THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIAN RELIGION, PROVED By the Principles, and Rules, taught and received in the Light of Understanding; In an exposition of the Articles of Faith, commonly called the Apostles Creed. Whereby it is made plain to every one endued with Reason, what the steadfastness of the Truth and Mercy of God toward Mankind is, concerning the attainment of everlasting happiness: And what is the glory and excellency of the Christian Religion, over all heathenish Idolatry all Turkish, Jewish, Athean, and heretical Infidelity. Written by a learned Author lately deceased. PSAL. 116. VERS. 10. I have believed, therefore have I spoken. LONDON, Printed for for Joshua Kirton, and are to be sold at his shop in Paul's Churchyard, at the sign of the Kings-Armes, 1651. TO THE RIGHT WORSHIPFUL, the Master, Wardens, and Assistants of the Honourable Company of MERCERS in London, my worthy friends and Patrons, etc. IT is now six and twenty years, since by the great love and favour of the Company, I had the government of that ancient, and religious foundation of Paul's School, committed to my trust, and care. In all which time (until Nature gave place unto extreme age and infirmity) if my ability assisted with industry hath advanced those, that were commended to my institution, in manners, and learning; I desire that they may render and attribute the sole thanks unto you. For by your courtesy and discreet liberality I was cherished, and furthered, not only to do you service in myself, but likewise to give such education to my sons, as hath made them fit, in their qualities, to perform the like duty. Now so it is, worthy Gentlemen, that Nature being not only declined in me, but almost quite worn out, by reason of a sedentary life, much study, and continual pains; I thought it fit, before I go hence, in grateful acknowledgement of the many and great obligations, which your goodness hath from time to time fastened upon me, ever since my entrance into your service, to dedicate the best of my labours to your acceptance. This is it, which if it have the blessing to do (as doubtless it will in some measure) any benefit to the Church and country, wherein I live; I shall likewise entreat them to confer the thanks upon you, by whom I was enabled to perfect a work of so high and necessary an argument. I shall not live to receive your thanks myself: and therefore I beseech you to accept of them, as the legacy of a dying man; and, with them, the dedication of this work. Which as it was begun, and finished under your roof: so I know none more fit to patronise the work, than your-selves, who have been the Patrons of the author. Thus in all humility I take leave, committing you to God; my surviving sons to the continuance of your love and care; and this other child of my old age to your fostering, a more living witness of your favours towards me, and my thankfulness towards you. Your much obliged Servant, ALEX. GIL. THE PREFACE to the Reader. WHen in the year 1601 I gave out a little treatise concerning the Trinity of persons in the Unity of the Deity, for such reasons as appear therein, I made a conditional promise of a further assertion of every Article of our Christian faith. This promise of mine hath oftentimes since that been exacted both by friends, and strangers. That treatise tried the common fortune of all books; some slighted it, because it brought nothing but that which was common, others condemned it, as thinking it unfit that matiers of faith should be persuaded by reason. They of the first sort were not only mine acquaintance, who might commend my Book for affection to me, but some strangers, who for their liking of the book became afterwards my friends. And these encouraged me to the performance of my promise. The second sort did not a little comfort me, because I had in no sort troubled the peace of the Church. The third sort have held me disheartened until now: for although I there showed, that even in matiers where faith is most required, both our Lord and his Apostles persuaded by common reasons, as also the Prophet's before-time had done: yet though I knew no reason of their dislike, I did forbear, because I would not offend of ignorance. But seeing the everlasting saving or loss o● the soul, is a thing which of all other concerns a man most to think of; and that all sorts and sects of men, which fare exceed us Christians in multitude, See Brerewoods' enquiry of Religion Chap. 14. have hope of immortal life aswell as we, it concerns us not a little to see wherein our advantage is, and what assurance we have more than they. Now to let pass the false Religion of the Paynim idolaters in Lapland, in Africa, in the East and West Indies, and that great continent of the South; what is our pre-eminence over the jews, Turks and Heretics of the former times? of them that are, and still will be until the time that all things shall be restored? The jews hold firmly as we, the authority of the Old Testament, and deny the New. The Turks also, though they speak honourably of Christ, as of more than a Prophet: yet of the holy Scriptures which we receive, they make little reckoning; and although they read the Psalter Azoa 7. yet they set up their Alcoran as their Idol which they worship. Do not the fathers, Tertullian contra Marcionem, and Augustine de Haeres. Cap. (See also the epistle of Orig. cited by john Picus Miran. pag. 206.) witness how the authority of Scriptures was abased by the Heretics? some they rejected, the rest they corrupted by false interpretations, by adding, and taking away what was for their purpose. It seems therefore, that the authorities on all sides respectively being of like regard, the main advantage which we have, is in reason, as it shall hereafter appear, in every Article of our Faith. And therefore they that deny us the use of reason in a matter of so great importance as our Religion is, bereave us of our chief advantage; and (as much as in them is) turn us out of the fold of Christ, to choose at large what Religion we like best. But if man were created in the image of God that he might know and serve him as he ought, and if common reason rightly guided be that image of God in us yet remaining, as it is plain, because that image and wisdom of the Father is that light which lightens every man that comes into the world, john 1. I see no cause why reason, that especial and principal gift of God to mankind, should not be serviceable to the principal and especial end for which man himself is created, that is, his drawing near unto God by faith in him: for the excellency of every thing is in the excellency of the End for which it is. And that common sense and reason have their especial use in things pertaining unto God, it is most manifest. For all our knowledge proceeds from mere ignorance, first knowing words, by their meaning, than things by fence and experiments, from whence the reason ascending by enquiry into the causes comes at last into the knowledge thereof, and so unto the chiefest and first cause, wherein alone it finds rest. And seeing man alone of all the visible creatures is framed and form of God unto this search, by the outward sense and reason to find the wisdom and power of God in the creature, that so honouring him therefore as he ought he might be made happy thereby: if it be no way possible by reason and discourse to come to this end, than should God want of his honour by some of those means by which it might be given unto him, than should the creature be failing to man in the special use, which he should make thereof to God, then should reason the chief faculty of our soul, and principal means of our knowledge, have been given unto man in value; that is, as sense is to the beasts, only for this life; if it were either no help at all, or an unfit, or an insufficient mean to know that which is most necessary and worthy to be known; and yet obscure, to stir up our industry, that as faithful servants we may improve those gifts wherewith God hath entrusted us: See Luke 19.1. And so the purpose of God should be frustrate, both in the inferior creature, and in man, and that in their chiefest and uttermost end. See Prov. 16.4. But these things are impossible, and therefore we are commanded Deut. 6.5. to love and serve the Lord our God with all our heart, the seat of reason: 1 King. 3.12. with all our soul, the seat of the will and understanding in heavenly things, and all our affections, there styled by a word of vehemency or excess. And thus do we fulfil the counsel of the wise Pro. 3.9. to honour the Lord with all our substance, that