said, Consummatum est, It is finished; as if he had said, Now my sufferings and indignities are at an end. Yet besides the bodily thirst, wherewith he was at the ninth hour more deeply touched, then with hunger in the wilderness, there was a thirsty desire of his soul to be dissolved from the body, and to be with his Father. And in this his last extremity, that other complaint of David was most exactly fulfilled, I stretch forth my hands unto thee: my soul thirsteth after thee, as a thirsty land. Hear me speedily, O Lord, my spirit faileth: hide not thy face from me, lest I be like unto them that go down into the pit. I remember the days of old, I meditate on all thy works; I muse on all the works of thy hands, Psalm. 143.6, 7. David was delivered from the pit which he feared, but our Saviour was speedily heard for that he prayed; which was, that his body might go unto the grave, and his soul and spirit unto his Father. And albeit S. john instructeth us, that after he had received the vinegar, and said, It is finished; 
Mat. 27.50 Mat. 15.37  he gave up the Ghost: Yet S. Matthew, and S. Mark tell us, that he cried again with a loud voice, and so gave up the Ghost. The articulation of this loud voice or cry, is registered only by S. Luke 23.46. And when jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thine hands I commend my spirit. And having said thus, he gave up the Ghost. And in this cry or speech, another Scripture or prayer of David was exactly fulfilled, Pull me out of the net that they have laid privily for me: for thou art my strength. Into thine hands I commend my Spirit, Psalm. 31.4, 5. But how was this fulfilled in him? Surely as the Prophet, or the Holy Ghost by whom he spoke, did mean it. How then was it meant of him? Not merely Prophetically, but typically of the Psalmist, and more really and punctually of him. The Psalmist in his own person, or as acting his own part, did commend his Spirit to God his Redeemer, in hope to be redeemed from death, or danger of body intended against him. The Redeemer of Mankind using the same words desired bodily death, or dissolution of body and soul, commending his soul or spirit by a dying wish into his Father's hands.  
9 The 143. Psalm (as the inscription of the Septuagint informeth us) was composed by David, when his Son Absalon with his complices did pursue him: and the sixth verse, I stretch out my hands, etc. is signed with a Selah, a note, or character as I take it, (not of music only) but of some greater mystery to be fulfilled. The mystery in this particular was this, that as David after he had in his own person prayed for deliverance, and was heard; so was the Son of David instantly after he had received the vinegar, delivered from the torments of death or bodily pains. When jesus therefore had received the vinegar (saith S. john) he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the Ghost, 19.30. If we consider either the 143. Psalm, or the 31. as literally meant of David: there is no intimation of any distraction of mind in him; much less was there any inclination to any distraction, discontent or distrust, in JESUS the Son of GOD, in whom whatsoever was commendably acted by David in his distress, was most punctually and exquisitely fulfilled of this our blessed Saviour in all his sufferings. His memory was most fresh, and his patience most remarkable, when his mortal spirits were expiring.  
10. That ejaculation, Psalm. 31.6. Into thy hands I commend my spirit; was (saith Maldonat) meant of Christ in another sense, than it was of David: rather fulfilled of Christ in a more exquisite sense, than it had been verified of David. David according to the literal and historical sense being in distress, commends the tuition or safety of his soul unto God, directing his prayer for speedy deliverance from that bodily danger, wherewith he was beset, unto Adonai jehova unto the Lord of truth, or the Lord God his Redeemer. Pull me out of the net, that they have laid privily for me: for thou art my strength, etc. Thou hast redeemed me, O Lord of truth, Psal. 31.4, 5. The Lord God Redeemer of mankind directs his prayer unto his Father, Father into thy hands I commend my spirit, after he had suffered all the disgraces, pains, and tortures, whereof any mortal body was ever capable. This delivery, or surrender of his life, and soul viuâ voce, at the very moment or point of death, into his Father's hands, did move the heathen Centurion to say, Of a truth, this man was the Son of God, Mar. 15.39. When the Centurion (saith S. Luke) saw what was done, he glorified God, saying, Certainly this was a righteous man, Luk. 23.47. This is in effect the very same which S. Mark saith. For, in that the Centurion did acknowledge him for a righteous man; he did necessarily in his heart acknowledge him to be the Son of God, because he had so professed of himself. That righteousness, which the Centurion ascribeth unto him, was the truth of his confession before Pilate, when he was examined upon this interrogatory, [Art thou then the Son of God?] now more fully proved and declared unto the world by the strange manner of his death.  
11. The confession of this heathen man, was more Christian, than the questions, which some Schoolmen have moved upon the delivery of his soul viuâ voce into his Father's hands. For so, some have questioned, whether he were homicida sui, or made away himself by actual dissolution of his soul from his body, before the violence and cruelty of the tortures whereto his Enemies put him, could by course of nature work this divorce. Surely, if he did any way prevent the death intended against him by the Jews, or shortened his own natural life, though but for a moment; they had not been so true, and proper murderers of him, as the Apostle intimateth, and we Christians believe they were. For albeit Abimelech had received a deadly incurable wound by the hands of a woman; yet he died by the hands of his Page or Armour-bearer: And a certain woman cast a piece of a millstone upon Abimelechs' head, and all to broke his scull. Then he called hastily unto the young man his Armour-bearer, and said unto him, Draw out thy sword and slay me; that men say not of me, A woman slew him. And his young man thrust him through, and he died, Judg. 9.53, 54. But as some Schoolmen have in the disquisition of this point gone too far: so others have acutely resolved the difficulty, and elegantly reconciled the difference in opinions. Mors Christi non fuit verè miraculosa, erat tamen miraculum in morte Christi. Christ did no way make away himself, or die by miracle, but by course of nature; Yet was it a true miracle, that his life and spirits being so far spent, he should have speech and memory so perfect, as to make delivery of his soul into his Father's hands viva voce, at the very moment of his expiration. The Jews, and Romans did truly, and properly take away his life; and yet he did as truly and properly animam ponere, lay down his life for his sheep, in that he patiently submitted himself to their tyrannical cruelty: and more sweetly and placidly resigned up his soul into his Father's hands at the instant of death by course of nature, or perhaps a little after it, than a sheep doth his fleece unto the shearer or his owner. In this resignation or bequeathing of his soul thus placidly into his Father's hands, in his inimitable patience in all his sufferings, whether of torture or indignities, there was a most exact concurrence, (or coincidence rather) of all former sacrifices and obedience; more than the quintessence of those sacrifices, wherewith God was always best pleased, that is, the sacrifice of a contrite spirit, and broken heart not humbled, but humbling itself unto death. The most full and proper satisfactory sacrifice, that could be required by God or desired by man: a sacrifice so complete, as no wisdom besides wisdom truly infinite, could have conceived: no person besides the person of him that was truly God, could have offered or performed.   

CHAP. XXX. That the Son of God should be offered up in bloody sacrifice, was concludently prefigured by the intended death of Isaac.  
1 THat the Son of God should be thus offered as a true and proper bloody sacrifice, was concludently prefigured by the sacrifice of Isaac intended by his father Abraham: That the Cross whereon he offered himself, should be the very Altar of Altars, the body which the legal Altars did foreshadow; and that this Cross should be erected without the gate of Jerusalem, was foreshadowed by other matters of fact recorded by Moses. To begin with the first type, to wit, Isaac. The place appointed by God himself for the sacrifice of Isaac, was either the Mount, whereon the Temple stood, or some Mount near unto it, if not Calvary itself. And when Abraham came near to the foot of the Mount (which of the Mountains of Moriah soever it were) he laid the wood for the burnt offering on Isaac his son 
Gen. 22. . Isaac then bore his cross unwittingly, and was afterwards willing by gentle persuasions to die upon the wood, which he bare. For if he had detested or abhorred the fact intended upon him, he was of years and strength sufficient to have resisted his father, he being at least twenty five years of age, and Abraham one hundred twenty five. Now our Saviour (as the Evangelists record) went forth bearing his cross unto a place called in Hebrew Golgotha, either a place where the skulls of dead men were laid, or rather for the form or fashion of it like a scull: But here some curious Inquisitor, or one disposed to examine or scann the relations of the Evangelists, as Lawyers do later evidences by more ancient deeds; would interpose this, or the like exception, [Non concordat cum originali.] For our Saviour CHRIST (as the Evangelists record) was really sacrificed, actually crucified, and put to death, but so was not Isaac as Moses tells us. But all this will infer no more, than all good Christians must of necessity grant, to wit, that the Evangelicall records are more than mere exemplifications of Moses. For that which was verified or truly foreshadowed in Abraham's readiness to sacrifice his only son; and in his son's willingness to be sacrificed by him: was to be really, and exactly fulfilled of God the Father, who had bound himself by promise to give his only son unto Mankind, and in the willingness of this his only son JESUS CHRIST, to be offered up in sacrifice for the sins of the world. Our Apostle is not afraid to say, that Abraham by faith offered up his only son (that very man upon whose life or death, the fulfilling of the promises made to Abraham and his seed, did depend:) accounting or being resolved, that God was able to raise him up even from the dead, from whence also he received him in a figure. Heb. 11.17, 18. Isaac then was a true figure both of Christ's death and resurrection. And Abraham first in stretching forth his hands to slay his only son; and secondly in being prohibited by God from accomplishing his resolution: did accurately foreshadow those fundamental truths, which we Christians believe concerning the true and bodily death, and resurrection of our Lord and Saviour. Abraham (by benign Interpretation of the mind or resolution for the very fact or deed) did both sacrifice his only son, and receive him from the dead.  