is, whatsoever is ours without or within, as sense, reason, understanding, affections, and will. But still you say that reason is an unsufficient means, and unable to bring us to the knowledge of those things which we are bound to believe: for else the Heathen which know not the Scriptures, might have known the truth of Religion as well as we. Ans. There be divers kinds of questions about every subject, as I shown Log Chap. 3. Now the conclusion or Article of our faith by the Atheist or Infidel or weak Believer being made a question, the reasons brought are to prove only that the conclusion is true, not always why it is true: for there be many conclusions in our faith which cannot be known and proved prioristicè (as they speak) that is, by their immediate and necessary causes, seen and understood in the effects necessarily following thereon: for then that humility which ought to be joined with our faith, should be without reward; but yet the foundation of our faith is sure, because the Spirit of God which understands the things which are of God, hath revealed in the Scriptures whatsoever is necessary for us to know or believe concerning God: & thus posterioristicè or by way of induction are all the Articles of our faith approved by reason: so that our faith and hope are not of things impossible, but such as are true and necessary to be. Moreover, if there be but one God, one Lord of all, one faith, the only way to come unto God, Ephes. 4.6. as it is plain there is but one Mediator, 1. Tim. 2.5. without whom none can come to the Father. john 14.6. It cannot be denied, but that the same glorious faith which we are taught in the holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament (excepting only the historical circumstances thereof, as names and times, as that the Mediator jesus was to be borne of a Virgin, Mary, and to suffer death under Pontius Pilate, etc.) must be that very same faith by which all the Saints of God were saved for above two hundred and fifty years before there were any Scriptures written. And therefore that although this faith was delivered and reverently embraced by the faithful before the Law of Moses, who also so delivered it, as that they could not look unto the end of the law, 2 Cor. 3.13. Yet they who either received it not by tradition, as most of the Gentiles, or understood it not in the Law, as few among the jews did, beside the Prophets, must of necessity through the light of reason alone hold with us some main and fundamental points, according to which, if they lived in obedience, they might find mercy, for that whereof they were ignorant, as it is said Act. 17.30. that God oversaw or neglected the ignorance of the time before Christ. For if the representative Priest, by foreign blood found forgiveness for himself and the ignorances' of the people concerning all punishment in this life: how much more might the everlasting highpriest by his own offering of himself find eternal redemption for their ignorances', who sought mercy of God, although they knew him not by whom they did obtain it? yet might they therefore assure themselves to obtain it, because they could not seek forgiveness but by his Spirit who framed their hearts to seek it, and thereby gave them an earnest or pledge that they should find it. Compare herewith, Rom. 10.18.20. joh. 14.6. Now those main points, of which I spoke, which by the light of reason they might know, are these. First, that there is a God infinite in goodness, in glory, in wisdom, in power, as it is manifest, Psal. 19 Rom. 1.19, 20. and elsewhere: Secondly, that this God the maker of all things, according to that goodness, made every thing to an end infinitely good, as fare as the creature could be capable thereof: And that therefore the happiness of man could not be in this life, short and miserable, but that his hope must be for hereafter. And therefore thirdly, that he must needs persuade himself that he was immortal, and that there was an immortal life, at least as appertaining to his soul. Fourthly, because a man's wretchedness is for the most part from himself, in the unlawfulness of his own ill deeds, which proceed from the bitter fountain of his affections, and ill desires tormenting himself: therefore he must needs confess his sin against himself, and know that he that finds himself so displeasing to himself, can no way hope, that for his own worthiness he can any way be acceptable unto God: and that therefore he hath no succour nor hope, but only in his mercy that hath made him thereunto, if he will, desire, and trust in his mercy. And thus far the reasons of the heathens, and the Religion of the Turks do drive them. But here that foolish Religion of the Turks is content to stay, not holding it necessary to believe a Mediator: because (say they) God infinite in mercy made his Creature only, because heloved it. Thus while they truly magnify the mercy of God, they utterly forget that he is Just. Unto which infinite justice of God if they had taken due regard, the same light of reason would further have showed unto them, that the soul that sins must bear a punishment answerable to his sin: And because by every sin against God an infinite justice is offended; therefore it is impossible that any man by his own righteousness (which can never be any more than by the Law of God he is bound unto) should be able to make any satisfaction for his sin. Upon which true principle it will follow necessarily in the light of reason, either that there is no possible return to the favour of God: which conclusion a man would by all means avoid; or else that the reconciliation of mankind unto God must needs be by the mediation of a man in every respect free from Sin, who bearing the punishment due to sinners, might find redemption and mercy for all them that would believe it, and live worthy thereof. But because all men conceived in lust and sin are originally tainted therewith; for out of uncleanness who can bring that which is clean? therefore must the generation of this Mediator be wonderful and not after the common manner of all men; but so that no sin or taint of the flesh must be therein. So that being both borne and living, without sin, he might by his death become a ransom acceptable for the sins of others. And although reason could not conceive nor find how this should be; yet seeing that in the necessity of the divine justice it must be thus; reason would as easily yield that it might be, as it did find and see the creation of mankind and the whole creature out of nothing, as by the discourse ensuing it will hereafter appear. If this were not thus, how should the whole world of Infidels and misbelievers be liable to the justice of God for their ignorance of him, for their neglect, and for their unbelief? So taking it as granted, till it doth further appear by the Treatise following, that reason hath right good and necessary use in the things of faith; it is too manifest, that these wretched times are such as seem to call aloud for the publishing of some such work as this: for though the fools, that have said in their hearts, there is no God, dare not in words profess it; yet by their continuance in their sinful deeds they do proclaim that their thoughts are so. Neither are they altogether wanting which say, that Religion is but a politic invention to keep men in civil obedience: but if the conclusions of the Christian Religion be inferred upon necessary principles, then are they not made out of policy, as these Atheists say, but cannot prove it, except they could also make it appear that policy was able to make natural reason. I will not deny that Mahumed settled his religion so, as they say; but he forbids to dispute of the principles thereof, because it is against both reason and Scripture; and so perhaps it may be said of those Will-worships that are, or have been among other Gentiles, to whom God vouchsafed not the knowledge of his Law. But our most holy faith because it alone is true, hath no other author than God himself, who hath revealed it by his word: and because no man shall be excused if he believe it not, he hath commanded reason, whereof all men are partakers, to seal thereto in every point: but because in the Treatise before mentioned, and by the whole practice of this book this thing is manifest, I will here turn me only to answer those doubts which may be brought against the persuading of matiers of faith by humane reason. First it may be objected, that the matiers of faith are fare above humane reason, and that therefore it is a great presumption to question or skan them thereby: for it is said by S. Paul Rom. 11.33. that his ways and wisdom are past finding out. I confess, we know nothing of God, but what he hath revealed of himself by his works, or by his words, for he dwelleth in the light that none can approach unto, even as S. Paul speaks there of his calling and election to faith, a will unrevealed: but the Articles of our faith he hath most plainly taught and revealed. And further to the argument, I confess that humane reason turning itself to behold the divine truths, is as the eye of a Bat to look on the Sun. But yet the eternal and infinite truths are so apprehended by man's finite understanding, as the light of the Sun is by the eye, that is verily and indeed the same light, and no other: for though the eye cannot receive all the light of the Sun; yet that which it doth receive is truly that same light which is in or from the Sun. But you say, that if in things of common use, as honey, salt, or any other things vegetable or mineral, we must confess our exceeding ignorance of their nature, properties and possibilities, both alone, and much more in all manner of compositions; it may seem that our dulness may much rather be acknowledged in things divine. I yield not altogether to this consequence: for to the knowledge of natural things, we have our own witless experience to help us, and the deceitful authority of mistaking men: but all those truths whereon our faith relies, are grounded on the infallible rules of Gods own word revealed by himself unto us, for this end, that we should not be deceived or mistaken. And although it was impossible for humane reason ever to find out the conclusions and most fundamental points of our faith, as the mystery of the Trinity, the incarnation of God, the resurrection of the body, etc. yet being by the clear light of Gods own word made known unto us, we approve the same truth by the judgement and voice of reason. So the reasons that are brought hereunto are not to establish any truth new or unheard of, but for that faith which was heretofore taught & delivered unto the Saints; & if the reasons of themselves be weak, and by their weakness show how man's understanding is dazzled at the divine light; yet the conclusions stand sure and unmoveable: but if the reasons be certain and true; then questionless they are grounded in the Word and truth of God, and the conclusion true, either for the reason delivered, or for a higher reason which we cannot find. To this purpose the Father Anselm. de Conc. Gratiae & lib. arbit. saith not unfitly, Sacra Scriptura, omnis veritatis quam ratio colligit, authoritatem continet, cùm illam aut apertè continet, aut nullatenus negat. Quod enim apertâ ratione colligitur, & illi ex nullâ parte Scripturae contradicitur quoniam ipsa sicut nulli adversatur veritati, itae nulli favet falsitati, hoc ipso quiae non negat, ejus auctoritate suscipitur. Yet you will say, that this endeavour is altogether needless, seeing the conclusion of itself is more manifest than the reason. I answer; The eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the understanding with knowledge: and if the eye be not able to behold the beams of the Sun, either direct from itself, or reflected in a looking glass; yet it joys to see that shining lamp when his beams are refract, or as it were broken off; as in water, a thin cloud, or a coloured glass: so man's understanding not able to understand the glorious light of God's holy truth shining from himself, for that is his garment; nor yet reflected on it by his word, a word, like the speaker, of infinite wisdom; yet takes it infinite delight to see, if it be but a glimpse of that clear light, thorough the thick cloud of humane reason, thorough which being refracted, it is better fitted to be looked upon: for because reason and understanding is more natural to the soul of man, than to believe, and because the soul as every other thing, joys in the natural abilities of itself, therefore though the reasonable soul do believe what it is taught by the spirit of Christ instructing it; yet if that blessed Spirit vouchsafe further to enable the natural abilities, that it may see the reasons of the lessons taught, it triumphs much more therein: for faith is a supply of reason in things understandable, as the imagination is of sight in things that are visible: now as the imagination takes the shapes, proportions, and distances of persons and places by their description, till it be better satisfied by the very sight of the things themselves; so the soul through faith embraceth the truth of that which is taught, and relies on the steadfastness of that which is promised, and this in full assurance and hope without wavering. Yet because the things believed are of so great importance, it is glad of the help of reason whereon to stay itself; as a weak man though upheld in his going by one that is strong and able to bear him, yet will not forgo his staff, which without further aid could not support him. Secondly, it is objected, that many learned men hold it not fit to examine the things of faith by humane reason. Answer. The 19 Serm. of Athanasius clearly refutes this opinion by many arguments. And I have known some able Preachers, as they have judged their hearers fit thereto, to persuade even the chiefest points of our faith by common reason. And are not the Bereans praised Acts 17.10. because they examined the things delivered of Paul by the Scriptures? And is not reason the Scripture of God, which he hath written in every man's heart? yet I examine not these things of faith, whether they be true or no, as the Bereans did; but knowing, acknowledging, and to death holding them true, I bring all the strength of my understanding to approve them so. And although it be not lawful for me to handle either sword or spear; yet because I wish well to these holy wars, I have as a straggler brought my baskets of stones, whence the cunning slingers our david's (if they please) may choose what they like, if any uncircumcised Philistim, shall defy the host of Israel. And thereto they want neither reason nor example. For no man makes due account of the Holy Scripture, whose heart God hath not touched, and so is already won. But there is none so brutish, which doth not willingly hearken to reason. And did S. Paul at Athens, or elsewhere among Idolaters, persuade the worship of the true God, and Christ the Saviour of the world by the authority of Scripture, or by common reason, and their own poets? beside Aratus whose words he citys, you shall find that his speech is in their own phrase and stile, and much of the matter in Plato, and in special his Phaedon, of the soul's immortality. Did the valiant champions or Martyrs of Christ defend the Christian Religion before Ethnic Emperors, by the authority of the Scriptures? Did the persecutor Dioclesian give any credit to the holy text, when he commanded it to be burnt? Did not the Apostata, nicknamed Idolianus, therefore forbidden the Christians to instruct their Children in Grammar, Logic and other liberal arts, because they wounded the Heathens with their own weapons? because they defended their own Religion, and shown the madness of Idolatry, by common reason? The books of justine the Martyr, of Tertullian, of Arnobius, and other are yet extant: do they defend the Christian Religion by Scripture, or rather by reason? by the innocent life of the Christians; and the infinite good which the Heathens themselves received by them. Who blames the later writers, I mean the Schoolmen, Aquinas, both the Raimunds, and the rest? if their reasons be good, allow them, if ill, amend them. What man of learning, praises not the endeavour of the learned Mornay concerning the trueness of the Christian Religion? The Lutherans, I confess, though learned, do not every where like of this learning, because it strangles their consubstantiation even in the birth. The Papists doubtless as learned as they, yet in this point are much more temperate. For though their transubstantiation cannot stand with natural reason, yet they do not therefore thrust the use of natural reason out of Religion, but confess Transubstantiation to be a thing miraculous and transcendent. Therefore let these declaimers and froward opposers against reason vanish away in their own opinion; because it is known by experience that none are so forward to thrust new doctrine and rules of life upon the Church by their own authority, as they that gainsay both reason and authority. Other cavils like to these you may see answered note (a) on chap. 11. where for further satisfaction, the manner of our arguing is plainly