2. But was there no more than a tentation or trial of Abraham's faith in that story of Moses, Gen. 22? If no more than so, the tempting or trial itself might seem superfluous. For God who knoweth all things, aswell possible as determinate or future, did most infallibly know what Abraham would do upon his command, what he would leave undone upon express prohibition. This only concludeth that the omnipotent and allseeing Father of power did not stand in need of the determination of Abraham's will, either to foresee or determine that which upon this actual obedience of Abraham, he did first bind himself by oath to perform: That which long before he had decreed ad extra, and in his general expression of his mercy and loving kindness; he had promised to do. We had his promise before Mankind was actually propagated or multiplied upon the earth, that the woman's seed should bruise the old Serpent's head, which had seduced her. The like comfortable words were at sundry times interposed by God himself to Noah and Abraham.  
3. But upon this present fact of Abraham, the same Lord interposeth his oath, (and it was the first oath which we read, that God did make) for the fulfilling of the general promise in one of Abraham's seed, Because thou hast done this thing, and hast not spared thine only son; by myself have I sworn,— that in thy seed all the Nations of the Earth shall be blessed. But did not this God of mercy and consolation infallibly know that Abraham would be ready to do all that he commanded him to do? Yes certainly and more than so, that Abraham should not do all which he first commanded him to do. Why then did he command him to sacrifice his only son Isaac? To this end that he might have Abraham's full consent to offer up one of his seed, but not Isaac; for the accomplishing of the blessing promised to mankind from the date of the curse pronounced against the first woman. Inasmuch as Abraham was willing to sacrifice his only son, the son of his old age, whom he loved more dear, than he could have done any one or more sons, or then he could have loved him if he had been the son of his middle age: his consent for the sacrificing of any other either of his or Isaac's posterity, whosoever he were, was evidently included in this his extraordinary obedience. And yet so graciously and lovingly did God deal with Abraham, that albeit he was the Lord of all, and Abraham's most gracious Lord in particular; that he would not seize upon any of Abraham's seed for a sacrifice of atonement betwixt himself and the whole world, without Abraham's consent. This gracious Lord then by interposing the forementioned oath, [that in Abraham's seed all the Nations of the Earth should be blessed] was abundantly merciful not to Abraham only, but unto all mankind by him. And yet as Rupertus (out of S. Chrysostom if my memory fails me not) observeth, this abundant mercy was not diluta misericordia, that is, this mercy though incomparable, was well placed, and the accomplishment of it assured upon most just and equitable, though not upon any valuable considerations. Quaesivit Deus titulum in Abrahamo, saith this Author, etc. God from the first promise made to mankind did expect a fit occasion to confirm it by solemn oath, and found out Abraham a man (quoad haec) according to his own heart for accepting this league or covenant betwixt him and man upon earnest given or resolved to be given by Abraham. For God had before determined to give his Son for the redemption of men, and now finding Abraham most willing and ready to give him his only Son, and finding also Abraham's only son obedient unto death: he binds himself by solemn oath, that he would give his only Son; & that his only Son being made the seed of Abraham, should be more willing than Isaac was to be offered up in bloody sacrifice for the redemption of Mankind. But the contents or importances of God's covenant made by oath unto Abraham, were they to be handled alone, would require a larger volume and longer disquisition, than I dare in these years and in this weakness project. So much of them as I conceive to be pertinent unto these Commentaries upon the Apostles Creed, shall be intermingled (by God's assistance) in the explication of the articles following.  
4. But taking all that hath been said for granted, to wit, that God by demanding Isaac in sacrifice, or by pressing Abraham to be the Sacrificer, did bind himself by oath to offer up his only son in such a bloody sacrifice, as Abraham had destinated Isaac unto: Yet the captious Jews, or other Infidels would thus except, that Abraham never intended, nor was he by God commanded to offer up his only son Isaac upon the cross: for that did not only imply a bloody, but an accursed kind of death. This indeed is the main stumbling block to the Jew, who perhaps would not so much as have scunnered at the Altar, if our Saviour had been offered upon it, specially in the Temple, or in the Courts adjoining. The next queries then, for satisfaction of the Jews or other Infidels (if God at any time shall vouchsafe them eyes to see, or ears to hear) are, in what sacred writings acknowledged by them, the bloody sacrifice of Abraham's seed, or his sufferings upon a tree or cross without the City of Jerusalem, not in the courts or precincts of the Lords house, were either foretold or foreshadowed.   

CHAP. XXXI. That the Son of God should be offered upon a tree or cross, was prefigured by Moses his erection of the brazen Serpent in the wilderness.  
1 THat the death of the Messias or Son of God upon the Cross, was prefigured by Moses his lifting up of the brazen Serpent upon a pole, (perhaps a cross) in the wilderness: this Son of God did instruct his timorous Disciple Nicodemus, who came to him by night, more fully, than he did such as were his daily followers, until the time approached wherein he was to suffer this ignominious death. His sacred Catechism to this Disciple, is exactly registered by S. john, and uttered by him some years before that last feast of Tabernacles whereat Nicodemus was present. joh. 7. No man (saith our Saviour unto him) hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven: and as Moses lifted up the Serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up. While the Son of man was lifted up, the Son of God was likewise lifted up, that is, by way of sacrifice, or atonement. That the efficacy of this atonement should proceed from virtue or power of himself as he was the Son of God, he himself instructeth us, ver. 16. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believed in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life: for God sent not his Son into the world to condemn it, but that the world through him might be saved. The end then of his coming into the world was to save it, and the end of his lifting up upon the cross was to draw all men to look upon him, as the Israëlites, who were stung with fiery serpents, did upon the brazen Serpent, which Moses erected in the wilderness. To this purpose he afterwards expounds himself, when he repeateth his Catechism made to Nicodemus, unto the people, joh. 12. And I, if I be lift up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. He did and doth draw all men unto him, not drag any after him. Such as will not be gently drawn by him, their perdition is from themselves: and however all shall not in the issue be saved by him, yet he is the Saviour of all, though especially of such as believe, that is, of such as out of the sense and feeling of their sins, (which are the stings of death,) seek that remedy for their souls from meditations upon the cross or upon him crucified, which Gods people in the wilderness did for their bodies by looking upon the brazen Serpent erected by Moses.  
2. That bodily salvation which they enjoyed by observing of this divine prescript, was not procured by the material Serpent on which they looked, but by the virtue of that invisible power whose spiritual efficacy was in times following to be more visibly manifested in the accomplishment of that grand mystery, which this strange temporal healing did prefigure: and that was the future cure of our Souls; our deliverance from the tyranny of the old Serpent by the Son of God becoming the Son of man, and vouchsafing to be lift up from the earth upon the Cross. For it was requisite that upon them exercising tyranny, should come penury, which they could not avoid; but to these it should only be showed how their Enemies were tormented. For when the horrible fierceness of beasts came upon these, and they perished with the stings of crooked Serpents, thy wrath endured not for ever. But they were troubled for a small season, that they might be admonished, having a sign of salvation to put them in remembrance of the commandment of thy Law. For he that turned himself toward it, was not healed by the thing which he saw, but by thee which art the Saviour of all, Wisd. 16.4, 5, 6, 7.  
3. Shall we say then that the brazen Serpent was a true picture or type of Christ? So, many have from the forecited place of S. john concluded; and of these many, not a few have sought out diverse properties of brass, and of Serpents, more than accurate naturalists before had known, to salve up the apparent incongruity betwixt the picture and the body, which they would have it to represent. But when they have said all they can, or others more than they could for them, the congruity will be no better than si gryphs jungantur equis. For what correspondency or conveniency can there be between the Serpent, and the woman's seed? Shall we attempt to foreshadow light by darkness? or make a league betwixt Christ, and Beliall? All that which our Saviour's exposition upon Moses his fact will concludently infer, is briefly this, that the mystery of his suffering upon the Cross was prefigured by the erection of the brazen Serpent: and by the comfort which the wounded Israelites found by looking upon it.  
4. Ahitophels' treachery against his Master David did truly foreshadow the betraying of David's Lord by judas; yet no man will hence conclude, that Ahitophel was a type of Christ or of his death, but rather of judas and his fearful end. Nor was the brazen Serpent any other ways a type of Christ's person, than Ahitophel was, that is no type at all: yet a more excellent type of that old Serpent whom the woman's seed was to vanquish, than Ahitophel was of judas. And the erection of this Serpent upon a pole or tree, was a prophecy or speaking picture that the victory of the woman's seed or Son of God over Satan, should be accomplished upon the Cross. This Interpretation I learn from our Saviour himself, john 12.31. Now is the judgement of this world, now shall the prince of this world be cast out. Now, that is, when the Son of man shall be lift up. The Cross then was the scene or stage, wherein the long duel was to be determined; and the destruction of the old fiery Serpent upon the stage was excellently foreshadowed by the lifting up of the brazen Serpent in the wilderness, which questionless did better represent a dead, wounded, or bruised Serpent, than a live or active one. This interpretation or display of that sacred Emblem, is most consonant to the historical circumstances and occasions, which Moses had to make, and set up the brazen Serpent upon a pole to the view of all the people. God from the fall of our first Parents did by way of punishment, as well upon the woman and her seed, as upon the Serpent and his seed, which had seduced her, denounce a perpetual enmity between them. Now albeit this enmity did principally consist between the woman's seed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is our Saviour, and the old Serpent, that is the Devil and their followers: Yet this spiritual enmity was visibly represented to the world by that antipathy which in course of nature is usually experienced between men and bodily Serpents. And this enmity (specially on the Serpent's part) was never more remarkable then in the wilderness when the murmuring Israelites did tempt the Lord their God after the same manner, as the first woman had done, that is by lusting after meats for that time and place forbidden; by loathing Manna and heavenly food which God had plentifully provided for them. And they departed from the mount Hor by the way of the red Sea, to compass the land of Edom: and the people were sore greeved, because of the way. And the people spoke against God, and against Moses, saying, Wherefore have ye brought us out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for here is neither bread nor water, and our soul loatheth this light bread. Wherefore the Lord sent fiery Serpents among the people which stang the people, so that many of the children of Israel died. Therefore the people came to Moses and said, We have sinned for we have spoken against the Lord, and against thee: pray unto the Lord, that he take away the Serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people. And the Lord said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery Serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten when he looketh upon it, shall live. And Moses made a Serpent of brass and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, if a Serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the Serpent of brass, he lived, Num. 21.4, 5, 6, 7, 8, etc.  
5. The importance or implication of the history, is, that as God had now brought that curse upon them, which had been denounced against the woman's seed from her first sin: so in case they would not tempt the Lord their God by renewing their first Parent's sin, they should in good time see the curse denounced against the old Serpent, that is the crushing of his head, as exactly fulfilled as the punishment upon the woman's seed had been by the fiery Serpents in biting their heels: That the same Lord who had now saved them from the poison of these lesser bodily Serpents, would in his good time deprive the old Serpent of his deadly sting, and destroy death itself by dying upon the Cross. The experience of woes or calamities threatened against disobedience, is usually given by God's 
* jer. 32.42.  Prophets as a pledge or earnest for the accomplishment of the good things, which he hath promised to the penitent.  
6. That which specially did first persuade me thus to display the Emblem of the brazen Serpent, was the demolition of it by good Hezekiah, who questionless would never have done to it as he did, had he known or taken it to have been the type or figure of his expected Redeemer, rather than of his Enemy. The good King by this zealous fact did foreshadow the future accomplishment of that grand mystery, which the erection of the brazen Serpent was appointed to represent, to wit, the dissolution of the old Serpent's Kingdom over this world. The adoration of this Serpent, whilst it stood uncrusht, was not only an abuse of things indifferent, but the most preposterous idolatry which this rebellious stiffnecked people did at any time practice. For in worshipping it, they did worship him, whose quality and person it did represent. And for this reason Hezekiah was moved with greater indignation against it, then against any other idol, statue, or relics of idolatry which came in his way. He took away the high places, and broke the images, and cut down the groves, and broke in pieces the brazen Serpent, that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense unto it, and he called it Nehushtan, 2. Kings 18.4, 5. A name questionless implying much more, than the mere grammatical expression (which most Interpreters use) imports. Nor had this good King's words or fact been worth the registering, if he had only called a brazen Serpent broken to pieces a piece of brass. But the full importance of this word, as of many others in the original, whether in the Greek or Hebrew, will not be easily found in ordinary Lexicons or Nomenclators. Every good Interpreter should have a Lexicon either of his own, or others gathering peculiar unto Divinity, specially for words used in a technicall, Emblematical, or proverbial sense. However Nechosheth signifies no more ordinarily than brass: Yet Nehushtan in this Emblematical speech, or fact of Hezekiah (as I should guess) imports no less, than our English foul fiend, the old Dragon or Satanas. As these Idolaters in Hezekiahs' time did adore the picture or type of the old Serpent: so this last generation having forsaken the God of their Fathers, did choose Barrabas the son of the Serpent, and renounced the Son of God for being their Lord, and so make up the full measure of their forefather's iniquity, and brought a greater plague upon their posterity, than any which did befall their Ancestors in the wilderness, whether by the biting of Serpents, or other of God's judgements or punishments.  
7. To this effect I took occasion to expound this fact of Hezekiah obiter and upon another text in a learned audience many years now ago, without the tax of any (as far as I could hear) and with better approbation of some then present, than I expected, because the exposition was new and uncouth. And yet as I have found since, conceived before by a learned man, though no professed Divine. But (as the proverb is) bystanders sometimes see more than they who play the game. And I must freely confess that for the explication of many places in Scripture I have learned more, or been better confirmed in mine opinions by the Lawyers then by the professed Divines of the French Nation, one, or two excepted. The man to whom I am in this particular beholden, is Hotman,  

And that which in his history deserves to be had in special memory, he demolished & cast down the brazen Serpent, which Moses by God's command had set up in the Desert, that such as were slung by the biting of Serpents, might be healed by looking thereon, when he perceived the superstitiously-bent people thereunto idolatrously to attribute Divine honour. For there was not in that Image any Divine efficacy, but this being the time of Infancy of God's worship, Moses the Schoolmaster of the Hebrews, by this Image did prefigure Christ's triumph over the conquered Serpent, when by the name of Serpent (
* Scilicet in 3. Cap. ejus libelli.  as is said at the beginning) he intimated the subtle enemy of Mankind.   

Quodque in ipsius historia singulari memoriâ dignum est, serpentem aeneum, quem Dei monitu Moses in solitudine statuerat, ut qui serpentum morsu ulcerati essent, eo conspecto sanarentur, excîdit atque disjecit, cum animadvertisset populum superstitione imbutum divinos statuae honores tribuere. Non enim ei simulachro vis ulla divinitus inerat, sed cum haec divinae religionis esset pueritia, Moses hebraeae gentis paedagogus, eo simulachro futurum Christi de Serpente devicto trophaeum designabat, cum serpentis nomine callidun (ut à principio dictum est) humani generis hostem significaret. Hotman in consolatione è sacris literis petitâ, de factis Ezechiae, pag. 128.    

CHAP. XXXII. That the Son of God should suffer without the gates of jerusalem, prefigured by the sacrifice of the Atonement.  