declared. Thirdly, it will be objected against myself in particular, that seeing other men have handled divinity by common reason before, my pains herein might well have been spared; And so much the rather, because that I, neither a Prophet, nor the son of a Prophet, might (if any supply at least had been needful to their former pains) full well have let this burden alone, too heavy for my shoulders, for them to take up who being professed to divinity, might better have borne it. Vouchsafe to hear: For I hearty profess that this task had been fit for them to undertake, who had both more ability, and leisure than I to perform it. But if either they thought not hereon, or held it not fit, or that their pains were otherwise employed; their greater and more profitable labours deserve more praises. And though I have stood all day in the market, because no man hath hired me; yet seeing I would as feign have the penny as he that hath borne the burden and heat of the day, I would not be idle. But because the knowledge and study of heavenly things, and the means whereby the soul may be saved, concerns all men alike, even Amos among the herdsmen of Tekoa, as much as Azariah the Priest in the Temple of jerusalem; And that every one as he hath received, so is he bound to make account of his talon; Therefore although the burden I confess, was more fit for a man in the strength of his memory and understanding and too heavy for me now wasted in seventy years, with age, sickness; and continual pains; yet I trusted in him that directed my heart to take it up, that he would give me strength in some sort to bear it. But, concerning those men that have laboured herein before me, although I praise their pains, yet I think them not fit for every man's use. Aquinas according to the greatness of his active understanding in his books against the Gentiles, hath moved an endless number of questions, of which (as it seems to me) many are very needless and impertinent to this my purpose, and would draw an English Reader into a maze out of which he could hardly wind himself. Raimund de Sabunde though his writings be easy and quick, yet his matiers are scattered, and not according to that method which I intent. Savanarola wanders up and down, means well, saith something out of Thomas; but in his Triumphus Crucis, as in all the Schoolmen, and so in both the former, very many things are left out, which most necessarily belong to this our purpose, and many things brought in, which are not here at all questioned. Mornay though he deserves much praise for his great reading, and his plain and easy stile; yet beside that which he persuades concerning some few questions here moved, he refers us to the Scriptures for proof of the rest. A most certain proof indeed, and above all other with a Christian: but my purpose is to add an overplus of proof to the persuasion which the Christian hath; and to justify his faith against all adversaries, not by authority of Scripture only, which with Heretics, Turks, and Infidels is of small regard. Moreover that which he persuades, is by reasons in a manner altogether inductive: which kind of proof, although it be more usual in the Scriptures than any other, and is of force sufficient with them that hold the principles and main grounds of Religion, for whom only they were written, and not for them who are without, Rom. 15.4. yet, with infidels or adversaries inductive arguments are of small force, except they be laid down with their supposition as I call it, log. cap. 14. For other wise the understanding hath no foundation whereon it may stay itself. And he that in matiers of faith brings in reasons which are not of force to compel the understanding to yield to the truth, gives occasion to infidels and Atheists to scoff at Religion, and leaves the wavering minded more unsettled than before: As I knew a young Scholar, who reading Euphues, refuting his Atheist by such flight inductions and arguments, only probable, became much perplexed in his mind, till it pleased God by his light to settle his understanding. The reasons of Raimund Lul and his manner of arguing gives more full satisfaction; And he it is from whose enlightened Spirit I borrowed most, because he only of the rest hath written particularly to almost all the Articles of the Creed: yet that treatise hath great need, both to be cleared, and of supply. And although for example's sake in his art general, and inventive, he handle some of the questions; yet while he strives therein to show the use of his art, rather than the truth of the things, he proposeth his reasons with great confusion, and exceeding difficulty to be understood, as it will easily appear to him that reads him. But to yield that, I took my light from those illuminate doctor's Aquinas and Lul (for I seek not mine own praise, but the manifestation of the truth of God and the joy and comfort of the Christian souls among mine own nation) was the light theirs? is not reason the common light of every man which can either find it out; or see it being found? is the light in a Church his light that made the windows thorough which it shines? what interest hath he therein more than any stranger that enjoys the light, yet knows not the mason? But if my knowledge of the mason, that is my reading of Aquinas, make the reasons his, than his reading of Aristotle shall make the reasons Aristotle's, from whom he hath gathered his reasons, some where whole and entire, every where from his principles. And so if my reasons gathered from the practice of Raimunds' art, or from his own practice, be therefore Raimunds' reasons, because he delivered that excellent art, than the light shall be the Masons. But if they for their goodly buildings, made Bay windows to let in much light: And I for my low, yet sure built house have made but casements and loopeholes, yet so disposed them as they may let in light enough to lighten every corner of my little rooms; Let every one that is pleased come in and enjoy the benefit of the light, and thereby behold the truth of God, and rejoice in His light; And when he understands the reasons; let him account them his own, either to strengthen himself and others thereby against misbelief and doubting; or especially against such as shall either wilfully or ignorantly withstand the truth. And if I for my long and great study earn not so much as the name of a diligent translator, or an Abridger, or a gatherer hereby; yet if any man gather either profit or content, I shall be glad, for the pains that I took herein, brought unto me an abundant reward. And having thus defended myself I will tell you, for what reasons I have at last taken heart, to discharge myself of my former promise. First of all, when in the earnest thought of these things, I found that the holy religion of the Christians, howsoever tried by Scriptures or by the clear evidence of understanding, had such light and manifestation of the truth therein, as that all the darkness of hell could not dim it. I confess I had such assurance of joy therein, that I judged I ought not to conceal it alone. For what greater joy can any man have in all the miseries and discontents of this wretched life, than to know and see; that his hopes proposed for a better life are such as cannot fail? then to see the exceeding mercy of God such, as that he requires nothing to be believed for which he doth not abundantly satisfy the understanding, if it will enlarge itself, and desire to be satisfied. Is it nothing that the mouths of all Heretics are stopped hereby? I mean not every difference in opinion to be an heresy, no not in an Article of Faith; but there is not any heresy in any main point, but by the strength of reason alone, it may be overthrown, as it will hereafter at large appear. Besides when the Christian Religion is found to be so reasonable, and to stand on such sure * Fundamenta ejus in montibus Sanctitatis. i. Scripturae sacrae, et ratter is. Psal 87.1. Foundations, as that it only is able, only worthy to bind the conscience of a reasonable man; whereas all other religions, or rather false worships, although examined in themselves only by their own principles, are found to be false and against common sense: what triumph is this of a Christian over all Heathens and misbelievers, that, will they nill they, if they will be men, and stand to reason, they must confess that the Christian religion is only true. And seeing the world hath been called to the marriage of the King's Son, Luc. 14.16, etc. First by the voice of nature, declaring the wisdom and power of God in the creature, and that they that were