1 BUt before God's people could be capable of this cure of their souls by looking upon him who did vanquish the old Serpent, or before he came to be the Author of so great salvation: he was to make full satisfaction for their sins, whose weight had otherways pressed all Mankind down to hell. This full reconciliation or atonement betwixt the just unpartial Judge and sinful men, was made upon the cross. But some will demand in what part of Moses writings this was foretold or prefigured? It was most exquisitely foretold and prefigured, partly in the alienation of the primacy from the month Tisri unto the month Abib. Until the law was given, Tisri had absolute precedency, being the month wherein according to all probability the world was created. But upon the deliverance of Abraham's seed from the tyranny of Egypt, the month Abib by God's special command had both precedency and preeminency: Yet not absolute precedency, but precedency in respect of that which was more preeminent, to wit, for the Spiritual or Ecclesiastical account; as for their accounts temporal, September or Tisri did still retain precedency. And for this reason I take it our Saviour was first proclaimed the Messias by john Baptist in the month Tisri, but afterwards declared to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead in the month Abib. At his Baptism he had fulfilled one part of the mystery prefigured in the legal feast of atonement, which was celebrated upon the tenth day of the month Tisri. In his sufferings upon Mount Calvary he did fully accomplish that which was prefigured by the legal sacrifices in the day of Atonement, and that which was inchoated by himself at the day of his Baptism. At his 
* See Christ's answer to John.  Baptism he fulfilled the mystery of the escape goat bearing these people's sins into the wilderness, and there vanquished the great Tempter who had first vanquished them and their forefathers. At the feast of the Passeover in the month Abib he accomplished the mystery prefigured by the other goat, whose blood was brought by the high Priest into the Sanctuary. Thus much we learn from our Apostle, Hebr. 13.10. etc. We have an Altar, whereof they have no right to eat, which serve the Tabernacle. For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the Sanctuary by the high Priest for sin, are burnt without the camp. Wherefore jesus 2also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach. The true meaning or purport of this passage, and the connexion of it with the former, the Reader shall find more at large in a Sermon to be annexed (by God's assistance) with others to this present and the former Treatise. All in this place intended by me, is to satisfy such as will be satisfied, that our Saviour's sufferings upon the cross were a most true and proper sacrifice: a sacrifice fully satisfactory for the sins of the world: the accomplishment of all the sacrifices of the law: the only sacrifice whereof the anniversary sacrifices used in the feast of atonement, were but shadows, no true images. Again, that the anniversary sacrifices of the Passeover which were in the month Abib, and those in the feast of Atonement were to be jointly accomplished at one and the same time, to wit, in the first month after this people's delivery out of Egypt; is employed in the alteration of the account upon their deliverance. For that alteration portendeth that in the very same month, in which they were delivered, there should be in after times a more general deliverance of God's people, whose memory should deserve the precedency of all feasts and solemnities. Such was that feast of the Passeover, wherein our Saviour suffered.  
2. As for all the circumstances of place, or time, or the like wherein other legal sacrifices were offered; the mysteries prefigured by them could not possibly be accomplished in one and the same time, and place by any sacrifice; not by the sacrifice of the Son of God himself, though all-sufficient for its substance. For if he should have fulfilled the sacrifice of Atonement in the feast of Atonement, and the sacrifice of the Paschal lamb in the month Abib, or in the place where it was offered; he must have died oftener than once, and in more places than one. For the mystery prefigured by the Paschal lamb, that was accomplished in due time on the day appointed for that sacrifice. So was the Altar whereon he was offered, that is, the cross, the accomplishment of the figurative place whereon the first Paschal lamb was offered, and that was the lintels or door posts of the Israelites houses, on which the blood of the Paschal lamb was sprinkled. But the slaughter of the Paschal lamb in the first institution, was intra pomaeria, within the doors or precincts of private families, or within the compass of public places of meetings. So that in respect of the place wherein the true Paschal lamb, and the true lamb of God was slain or sacrificed, there is some disparity; yet a full harmony between the substance of both sacrifices, and the circumstances of time wherein they were offered. But this defect, or rather this variation concerning the circumstance of place, wherein the Paschal Lamb and the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sins of the world were offered, is most exactly recompensed by the circumstance of place wherein the body of the he goat, on which the Lord's lot should fall, and other sacrifices in the day of Atonement were by a most peremptory law to be consumed. And that place was without the camp, whilst the posterity of jacob had no Temple or no fixed place of worshipping God, but a mooveable Tabernacle. Also the bullock for the burnt offering, and the goat for the sin offering (whose blood was brought to make a reconciliation in the holy place) shall one carry out without the host to be burnt in the fire with their skins and with their flesh, and with their dung, 
* Vide Chytraeism in hoc caput.  Leu. 16.27. This is the Apostles meaning in the forecited place Hebr. 13. jesus, also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate, that is, without the city, yet near the suburbs of Jerusalem, whose type or figure was the camp of the Israelites in the wilderness, or at that time wherein the Tabernacle was movable. For the Tabernacle was but a model or pattern of the Temple in Jerusalem, as the camp of the Israëlites in the wilderness was of Jerusalem itself.  
3. And however their GOD, and supreme Lawgiver did by a peremptory law enjoin his people, that no manner of bloody sacrifice should be offered, or at least no public solemn feast be celebrated save only in Jerusalem, after the Ark was brought into it and placed in the Temple: Yet the circumstance of the place, wherein our Saviour was sacrificed, was exactly foreshadowed by the place wherein the anniversary sacrifices in the feast of Atonement during the time of this people's progress in the wilderness or movable Tabernacle, were offered, and that was without the camp, or trenches of that great Congregation.  
4, The sum of all the forementioned prefigurations or predictions, whether of our Saviour's offering up of himself according to his Father's will and appointment, or of the times, and places wherein he was offered; is this, that this his offering up of himself was a true and proper sacrifice; a more full satisfaction for all the sins or tranagressions of men against the moral law of God, than the sacrifices in the feast of atonement or the Passeover or other anniversary solemnities, were for sins whether of omission or commission merely against the law of ceremonies. This is most divinely expressed by our Apostle Hebr. 9.13. 
Sect. 2.  as hath been handled more at large before.   

CHAP. XXXIII. At what hour of the day our Saviour was crucified, at what hour taken down from the cross, and of the mysteries ensuing his death.  
1 ABout the time of the year, as in what month, and in what day of the month, the Lamb of God was offered or did offer up himself in bloody sacrifice, there is no question of moment, or none at lest which may not easily be resolved. But as concerning the time of the day, or hour wherein he was offered, there is more than variety of opinions amongst the learned: some appearance of contradiction between two, over whom were they now alive, no authority now on earth could have any power either of arbitration or jurisdiction. It was the third hour (saith S. Mark,) and they crucified him, etc. 15.25. designing the time after he was brought to Golgotha, and refused to taste of the wine mingled with myrrh; Whereas S. john speaking of the time a little before Pilate gave sentence, saith, It was the preparation of the Sabbath, and about the sixth hour. john 19.14. That the various relations of these two Evangelists (if we take them as they are extant in most copies) should be reconciled, there is a necessity. And if either of their own writings were to be corrected by the other; S. john's Gospel (as Maldonat well observeth) were to be corrected by S. Marks. For S. Marks assertion is punctual and precise, and between the ancient Manuscripts and modern exemplifications of his Gospel, there is no variation: but in S. john's there are. For in some copies yet extant, and in some which Nonnus in his Poetical paraphrast did follow, there is express mention of the third hour, not of the sixth. Whence it is probably conjectured by some, that the sixth hour was inserted by the Transcribers of S. john's Gospel for the third, upon a mistake of the figures or numerical characters; the numerical character of the sixth hour being not much unlike the numerical character of the third hour. And yet it cannot be denied that in some ancient Manuscripts of the Greek Testament now extant, the numbers of hours or days or years are expressed in entire words, not in figures or numerical characters. But whether this manner of expressing numbers was usual ab initio, or in the times when S. john wrote, or used at all by him, is not so clear. For several ages or revolutions of times have their several manners of expressions, specially for quoting of Scriptures or deciphering of numbers. And sometimes later ages agree better in this point with the most ancient, then middle ages do. The determination of this particular, as whether in S. john's time, numbers were expressed at large, or in figures, I refer to professed Antiquaries.  
2. But admitting that S. john did write expressly, about the sixth hour (not in figures:) Many learned men of several Churches and Religions, have wittily attempted to salve the appearance of contradiction betwixt him and St. Mark, by reducing the manner of measuring the day unto the scale or manner of measuring the night, which they divide into four parts or watches, every watch containing three hours according to the sun-dial; So as the first great hour answerable to the watch by night, did begin at six in the morning, and continue till nine which with them was called the third hour; and this third hour answerable to the second watch of the night containing likewise three diurnal hours, did continue until the midday, or twelve of the clock, at which time their sixth hour did commence, and continue till their ninth hour, which is our three a clock in the afternoon, at which time it is without question that our Saviour did yield up the Ghost. So that when S. Mark saith, our Saviour was crucified at the third hour, that is, about nine a clock in the forenoon, and before twelve, which was the sixth hour; and when S. john saith he was sentenced to death by Pilate about the sixth hour: we must take his meaning to be thus, that he was so sentenced, as long before the sixth hour, which is our twelve a clock, as after the third hour, which is our nine. So that the precise time of his crucifying should be about half an hour after ten of the clock. For if we admit or allow the former scale of dividing the day into the first, third, sixth, and ninth hour, it might as truly be said, our Saviour was crucified about the sixth hour, as about the third hour, if he were crucified at half an hour after ten. For so some Collegiate statutes which enjoin the shutting of their gates at eight in Winter, and nine in Summer, and opening them about six in Winter, and five in Summer; have been by legal and authorized construction adjudged to be rightly observed, so they were shut within half an hour after eight in Winter, or half an hour after nine in Summer: or opened half an hour after six in Winter, and half an hour after five in Summer. So that such as approve the former reconciliation of S. Mark and S. john, did very cautelously pitch upon the point of time mentioned, that is, half an hour after ten in the morning for the crucifying of our Saviour, or for the point of time wherein Pilate did sentence him to death. For this was the just middle point between the third hour, and the sixth hour, and did equally refer to both. This reconciliation of the two Evangelists, would have better satisfied me, if the Authors or followers of it had not attempted to have given a reason for it, which I can no way approve, but rather suspect the opinion itself for the improbability of the reason alleged by them.  
3. The reason which Maldonat (a man free enough to admit misnomers or mistakes in Transcribers of the Gospel) allegeth for his opinion [that our Saviour was not crucified precisely at the third hour] (as S. Mark saith;) is because in his judgement so many businesses or debatements as did interpose in that morning, wherein our Saviour was sentenced unto the death of the Cross, could not be dispatched before the third hour, that is nine a clock in the forenoon. But in my opinion (which I submit to better judgements) more businesses by many than the Evangelists relate, might have been determined according to the course of civil Justice (especially before such as examine them summariè & de plano) within less time then S. Mark and the other Evangelists allot to the examination, arraignment, and adjudication of our Saviour to the death of the Cross. Vt primum exortus est dies, Assoon as it was day (saith S. Luke) the Elders of the people, and the chief Priests and Scribes came together, and led him to their Council, etc. Luk. 22.66. The time then of their Assembly to examine him (albeit we account the beginning of the day only from the Sunrising not from the dawning) was at six a clock in the morning, (if not before.) And after they had examined him, the whole multitude of them arose, and led him unto Pilate and begun to accuse him, Luk. 23.3. And this in all probability was before their second hour, or seven a clock with us in the morning. Now the time of our Saviour's circuiting from Pilate to Herod, and back again, and all the debatements betwixt Pilate and the Jews, which are related by the Evangelists, could not in that tumultuous Congregation take up more time than an hour and an half. So that our Saviour might not only be sentenced to death by Pilate (as S. john relates) but actually crucified, or lifted up upon the Cross precisely and punctually at the third hour, as S. Marks words import.  
4. If we thus reconcile S john, (or rather the Transcribers of his Gospel) unto S. Mark, and his Gospel, as in all copies now it is extant; the harmony between the type and the antitype, or the proportion between the picture and the live substance represented by it, will be most exact. For, we are to consider that the Son of God by the sacrifice of himself once for all, was to accomplish not only the anniversary sacrifices of atonement of the Passeover, etc. but the continual daily morning and evening sacrifices. The hour allotted for the morning sacrifice was the third hour, or nine a clock in the forenoon; the hour appointed, and accustomed for the evening sacrifice, was the ninth hour, or three a clock in the afternoon: and at this hour (as the Evangelists jointly record) our Lord Redeemer did accomplish his sacrifice. jesus (saith S. Matthew) when he had cried again with a loud voice (and that was about the ninth hour) gave up the ghost. Et ecce aulaeum Templi fissum est, and behold the veil of the Temple was rend in twain from the top to the bottom. 27.46, 50, 51. One special importance of the word Ecce in this place as in many others, is the present exhibition of that which was promised or portended. The mystery foreshadowed or portended by the anniversary sacrifices of the Paschal Lamb, by the daily morning and evening sacrifices, by those sacrifices of the Atonement whose blood was brought by the high Priest unto the Sanctuary; was in brief this, that all these rites or solemnities should expire upon the death or sacrifice of the true Lamb of God: and thus much, and more is sealed unto us by that speech of our Saviour a little before his death, Consummatum est, All is finished, john 19.30. Now the rending of the veil immediately after our Saviour had commended his Spirit into his Father's hands, did betoken that now, and not before, the entrance or passage into that most holy place, which was prefigured by the material Sanctum Sanctorum, was set open not to Priests only, but to all true believers: That the celestial Sanctuary (whether that be coelum empyr aeum the seat of our future bliss, or some other place) was now instantly to be hallowed, or consecrated by the blood of the high Priest himself, as the terrene Tabernacle or Sanctuary was by the legal high Priest with the blood of bullocks or goats, etc.  
5. Whithersoever the soul of this our high Priest went that day, wherein he offered the sacrifice of himself, (as whether into the nethermost hell, or into the place where the souls of the righteous men did rest,) there is or should be no question among good Christians but that he was that evening in Paradise. For, so had he promised unto the penitent Malefactor who was crucified with him, with an asseveration equivalent to an oath, Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum eris in paradiso, Verily I say unto thee, this day thou shalt be with me in Paradise. As for those sophistical Novelists (to say no worse) who thus mispoint the words of his promise, Amen dico tibi hodie, mecum eris in Paradiso, Verily I say unto thee this day, thou shalt be with me in Paradise, to wit, sometimes hereafter, as at the general resurrection of the just (though not this very day,) they declare themselves to be in this particular as in most others, more unfit to interpret sacred Oracles, than Apes to be principal Actors in stately doleful Tragedies. For our Lord and Saviour did most graciously grant this poor soul more than he durst petition for; and with better expedition, than he could hope for, to wit, a present estate of blessedness, whereas he requested only to be remembered with some mercy or favour without indenting any point of time (after our Saviour had entered into his Kingdom.) And his entrance into that Kingdom was not upon the same day wherein he suffered, nor within forty days after. The Kingdom of heaven was not set open to any believers, not to Abraham himself upon our Saviour's passion or resurrection, whether that Kingdom import the same place wherein Abraham before that time was or some other. For it is one thing to say that the souls of righteous men deceased were in heaven before our Saviour ascended thither: another to say they were in the Kingdom of heaven, or Citizens of that Kingdom, which upon the day of our Saviour's victory over death was not erected. And he who denyeth the souls of the Patriarches to be partakers of the Kingdom of heaven before our Saviour's death, cannot be concluded to grant that they were either in Limbo or in any other region under the earth, or under the stars.  
6. But to waive further dispute about this point for the present: Our Saviour's soul upon the same day wherein he died, was in paradise: and so was the soul of the penitent Malefactor, yet not at the same instant (perhaps not within the compass of the same hour wherein our Saviour's soul went thither) in what region soever whether of heaven or earth this paradise was seated. For it is evident out of the Evangelicall histories, that our Saviour did surrender his soul into his father's hand before either of them who were crucified with him, did expire. For as was before recited out of S. Matthew 27.50. immediately upon the ninth hour our Saviour yielded up the Ghost. This testimony alone, or this at least with the like, Mark 15.37. had been sufficient to prove the Article of our Saviour's death. But for the more full satisfaction of all posterity as well of Jews as of Gentiles, God would have the death of his only Son to be remarkably recorded, by the solemn testimony of the Roman Centurion taken upon examination before Pilate: And now when the even was come (that, I take it, was betwixt five and six of the clock:) because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath; Joseph of Arimathea an honourable Counsellor, who also waited for the Kingdom of God, came and went in boldly to Pilate, and craved the body of JESUS. And Pilate marvailed if he were already dead, and calling unto him the Centurion, he asked him, whether he had been any while dead. And when he knew it of the Centurion, he gave the body to Joseph. Mark 15.42, 43, etc. That our Saviour died before the other which were crucified with him, is more apparent from the parallel testimony of S. john, 19.31, 32, etc. The jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day, (for that Sabbath day was an high day:) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. Then came the Soldiers and broke the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. But when they came to JESUS and saw that he was dead already, they broke not his legs.  