so called would not come, because their minds were set on earthly things. Secondly by the Law: but the jew who sought righteousness by the Law, would try what his five yoke of oxen, that is, his keeping of the Ceremonial Law, contained in the five books of Moses could do, and so would be excused. Thirdly by the Gospel; but the carnal gospeler and false Christian could not come, because he is married to pleasure, and worldly lusts; what remains but that they who are yet strangers, and walk in the broad ways of sin and the by-paths of their own inventions, should by reason, that servant of God be compelled to come in? And seeing the time cannot be fare off, that all the nations of the earth are to be called to the knowledge of Christ; For great shall his name be from the rising of the Sun to the going down of the same, Psal. 103.3. What hinders that the truth of Christ be taught according to common reason, whereto every man doth listen? For it cannot be but that all Idolatry and false worship, all heresies and dissensions about Religion must then cease, when the truth is taught in the evidence of that Spirit whereby every man is guided. For as God made man reasonable, so doth he command nothing to be done which in true reason is not the best: nor require any thing to be believed, which in true reason is not most true. You will say, is there no difference then between faith and reason? yes, very great. For Reason is busied in the proof of some general conclusion which is to be held for a truth, and so received of every man; but faith is the application of that conclusion to a man's own self. As if it be concluded, that because Christ being so conceived and so borne had no sin, and therefore he suffered not death for himself, but to save them that should believe on him: faith applies this general conclusion thus: but I do believe, and therefore I shall be saved. Now this application is not made by reason, but by the special instruction of the Spirit of God in the heart of the believer, although it were inferred upon such a conclusion as was proved by reason. I have not endeavoured herein to heap up arguments by numbers, but by weight, and therefore have Eyelet. pass all reasons from foreign authority, and all that were but likely only, and of small importance, neither have I brought any one, but such as seemed to me sufficient of itself to confirm the question. The reasons here used are for the most part from the goodness, power, wisdom, and other dignities of God; because the questions are concerning the things of God, and no arguments can be of greater force, and more immediate, than such as are drawn from the very being or immediate properties of the things in question, they are handled by necessities, and impossibilities, to show that all things that are, and are not, stand for the truth of the promises of God to us, that by all means we might have strong hope and comfort in Christ. And though I sometimes bring one argument for divers conclusions, yet it is not therefore of less force, no more than a good tool is of less worth because it serves for divers uses. I have studied for plainness as much as I may; and therefore have I sometimes handled the same reason both affirmatively and negatively, that he that cannot take it with one hand, might hold it with the other: & for that purpose also are divers reasons brought, though all satisfying (as I think) yet perhaps all of every one not equally understood: but he that understands all, may upon these grounds or the like, bring many other to the same purpose, and give glory to that infinite mercy, which hath so fortified this glorious truth which he hath bound us to believe, with such walls, bulwarks, ravelings and counterscarpes of reason, that all the power of hell, all the battery of Atheists, Turks, jews and other adversaries, shall never be able to overcome it. And because a little light is soon lost, if dispersed, as in the Stars called Nebulosae, and those of endless number and distance in the milky way; I have proposed the reasons together in as short and few words as I can, that the light of the reason may more easily appear. For oftentimes while men desire to enlarge themselves, the reason vanishes into words. The autorities of the sacred Text I bring as need is, that the Christian may see whence the Article of faith in question is taken, and whereon it is grounded, and that in the proof thereof I bring no other doctrine than the holy Scripture doth reach. Let no man carry my words or meaning awry: for although in this search of causes and reasons, other conclusions offered themselves, yet I held it not meet to propose any other things than the holy Church of old thought fit to be held as sufficient for the saving faith of Christians, contained in the Creed which is called the Apostles, as being gathered from their writings, and that according to that order as it is therein delivered, yet with such prefaces and notes, as the necessity of the things did drive me unto, leaving those other things to the higher speculation of them, whom God shall vouchsafe to enlighten for their further progress from faith to faith, from knowledge to knowledge, till all the holy Church come to be partakers of those things new and old, that are kept for her in store, when she shall come unto the fullness of the measure of the age of Christ; that is the perfect knowledge of all those things which our Lord in his time taught his Disciples, who were not able then to bear them, till they had received the light of the holy Spirit from above. If any man learned be pleased to read in this book, let him forgive me the harshness of my speech, being to teach the unlearned in English a language not taught that nicety of words, whereby to express the difference of things, which I easily hope he will do, because he knows that the infinite differences of things do much exceed the sharpness of our understanding, and yet the subtlety of man's understanding doth go fare beyond the rudeness and scarcity of all words and speech. The Treatise, whatsoever it is, with all humility and reverence I submit unto the undefiled Spouse of jesus Christ my dearest mother, the Church of England: and if I have done any thing herein which is pleasing to God, or useful to his Church, let the glory be given to him, by whose only mercy and favour I have been enabled to perform it. But let his holy Church graciously pardon whatsoever is herein amiss through my weakness, or error: And if any thing be offensive; let it by her censure, be as if it had never been written or thought of. Alexander Gil. Reader. BEcause the Printers are unwilling to be troubled with notes on the sides; therefore the authorities, and references are put in the leaf thus marked (000) but seeing the words and their meaning are perfect in themselves, beside those references, you may pass over all such places without hurt to the sense, except you think good to try it by the authority. january. XXXI. 1634. PErlegi universum hoc opus, cui titulus (The sacred Philosophy of the holy Scripture laid downe as conclusions, &c) quod continet in toto paginas, 492. aut circitèr, in quibus reperio nihil sanae doctrinae aut bonis moribus contrarium, quo minùs cum utilitate publicâ imprimi queant; ita tamen, ut si non intra quinquennium typis mandentur, haec licentia sit omnino irrita. Guil. Haywood. capell. domest. Archiep. Cant. THE ENTRANCE to the Treatise. LUKE 12.57. Why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right? THe principal virtue of man's soul is Reason, unto whose power the soul would have every thing subject, if it might; because that is the Standard to try the truth; in the knowledge whereof principally the soul is delighted But because arguments always appear not, by the weight of which reason may try the truth; the soul is content to believe or unbelieve such things, as it cannot try by reason; either for the credit of the author, or for the desire which itself hath, that they should be so, or not so. The first degree then of the powers of the soul above reason is faith: but because the soul is loath to be deceived, therefore will it not always come so fare as to believe, or discredit a thing, but is content to hold it in opinion: and yet upon a more slight view, to suppose something to be, or not to be, true or false for a time: for a man may suppose that to be, of which he will not entertain an opinion that it is, yea and have an opinion of that, which he doth not constantly believe; yea and believe that for which he cannot give a sound proof that it is. So that faith, opinion, and supposition, are