7. And thus we may observe that aswell the malignant Jews, as Christ's Disciples of the Jewish Nation, and the Roman Soldiers, though unwittingly did strangely combine for the accomplishment of diverse prophecies or prefigurations concerning the death of the Son of God. Had he not died before the other two which were crucified with him, his legs had been broken with theirs, and his body had not been interred before the setting of the Sun, as is probable from Pilat's demand to the Centurion [whether he had been any while dead] before he would give joseph leave to bury his body. Now if his body had not been interred before the Sunset, or at least before the stars appeared, the mystery prefigured by the imprisonment of jonas three days and three nights in the belly of the whale could not by any Synecdoche have been exactly fulfilled by his blessed rest in the grave: but of this hereafter, Again, if the breaking of his legs had not been prevented by his dying before the other two which were crucified with him; the harmony betwixt the manner of his death, and the death of the Paschal Lamb could not have been so exact: for no bone of it was to be broken, Exodus 12.46. Numb. 9.12, Nor should that which David spoke of himself, (but of himself as he was the type of Christ) when he was in some peril of breaking his legs or arms, or some better joints, have found its accomplishment in the circumstance of our Saviour's death. These things were done (saith S. john) that the Scripture might be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken. john 19.36. This allegation of S. john (if my observation fail not) refers as literally and properly to that saying of David, Psal. 34.20. (when he was driven by Saul into the cave of Adullam) as unto the rite of the Paschal Lamb before cited, He keepeth all his bones, not one of them is broken. This was not a mere historical narration, but a speech typically prophetical, that is, first verified of David, and afterwards to be more exactly accomplished in the Son of David. Of the same rank was that which followeth, Evil shall stay the wicked, and they that hate the righteous shall be desolate. The Lord redeemeth the soul of his Servants, and none of them that trust in him, shall be desolate. verse 21, 22. The truth of this observation was never so punctually proved, or exemplifyed as in the death of the two Malefactors which were crucified with our Saviour. Though neither of them had any interest in the former promise [He keepeth all his bones, not one of them is broken;] yet the soul of the one who trusted in the Lord, was instantly redeemed, and taken up into Paradise by him: the soul of the other which did hate and revile him, was (to say no worse) left desolate.  
8. Again, the law concerning the taking down of such as were hanged on a tree (though not strangled,) before the night went over them; had not been accomplished in our Saviour, unless the day wherein he died had been the preparation to the great Sabbath. For it was not the zeal of the Jews unto the due observation of this law, but fear of polluting this great Sabbath which moved them to become petitioners unto Pilate, that the bodies of all that were then crucified might be taken down, and carried away before the beginning of the Sabbath, which was in the twilight following. The law which out of this fear they occasioned to be observed and fulfilled, is extant, Deuteron. 21.22, 23. And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and be be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree: his body shall not remain upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day: for he that is hanged is accursed of God: that thy land be not defiled, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance. That this law had a special reference or pre-aspect unto our Saviour's death upon the cross, S. Paul hath taught us, Galat. 3.13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree. Lastly, however the Centurion and the Soldiers apprehended no necessity of breaking our Saviour's legs, as being persuaded that he had been a good while dead, and fit to be buried: Yet one of them to make all (as we say) sure, pierced his side while he was yet hanging upon the cross, with a spear, striking him (as by the posture of his body is probable) under the short ribs through his very heart: otherwise he might have broken one, or more of his bones. And this, as S. john instructs us, was done that another Scripture might be fulfilled, And they shall look on him whom they have pierced, john 19.37. The prophecy which by this accident was exactly fulfilled, we have Zachar. 12.8, 9, etc. In that day shall the Lord defend the Inhabitants of jerusalem, and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the Angel of the Lord before them. And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the Nations that come against jerusalem. And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the Inhabitants of jerusalem, the Spirit of Grace and supplications; and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him as one mourneth for his only son, etc.  
9 This sacred passage lieth punctually under that line or rule for interpreting sacred oracles, which in these commentaries hath been oft heretofore mentioned: that is, it is a passage which cannot be literally verified of any person besides God himself, nor could it have been fulfilled in God himself otherwise, then as he was incarnate, made subject to death, and violent percussion after death. But whether this passage either according to the literal sense of the Prophet, or to the intention of S. john in avouching the fulfilling of it, amount to any more than hath been said, or (in particular) to infer [that real communication of properties between the divine and humane nature of Christ,] which some of the most learned in the Lutheran Church would from this place (in special) press upon us; is a disquisition more proper to the Article of the holy Catholic Church, then to this Treatise of the Humiliation of the Son of God. That humiliation (as I conceive) did expire with his death; or at least when he was taken down from the cross after his sacred sides had been so pierced, as S. john relates by that rude Roman Soldier, whose name by unwritten tradition was Longius, but a name (as I suppose) mistaken for the weapon wherewith he pierced him, which was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.    

The Conclusion of this Treatise.  
IT followeth in the Apostles Creed that he was buried, that he descended into hell. In what sense soever we take this word buried, the historical truth of it is most punctually recorded by the Evangelists. The only quaere which this article, or this part of the article will admit, is, whether by his burial we are to understand the interring or depositure of his body in the monument: or rather his embalming by joseph or Nicodemus, who did accomplish that work which the good woman before his death did foresignify, or begin by pouring out that precious ointment on his head. This quaere hath been long ago proposed by some learned men in the 
* Vide Petrum Ramum in Commentariis de side Capite 130. de Christi sepulturâ. Et Tremellium in editione Syriaci Testamenti.  French and Germane Churches, who seem to deny the local descension of his soul into hell, either into the place of the damned, or into Limbum patrum. But this truth they have denied or questioned with better moderation and discretion, than such of our Native English as either have questioned or opposed our Church's meaning in this Article. For by his descending into hell, these men would have us understand the interring or depositure of his body in the monument or sepulchre wherein no man had been laid before, being before imbalmed, as the manner of the jews was to bury, john 19 40. But for pleading one way or other of Christ his descension into hell, at this time, or in this place, I have excluded myself in the 
See the 2. page of this Treatise.  general division of this and the ensuing Treatise, which was concerning the humiliation and exaltation of the Son of God. Now unto whether member of this dichotomy or general division, the burial, interring, or descension of the Son of God into hell, should be referred; I am not as yet resolved by any Catholic consent: But in my private opinion, I think rather to the Exaltation or Consecration of the Son of God to his everlasting Priesthood. And unto this Treatise principally intended by me in these long Commentaries upon the Apostles Creed, I must crave pardon to refer all those other modern Controversies concerning the extent of our Saviour's sufferings, for whom he died; for whom he rose again; whether the redemption purchased by his blood, was universal to all mankind, or to the elect or predestinated only; or (seeing redemption is a term importing matter divisible,) what part of redemption purchased by Christ, was common to Adam, and all that came after him; what part more proper to such as under the law were circumcised, or in the time of the Gospel baptised; what part of the same redemption, is peculiar to the Elect or predestinate.  
In the mean time I conclude this Treatise concerning the humiliation of the Son of God, with that excellent prayer for the peace of the Church, first conceived in Latin by Erasmus, and afterwards set forth Aº D ni M. D. XLV. both in Latin and English, as a part or appendix of that primer or Liturgy which K. Henry the 8. caused to be published by the Supreme Authority of the Church of England, with diverse other godly prayers yet retained, as appertinences if not as genuine parts of our Communion book. Why this prayer for the peace of the Church should be left out, I suppose the moderate and devout Reader will wonder with me.  

DOmine jesuchriste, qui omnipotentiâ tuâ fecisti omnes creaturas, visibiles, invisibiles, & divinâ sapientia tua gubernasti disposuistique omnia ordinatè, qui ineffabili bonitate tua custodis, defendis, promovesque omnia, qui profunda misericordia tua reficis ruinosa, renovas collapsa, vivificas mortuos: digneris (precamur) ad extremum, in dilectam sponsam tuam Ecclesiam, dulcem illum & misericordem vultum tuum, quo coelestia omnia terrestriaque, & quae supra coelum infraque terram sunt pacificas, conjicere: digneris teneros misericordesque oculos in nos convertere, quibus Petrum semel, magnum Ecclesiae tuae Pastorem aspexisti, & continuò rediit secum in memoriam, & poenitentiam ductus est; quibus dispersam semel multitudinem perlustrasti, & misericordia commovebaris, quod boni Pastoris defectu errabant quasi oves sparsae palantesque. Tu satis vides, bone pastor, quot varia luporum genera in ovilia tua irruperunt, è quibus unusquisque clamat, Hic Christus est, hic Christus est: ita ut, si fieri posset, in errores deducerentur electi. Tu vides quibus flatibus, quibus fluctibus, quibus tempestatibus misera navis jactatur, in qua pusillus grex tuus de submersione periclitatur. Quid autem nunc restat, nisi ut prorsum submergatur, omnesque nos pereamus? hujus tempestatis causa est nostra iniquitas & depravata vita; hoc nos videmus & confitemur, justitiam tuam cernimus, & injustitiam nostram lamentamur: sed ad misericordiam tuam provocamus quae (secundum Psalmum Prophetae tui) exuperat omnia, opera tua: multa supplicia sustinuimus, multis bellis fracti, multis jacturis bonorum consumpti, tot morborum pestiumque generibus flagellati, tot fluctibus quassati, tot perterrefacti; & nullus tamen nobis ita fatigatis, & inusitata malorum vi debilitatis, portus perfugiumque apparet, sed quotidie magis magisque graves pluresque poenae imminere cervicibus nostris videntur. Non hic de tua asperitate conquerimur, misericordissime Domine, sed tuam potius misericordiam intuemur, quòd longè graviores plagas commeriti sumus. Nos verò abs te, misericordissime Domine precamur, non quid meritis nostris dignum sit consideres aut perpendas: sed potius quid deceat misericordiam tuam, sine qua ne Angeli quidem in coelo consistere possunt, nedum nos vasaluti infirma. Miserere nostri Redemptor noster, qui facillimè exoraris, non quòd nos misericordiâ tuâ digni sumus; sed hanc gloriam nomini tuo dato. Ne patiaris judaeos, Turcas, reliquosque qui vel non noverunt te vel gloriae tuae invident, perpetuò de nobis triumphare, & dicere; Vbi Deus, ubi Redemptor, ubi Servator, ubi Sponsus illorum est? Haec contumeliosa verba & convitia in te Domine redundant, dum ex malis nostris bonitatem tuam existimant, nos derelinqui putant, quos emendari non cernunt. Cum semel in navigio dormires, & tempestas subito exorta minaretur mortem omnibus qui in navi erant, ad clamorem paucorum Discipulorum excitabaris, & continuò fluctus quieverunt, ventus cessavit, tempestas in magnam tranquillitatem conversa est; Aquae mutae Creatoris vocem agnoverunt. In hac autem longè graviore tempestate, in qua non paucorum hominum corpora in discrimen veniunt, sed innumerabiles animae periclitant; ad vocem universae Ecclesiae tuae, Domine, precamur ut vigiles, quae nunc in periculo submersionis est. Tot jam millia hominum clamitant, Domine, serva nos, perimus, tempestas haec humanam potentiam superat, immo verò conatus eorum qui illi praesidium ferrent, in contrarium avertuntur. Quod haec praestabit, solum verbum tuum est: Verbo solum oris tui dicito, Tempestas cessa, & confestim tranquillitas expetita apparebit. Quot millibus impiorum pepercisses, si in civitate Sodomae vel decem inventi fuissent: nunc verò tot millibus hominum gloriam nominis tui amantium, & propter decorem domus tuae gementum, non horum precibus adductus iram remittes, & consuetarum antiquarumque misericordiarum tuarum recordaberis? an non divinâ sapientiâ tuâ nostram stultitiam in gloriam tuam convertes? an non malorum improbitatem in Ecclesiae tuae bonum commutabis? cum enim misericordia tua solet omnia sublevare, cum res nobis immedicabilis esse videtur: nec potentia aut sapientia humana corrigi potest. Tu solus res etiam inordinatissimas in ordinem adducis, qui solus author conservatorque pacis es. Tu antiquam confusionem quam Chaos appellamus formavisti, in qua sine ordine, sine mode, perturbatè discordia semina rerum jacebant, & admirabili serie res natura suâ pugnantes, vinculo perpetuo copulavisti & colligavisti. Quanto quaeso, major confusio est haec, ubi nulla charitas, nulla fides, nulla copulatio amoris, nulla legum, nulla Magistratuum reverentia, nulla opinionum consensio, sed quasi in perturbatissimo choro, unusquisque diversum canit. In coelestibus planetis nulla est dissensio, elementa suas sedes tenent, unumquodque constitutum sibi officium facit: & sponsam suam cujus causa omnia facta sunt, continua sic dissensione perire & labefactari permittis? Malósne spiritus seditionis authores atque administros, in ditione tua sine ulla reprehensione ita regnare permittes? potentemnè illum iniquitatis ducem, quem semel dejeceras, castra invadere & milites tuos spoliare sines? Cum hic in hominibus versabaris, vocem tuam fugiebant daemones. Emitte quaesumus Domine, Spiritum tuum qui è pectoribus omnium nomen tuum profitentium, malos spiritus, magistros intemperantiae, avaritiae, vanae gloriae, libidinum, scelerum, discordiae abigat. Crea in nobis, Rex, & Deus noster, cor mundum, & Spiritum sanctum tuum in pectoribus nostris renova, nec Spiritum sanctum tuum auferas à nobis. Restitue nobis fructum salutaris sanitatis tuae, & Spiritu principali corrobora Sponsam, Pastoresque ejus. Hoc Spiritu reconciliasti coelestia terrestribus, hoc formasti ac reduxisti tot linguas, tot nationes, tam diversa hominum genera in unum corpus Ecclesiae, quod corpus eodem Spiritu copulatur capiti. Hunc Spiritum si in omnium hominum cordibus renovare digneris, tum externae hae quoque miseriae cessabunt: aut si non cessaverint, ad fructum saltem, utilitatemque diligentium te traducentur. Siste hanc Domine jesu, confusionem; hoc horribile Chaos in ordinem adducito: expande Spiritum tuum super aquas malè fluctuantium opinionum. Et quia Spiritus tuus, qui juxta Prophetae sententiam continet omnia, scientiam etiam habet vocis: effice ut quemadmodum omnibus qui in domo tua sunt, unum lumen, unus Baptismus, unus Deus, una spes, unus Spiritus; sic unam quoque habeant vocem▪ unam cantilenam, unum sonum, unam catholicam veritatem profitentes. Cum in coelum gloriosè ascendisti, demisisti de caelo res preciosissimas; dedisti dona hominibus, varia munera spiritus divisisti: renova Domine de Coelo veterem bonitatem, da nunc Ecclesiae labefactatae & inclinatae, quod illi emergenti, & exorienti initio dederas; Da Principibus Magistratibusque gratiam timoris tui: ut ita Rempublicam suam gubernent, quasi statim tibi Regi Regum rationem reddituri. Da sapientiam semper assistricem illis, ut quodcunque optimum factu fuerit, & animo provideant, & factis persequantur. Da Episcopis tuis donum prophetiae, ut sanctas Scripturas non ex suis ingeniis, sed tua inspiratione declarent & interpretentur. Da triplicem illis charitatem, quam à Petro requirebas, quando illius curae oves tuas commisisti. Da Sacerdotibus tuis temperantiae, castitatisque amorem. Da populo tuo studium sequendi mandata tua, & promptitudinem obediendi iis, quos tu super illos constituisti. Ita fiet, ut si largitate tua principes ea imperent, quae tu praecipis; pastores eadem doceant, populus utrisque pareat: veteris Ecclesiae dignitas, tranquillitasque cum ordinis conservatione ad gloriam Nominis tui restorescat. Ninivitis pepercisti morti addictis, statim ut ad poenitentiam conversi fuerant: & domum tuam inclinantem jam & corruentem despicies, quae vice sacci gemitus, vice cinerum lachrymas profundit? promisisti remissionem conversis ad te: at hoc donum tuum est, ut quis cum toto corde suo ad te convertatur, ut omnis bonitas nostra ad gloriam tuam redundet. Tu factor es, refice opus tuum quod formasti: Tu Redemptor es, serva quod emisti: Tu Servator es, ne sinas perire qui tibi innituntur: Tu Dominus es & possessor, vendica possessionem tuam; Tu caput es, opem fer membris; Tu Rex es, da nobis legum tuarum reverentiam: Tu princeps pacis es, aspira nobis fraternam charitatem: Tu Deus miserere supplicum tuorum, sis (ut beatus Paulus loquitur) omnia in omnibus, ut universus Ecclesiae tuae chorus consentientibus animis & vocibus consonantibus gratias de misericordia inventa agant Patri, Filio, & Spiritui sancto, qui pro perfectissimo concordiae exemplo personarum proprietate distinguuntur & conjunctione naturae adunantur, quibus laus, & gloria ad omnem aeternitatem. Amen.   