of larger compass one than another, and all of greater circuit than reason. Yet because the imagination that lovely Dalilah is ever serviceable to reason her Samson, though never faithful; and because there is nothing in any of these three, which the imagination dares not be busy with; therefore by the help of imagination, reason inquires into the works of all these, using thereto saying and gainsaying, likelihood and unlikelyhood, and arguing on every side, till it come to a conclusion, in which it will rest, at least for a time. And as every mind or soul is more noble and excellent than another, (for there are many more degrees of excellency in spiritual substances than there be in bodily) so doth it exercise itself in the most hard and excellent things. And to set all other matters aside (for all other are fare beneath the knowledge of God, and the assurance of our faith in him, which is our present search) let us see by what degrees we are come unto that task which we have undertaken. Religion is a band or tyall of the conscience in things pertaining unto God, in respect of the excellency of the reward to them that do well, or of the punishment of them that do ill: for there was never any religion true or false, but it was set in the service of some God, whom the worshippers believed to be just in rewarding both good deeds and bad, and that not only in this life, but much more in another, where they persuaded themselves the soul was immortal, as one of their false prophets truly said, Virtus recludit non meritis mori Coelum.— then that religion (as every other thing that is reasonably undertaken) proceeds from the knowledge of the End; and that all religion doth suppose an everlasting happiness, or punishment to the soul in immortality (excepting only that of the pestilential Sect of the Sadduces, who though they confessed God, yet thought that the promises and threaten of the Law stretched no farther than to this life only, and therefore denied the resurrection, the soul's immortality, Angels, Devils) It might seem that I, who inquire of religion according to the discourse of reason, might hold it sufficient to lay down the reasons of the positive Doctrine without any mention of heresies or contrary opinions, and that I ought first to inquire, * See Chap. 39 whether there be any such happiness at all, as is supposed in the life to come. * See Chap. 40. Secondly, whether the soul be immortal, and so capable of eternal happiness. Thirdly, whether the soul although immortal, do remain a separate and an entire being by itself, or whether when it departs out of the body, it doth not return into the Chaos of life, as a drop of water falling into a river: for if any one of all these points fail; that is, if there be no happiness at all after death, or if the soul enjoy it not, because it dies, or if that happiness be not peculiar and entire to the soul by itself, and in itself, than the end of all our religion is utterly frustrate. But for the present, they shall be only as postulata, or suppositions; the proof shall appear hereafter in the Article of Everlasting life. And concerning heresies, I confess that in this disputing age, wherein men will rather seem to know, that they may oppose the truth, than willingly to submit themselves thereto, I had great doubt in myself, whether by the remembrance of them, I might not give occasion to such as itch after opinions, to be tainted with these stinking ulcers, or at least cause a doubting, or falling away of them that are weak, when they consider the diversities that have been, and still are concerning religion. But when I remembered the saying of S. Paul 1 Cor. 11.19. There must be heresies even among you, that they that are approved might be known: I supposed that this benefit would grow thereby, that men in the examination of opinions might be more firmly grounded in the truth of God, while they take heed to his word, as to a light that shines in a dark place. Therefore as Mariners set Buoys and Seamarkes for avoiding of shipwreck; or as Physicians describe Aconitum and other poisonous herbs, that they may be avoided, so are these heresies here set out. Moreover in this triumph of the truth of Christ, a great part of the captive train should have been wanting, if they had not been driven before the triumphant Coach: Whereas now the Christian may have comfort to see how the truth hath been fought against, but yet hath overcome; hath been besieged, not taken, battered, not shaken: so that hereafter he may contemn the force of any adversary. And for fear of danger, I think there is none; when both by Scripture and reason these heresies mentioned are so utterly overthrown. But if any contrary to both these will yet be licking of that foul vomit, Let him that is filthy, be filthy still; and let him that is holy, be holy still. The heresies I mention under the most usual and known name, not reckoning up for ostentation, all those that were followers of that opinion. The word Heresy I use at large, for any opinion which a man doth choose to maintain against the truth; known or unknown. And herein I put not only the perverse opinions of them that have been called Christians, but also those false positions of the Heathens, who professed Philosophy, of whose traditions and false principles we are admonished to beware Col. 2.8. And these things being thus remembered, let us now with due reverence and regard first be assured, That God is, that we may know what that glorious truth is, which is the ground and rule of all truth, and the foundation of our most holy and Christian religion: because that this foundation being once laid, the spiritual building of our most glorious faith may on that firm Rock be raised up in all the parts thereof perfect and entire. And as we know that the author of all truth hath no need of our Lie, whereby to be justified: so where the truth is manifest, let us not shut our eyes against it; because we know that it is the shine of his being upon our understanding; and that for this end, that our understanding and will being enlightened thereby, we may find the way to everlasting happiness. ARTICLE. I. I believe in God. That GOD is. CHAP. I. IN the Grammatical interpretation of the words, I follow only that sense which the Church of England holds; my purpose is not to dwell therein, but only to ascertain these doubts whereabout question may arise. Therefore let the Atheist hear, and the fool that saith in his heart, There is no God: for certainly, There is a God. And although no word or speech can be uttered, of which it is confessed that it is true or false, but that it doth from thence follow necessarily That God is: yet I will take only those nearest attributes, which we know to belong essentially unto him, and so affirm that by this name God is meant a being eternal, and infinite in all perfection of goodness, wisdom, power, will, truth, virtue, glory, and all those excellencies which may be in so glorious and infinite a being. And again convertibly, that this being most perfect in infinity, eternity, goodness, wisdom, glory, etc. is God. The first reason is from the eternity. If there be not a being which had no beginning, then that which was first existent or begun, must be a beginning unto itself, by causing itself to be when it was not. But it is impossible that any thing should be a cause, and not be: for so should it both be, and not be. Therefore there is an eternal being, the beginning of all things, himself without beginning. And that eternal being is God. 2. Seeing there is being which could not possibly raise itself out of not being; it follows, that being was before not being, and therefore of necessity must be eternal: for otherwise there was a (a) time wherein it might be said, that being is not being, and so not being should have been eternal, and (b) contradictories might have stood together; that is, not being in eternity, and yet eternity is most of all being. But these things are impossible: therefore there is an eternal being, and this eternal being we call God. 3. Eternity is. For neither can Nature which in continuance took her beginning together with time: nor yet can man's understanding put any point of beginning in continuance, before which some other continuance may not be understood to be. Therefore all Nature and Reason must needs yield, that there is Eternity. Therefore there is an eternal being: for if in eternity you put privation, or not being, it would be impossible that any thing should be brought out thereby. Therefore God is. 4. Whatsoever enforces the privation, or taking