LOrd JESUS CHRIST, which of thine Almightiness madest all Creatures both visible and invisible, which of thy godly wisdom governest and settest all things in most goodly order, which of thine unspeakable goodness keepest, defendest, & furtherest all things, which of thy deep mercy restorest the decayed, renewest the fallen, raisest the dead: vouchsafe (we pray thee) at last to cast down thy countenance upon thy well-beloved Spouse the Church; but let it be that amiable and merciful Countenance wherewith thou pacifiest all things in heaven, in earth, and whatsoever is above heaven and under the earth: vouchsafe to cast upon us those tender and pitiful eyes, with which thou didst once behold Peter that great Shepherd of thy Church, and forthwith he remembered himself and repent; with which eyes thou once didst view the scattered multitude, and wert moved with compassion, that for lack of a good Shepherd they wandered as sheep dispersed & strayed asunder. Thou seest (O good Shepherd) what sundry sorts of Wolves have broken into thy sheep-cotes, of whom every one crieth, Here is Christ, here is Christ: so that if it were possible, the very perfect persons should be brought into error. Thou seest with what winds, with what waves, with what storms thy silly ship is tossed, thy ship wherein thy little flock is in peril to be drowned. And what is now left, but that it utterly sink, and we all perish? Of this tempest and storm we may thank our own wickedness and sinful living; we espy it well and confess it, we espy thy righteousness, and we bewail our unrighteousness: but we appeal to thy mercy which (according to the Psalm of thy Prophet) surmounteth all thy works: we have now suffered much punishment, being soussed with so many wars, consumed with such losses of goods, scourged with so many sorts of diseases and pestilences, shaken with so many floods, feared with so many strange sights from heaven, and yet appear there no where any haven or Port unto us being thus tired and forlorn among so strange evils, but still every day more grievous punishments, and more seem to hang over our heads. We complain not of thy sharpness, most tender Saviour, but we espy here also thy mercy, forasmuch, as much grievouser plagues we have deserved. But O most merciful Jesus, we beseech thee, that thou wilt not consider ne weigh what is due for our deservings, but rather what becometh thy mercy, without which neither the Angels in heaven can stand sure before thee, much less we silly vessels of clay. Have mercy on us, O Redeemer, which art easy to be entreated, not that we be worthy of thy mercy, but give thou this glory unto thine own Name. Suffer not that the Jews, Turks, and the rest of the Panims, which either have not known thee, or do envy thy glory, should continually triumph over us, and say; Where is their God, where is their Redeemer, where is their Saviour, where is their Bridegroom, that they thus boast on? These opprobrious words & upbraid redound unto thee, O Lord, while by our evils, men weigh and esteem thy goodness: they think we be forsaken, whom they see not amended. Once when thou sleptst in the ship, and a tempest suddenly arising threatened death to all in the ship, thou awokest at the outcry of a few disciples, and straightway at thine Almighty word the waters couched, the winds fell, the storm was suddenly turned into a great calm: the dumb waters know their maker's voice. Now in this far greater tempest, wherein not a few men's bodies be in danger, but innumerable souls: we beseech thee at the cry of thy holy Church, which is in danger of drowning, that thou wilt awake. So many thousands of men do cry, Lord save us, we perish, the tempest is past man's power: yea we see that the endeavours of them that would help it, do turn clean a contrary way. It is thy word that must do the deed, Lord Jesus. Only say thou with a word of thy mouth, Cease o tempest, and forthwith shall the desired calm appear. Thou wouldst have spared so many thousands of most wicked men, if in the City of Sodom had been found but ten good men. Now here be so many thousands of men, which love the glory of thy Name, which sigh for the beauty of thy house; and wilt thou not at these men's prayers let go thine anger and remember thine accustomed and old mercies? Shalt thou not with thy heavenly policy turn our folly into thy glory? Shalt thou not turn the wicked men's evils into thy Churches good? For thy mercy is wont than most of all to succour, when the thing is with us past remedy, and neither the might nor wisdom of men can help it. Thou alone bringest things that be never so out of order, into order again: which art the only Author and maintainer of peace. Thou framedst that old confusion, which we call Chaos, wherein without order, without fashion confusely lay the discordant seeds of things, and with a wonderful order the things that of nature fought together, thou didst ally and knit in a perpetual band. But how much greater confusion is this, where is no charity, no fidelity, no bonds of love, no reverence neither of laws, nor yet of rulers; no agreement of opinions, but as it were in a misordered choir, every man singeth a contrary note. Among the heavenly Planets is no dissension, all four Elements keep their place, every one do their office whereunto they be appointed. And wilt thou suffer thy Spouse, for whose sake all things were made, thus by continual discords to perish & go to wrack? Shalt thou suffer the wicked spirits, which be authors and workers of discord, to bear such a swinge in thy Kingdom unchecked? Shalt thou suffer the strong Captain of mischief, whom thou once overthrewest, again to invade thy tents and to spoil thy soldiers? When thou wert here a man conversant amongst men, at thy voice fled the devils. Send forth we beseech thee, O Lord, thy Spirit which may drive away out of the breasts of all them that profess thy Name, the wicked spirits, masters of riot, of covetousness, of vain glory, of carnal lust, of mischief, and of discord. Create in us, O our God and King, a clean heart, and renew thy holy Spirit in our breasts, pluck not from us thy holy Ghost. Render unto us the joy of thy saving health, and with thy principal Spirit, strengthen thy Spouse and the Herdsmen thereof. By this Spirit thou reconciledst the earthly to the heavenly: by this thou didst frame and reduce, so many tongues, so many Nations, so many sundry sorts of men into one body of a Church; which body by the same Spirit is knit to thee their head. This Spirit, if thou wilt vouchsafe to renew in all men's hearts, then shall also these foreign miseries cease, or if they cease not, at least they shall turn to the profit and avail of them which love thee. Stay this confusion, set in order this horrible Chaos (O Lord Jesus;) let thy Spirit stretch out itself upon these waters of evil wavering opinions. And because thy Spirit, which according to thy Prophet's saying containeth all things hath also the science of speaking: make, that like as unto all them which be of thy house, is all one light, one Baptism, one God, one hope, one Spirit: so they may also have one voice, one note, and song, professing one Catholic truth. When thou didst mount up to heaven triumphantly, thou threwest out from above thy precious things, thou gavest gifts amongst men, thou dealtest sundry rewards of thy Spirit. Renew again from above thy old bountifulness, give that thing to thy Church now fainting & growing downward, that thou gavest unto her shooting up, at her first beginning. Give unto Princes and Rulers the grace so to stand in awe of thee, that they so may guide the Commonweal, as they should shortly render account unto thee that art the King of kings. Give wisdom to be always assistant unto them, that whatsoever is best to be done, they may espy it in their mind, and pursue the same in their doings. Give to the Bishops the gift of prophecy, that they may declare and interpret holy Scripture, not of their own brain but of thine inspiring. Give them the threefold charity which thou once demandedst of Peter, what time thou didst betake unto him the charge of thy sheep. Give to the Priests the love of soberness and of chastity. Give to thy people a good will to follow thy Commandments, and a readiness to obey such persons as thou hast appointed over them. So shall it come to pass, if through thy gift thy Princes shall command that thou requirest, if thy Pastors and Herdsmen shall teach the same, and thy people obey them both: that the old dignity and tranquillity of the Church shall return again with a goodly order unto the glory of thy Name. Thou sparedst the Ninevites appointed to be destroyed, as soon as they converted to repentance: and wilt thou despise thy house falling down at thy feet, which in stead of sackcloth hath sighs, and in stead of ashes tears? Thou promisedst forgiveness to such as turn unto thee, but this self thing is thy gift, a man to turn with his whole heart unto thee, to the intent all our goodness should redound unto thy glory. Thou art the maker, repair the work that thou hast fashioned. Thou art the Redeemer; save that thou hast bought. Thou art the Saviour; suffer not them to perish which do hang on thee. Thou art the Lord and owner; challenge thy possession. Thou art the head; help thy members. Thou art the King; give us a reverence of thy Laws. Thou art the Prince of peace; breathe upon us brotherly love. Thou art the God, have pity on thy humble beseechers: be thou, according to Paul's saying, all things in all men, to the intent, the whole choir of thy Church with agreeing minds and consonant voices for mercy obtained at thy hands, may give thanks to the Father, Son, and holy Ghost, which after the most perfect example of concord, be distincted in property of persons, and one in nature, to whom be praise and glory eternally. Amen.    
FINIS.   

A CATALOGVE OF the several Treatises heretofore published by the Author.  
THe Eternal Truth of Scriptures and Christian belief, in two Books of Commentaries upon the Apostles Creed.  
The third Book of Commentaries upon the Apostles Creed, containing the blasphemous positions of jesuits and other later Romanists, concerning the authority of their Church.  
justifying Faith, or the faith whereby the just do live, being the fourth Book upon the Creed.  
A Treatise containing the original of unbelief, misbelief, or misperswasions concerning the Verity, Unity, and Attributes of the Deity: with directions for rectifying our belief or knowledge in the forementioned points, being the fifth Book upon the Creed.  
A Treatise of the Divine Essence and Attributes the first and second parts, being the sixth Book upon the Creed.  
The knowledge of Christ jesus, or the seaventh book of Commentaries upon the Apostles Creed, containing the first and general principles of Christian Theology, with the more immediate principles concerning the knowledge of Christ: divided into four Sections.  
The humiliation of the Son of God: or the eighth Book of Commentaries upon the Apostles Creed.  
A Treatise of the holy Catholic Faith and Church.  
Christ's answer to john's question: or an Introduction to the knowledge of jesus Christ, and him crucified: delivered in certain Sermons.  
Nazareth and Bethlehem: or Israel's portion in the son of Jesse, And mankind's comfort from the weaker sex, in two Sermons preached at S. Mary's in Oxford.  
FINIS.