away of a being infinitely and eternally good, brings in an infinite and eternal ill: But to deny that God is, enforces the privation or taking away of a being infinitely and eternally good: Therefore to deny that God is, brings in an infinite and eternal ill. Hear Atheist and consider, how thou dost put ill to have the priority before good, both in being and in action: For that which is first, must needs be a cause to all things that follow; so that the cause of all things being ill (every effect necessarily answering the cause) every thing should in the very being have been ill: whereas ill is only moral in the wickedness of the qualities, or action, not of the being. [Gen. 1.31.] The greatest excellency or perfection of every thing, is in the likeness thereof unto the first cause: but every thing is more excellent in the being thereof, than in the not being: therefore in the being it is most like the first cause; whereupon it follows that the first cause of all, is most of all being: therefore before not being and so eternal. And that is God. All truths inferior and created, depend necessarily upon a superior and increated truth: for nothing can be in the effect, which is not first in the power of the cause. Wherefore seeing no space can be given so great, but that it is possible for the understanding, a created being, truly to conceive a space yet more large: nor any number so multiplied, but that still a greater number than it may be given; the understanding must needs yield, that there is a being infinite in extension, that fills all space, and yet is infinitely greater than it: and a wisdom or mind numbering, which is also infinite, which no number can-either exceed or equal, but only that most simple unity of his own most pure and absolute perfection. (c) Therefore there is a God. Notes. IF any man desire to see other reasons to this purpose, let him read those arguments that are brought by Tho. Aquinas lib. 1. cap. 13. contra Gentiles; & Sum. Theol. part. 1. cap. 2. out of Aristotle, and out of Thom. in Savanarola in his book called Triumphus Crucis, cap. 6. The arguments also, that are here brought in the chapters following to prove the Eternity, Infinity, Omnipotency, etc. of God; do prove that there is a God: for because these terms are convertible essentially, they are so many several demonstrations of the same thing, as was showed log. chap. 18. n. 3. And so no less are all those arguments for proof of this question, which follow in cap. 13. against the Eternity of the World. The inductive arguments of Cleanthes you shall find in Tully de Nat. Deorum lib. 2. and out of him in Philip Mornay, Of the trueness of Christian Religion. cap. 1. and in Peter Moulin de Cognition Dei, and others. (a) There was a time] Time is commonly taken for a certain continuance measured by the motion of the heavens. But here it signifies at large and improperly as much as any lasting continuance, or duration which may be thought distinguishable in Eternity. (b) Contradictories, Reason 2.] The second part of Logonomia, which I call Logic, written by me, among other reasons there mentioned, was especially meant to be an help to them that needed help for the understanding of this book. And therefore for this, and all such dark words, you that need help must seek it there; and having read that book diligently first, and somewhat understood it; you shall come better furnished to this book, or the like; and let this note be sufficient for all such words of art as this. (c) Therefore there is a God.] All these reasons conclude directly the being of that one only true God whom we adore. And as there was never any nation so barbarous, which did not confess some God; one thing or other, which their imaginations lead them unto: So have few men been found so shameless as to deny it. Yet if any such there be, as Diagoras of Melos, and Theodorus of Cyrene were said to be: they shall be reckoned the principal heretics against this conclusion. Protagoras also shall go in that number, because he made it doubtful whether there were Gods or no; whom the Athenians did therefore banish, and burned his books. The second sort is of Paynims and Idolaters; who in stead of the true God worship false gods, Idols and devils Ephes. 2.12. The third sort of Atheists are they, who although they deny not God in their words, and being overcome in their consciences cannot deny him: yet in their actions and affections have no remembrance and regard of him. These have the sentence of their judgement already pronounced upon them Psal. 9.17. For whosoever prefers any thing before God and his fear; either honour, riches, pleasure, the favour of men, or whatsoever else; they set up other gods, and so forsake the true God, and his Religion, which had not power over their consciences to bind them to his fear. For he, that comes to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that seek him Heb. 11.6. A fourth error is of them, who make the idols of the heathens to be the same with the true God, known and worshipped among the Hebrews, blessed therein above all people, because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was their God. Psal. 144.15. & 147.20. You shall have their opinion delivered by Hermesianax, translated by Mr. G. Sandys. lib. 2. of his Relation. Pluto, Persephone, Ceres, Venus, Love, Triton, Nereus, Thetis, Neptune, and jove. Pan, juno, Vulcan, He with th'awful rod, PHaebe, and Archer Phoebus, all one God. And so all the Panim Idolaters, in spite of their noses, shall be worshippers of the true God. But how agrees this with the truth of the Scripture Deut. 32.16.17. where strange Gods are called devils. Psal. 106.36.37. They served idols and offered unto devils. 1 Cor. 10.20. The Gentiles sacrifice to devils, and not to God. But hath not this opinion gotten strength of late, when we are taught to believe by Sanf. & Park. de descensu sect. 6.7. etc. that these Heathenish devils had their names also from the glorious names of the true God? And for this purpose we must of Elohim have Helion. But if I should not be accessary to this folly, I would ask why not rather of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elion? especially, seeing the interpretation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 11. bind us thereto, from the signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies Strong, and yet the fiction of the Sun's horses proved out of Chrysost. sect. 7. would have fetched it better and with less dishonour to God, from Helias. Will you have any more? then of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shaddai take Dis: So this rare Cabalist takes the Epithet of the blessed God, Gen. 17.1. to the prince of their devils, of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which we read Jehova; you shall have jao, Euios, Phaebos, Bacebos, I, and the Peruvian Hioh: and of Adonai, the lovely boy Adonis: horresco referens. And Anion the Brasilian devil, and Kiwassa the idol of Virginia, if they had thought on't, with as much likelihood. But it is proved by the authority of the devil of Claros himself, Cunctorum dicas supremum numeu jao; Hic tibi vere novo sit jupiter, Helius aestu; Dis, cum saevit hyems; Autumno mollis jao. And again, the Rhodian devil said as much, Magnum Atten placate deum, qui castus Adonis, Euios est largiter opum, pulcher Dionysus. The devil is a Liar from the beginning; And I easily think, that he would and did help the Heathen to believe all Hesiods genealogy of the gods: And that he would as willingly suffer them to profane the holy titles of the only true God for their greater condemnation, that would attribute them unto him. But if the Heathens would falsely give these names to their * Devils. See Aug. de Civ. D. lib. 9 cap. 23. Gods, a Christian should avenge that unjust claim, and not with such hard straining thrust them upon them. And how sticks this with their own learning, that Moses, who was never called jehova, should be Bacchus, and the hill Sina, the city Nisa? and Arabia, the India to which Bacchus went? Did any Geographer so describe the earth, as to bring India into Arabia? Father Ptolemy tells us, that no part of India is near to Sina by forty five degrees, which of the Aequators' longitude is two thousand seven hundred miles. And the history of Alexander refutes this fancy Iust. hist. lib. 12. So joshua is sometimes Hercules, sometime Apollo: And Deos and Deus were used for any God indifferently; but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 began to be restrained to the true God. When? where? by whom? in prose, or in verse? he looked on 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and did but think so. Is not this that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that shreeves himself to his wife juno for all his slippery pranks with Danae, Semele, Latona, and the rest? Iliad. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. that threatens to clapperclaw her Iliad. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. that gave her the strappado with two Anvils at her heels? Iliad. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. yet see how we are bound to believe it. Ante haec tempora repertum non putamus, qui hanc ex literarum hyperthesi theologiam vulgârit.— felicia tempora quae te! But if you take away (hanc) the rest is the praise of the Cabalists. Read johannes Picus de Mirandulâ, Archangel. Reuchlin, and in special his books de Verbo mirifico. But to what purpose is all this grammar learning, which he presumes to know alone? did ever any man brag so loud for two sheets of paper? forsooth, to prove that Hades is derived of Adamah, it proves it not. But I will rather give it, than I will trouble you further with it. CHAP. II. What God is, And that He is Everlasting. HOw is it possible to define or bond an infinite Being? If we look upon the Creature to find a name for him thereby, though He be the cause of all, though all things speak his praise; yet He for ever dwelled in Eternity, before any thing in the Creature was. If we look upon the excellencies of the Creature, the goodness, or wisdom, or power, or glory, or virtue, or whatsoever else our words or thoughts can reach unto; yet all these excellencies are from him, the footsteps only of his passage by them. The whole Creature therefore with all the excellencies thereof cannot afford him a name, whereby to know what his Being is: So wonderful is He, so superexcellent above all names. Yet such is his mercy, as that in his holy word, he hath been pleased to lisp with us, as a mother with her infant, and to give us names as certain remembrances whereby our hearts may be lifted up unto him. Of these, some are given only by way of comparison, of which you may read more in the 8. Chap. Some are only negative, by which we may better understand what he is not, than what he is, as S. Paul speaks 1. Tim. 1.17. Unto the King Everlasting, Immortal, Invisible, the only wise God be honour and glory for ever and ever, Amen. Other attributes we give unto God, which signify perfections supereminently; as that he is the Chiefest good, the first beginning, the prime and principal perfection, and such like; which although by the force of reason we are compelled to give unto God: yet because these general expressions are too fare from our experimental knowledge, we attribute unto Him, better, and more fitly those perfections for which we have example in his word; whereof there be certain likenesses and experiments in the visible creature; which because it is his workmanship, we know there can be nothing therein, which is not supereminently in him that is the cause: as goodness, wisdom, virtue and such like; wherein after a sort we are his image. Now among these, there can be none like that description which God doth make of himself Exo. 34.6, 7. where, of fifteen attributes which God doth take to himself, the first three show to us his eternity, his infinity, and his omnipotency, one his truth, eight (according to the number of the blessings Matth 5.) are all of mercy; three only concern his justice. And all these things follow necessarily one upon another. For if God be without beginning (as was showed before) Cap. 1. Re. 1.2. etc. it must needs be, that he be also without ending: because, He can have nothing before him, and so can have no superior which might bring him to nothing. Therefore God is eternal, both before, and after; as they speak, à parte ante, & à parte post. Now eternity is an infinite continuance, therefore whatsoever is eternal, is also infinite. Moreover whatsoever hath infinite continuance, hath an infinite ᵃ power to continue infinitely. Therefore God is Almighty, and of endless power. By this therefore that God is everlasting, infinite and almighty, we may very well conclude, that this glorious Being is most worthy to be God; seeing nothing can be before or after him, being eternal, nothing greater than he, nor yet equal unto him, seeing he is infinite; neither all things, nor nothing able to resist him, because he is Almighty. If God then be most worthy to be God, it is necessary that he be most wise, most good, most true, most merciful, most just, and most glorious. For otherwise he were neither worthy, nor yet possibly could he be God, if any thing might be more wise, good, true, merciful, just, or glorious than Herald Therefore God is wise, and wisdom itself, good, and goodness itself, true, merciful, just and glorious, truth, mercy, justice, and glory itself. Neither can he move, or be moved from place to place; who fills all, and is infinite beyond all places: Neither can he be subject to any accident, whose being is most simple and pure perfection. And this is our God, thus described, as fare as the dim sight of our understanding is able to descry him. But that the truth of all these things may better appear; seeing we now lay the ground of those proofs which must follow hereafter: you shall for every one of these, or as many as is needful, have a reason or two, and first. That God is Eternal or Everlasting. 1 IF God be not eternal, than it follows that he was brought forth from not being, into being: but it is impossible that God should be brought forth from not being into being: for not being cannot be a cause: or if he were brought forth from not being by another that was before him; then should that other be more worthy to be God. But this is confessed, that nothing can either be, or yet be conceived to be more worthy than God. Therefore God is, and was for ever that which he is: and whatsoever hath been for ever, hath power to continue for ever: for otherwise the act of being should be without the power of being (that is to say, a thing might be when it were not possible to be) but that is impossible. Therefore God is everlasting, and can neither have beginning nor ending. 2. Whatsoever is being, and once was not, must of necessity bring on the being of some cause which brought it to that being which it hath: for nothing which only may be, can come into perfect and actual being, but by such a powerful being, as is already actual. Therefore there is either one first and chief being, the cause of all things, which is of itself actually perfect, and powerful eternally; or else nothing at all is, or else there is a subordination of causes infinitely. The former of these two is false and against sense: for I am, and thou art; the latter is impossible: therefore the first is ᵇ necessarily true. Now the falsehood of this later appears in this; for if there be a subordination of causes infinitely, then seeing every effect is brought to perfection in a finite time, it must follow that ᶜ infinite causes may work in a time finite, and so infinite may be in that which is limited and finite. But this is impossible; therefore there cannot be a subordination of causes infinitely. Moreover seeing every effect doth naturally answer the cause thereof, and seeing the effects are of so different kinds, it must follow, that there is not only an infinite subordination of causes; but also that there be infinite subordinations of causes of kinds infinitely different, according to the different effects brought forth. But this is impossible: for the causes being ordained for the effect, and the effect being the end of those causes, that which is finite should be more noble and excellent than that which is infinite. Thirdly if there be a subordination of causes infinitely, of which one is moved orderly by another, it must needs follow that there is no moving, and consequently not causing at all: for every cause being moved by that which is before or above it, if there be no first cause given, there can be no moving. But it is apparent, that in infinity of causes there can be no first nor last, and so there should be no moving, nor no immediate cause of the effect. Therefore there is one cause of all, is infinite and eternal. 3 If God be not eternal, then either the world was a beginning unto itself, or else it was eternally, and so shall continue eternally. But neither was the world a beginning unto itself, as is proved Cap. 1 Re. 1. neither is the world eternal, as shall be proved Cap. 13. Therefore God is eternal. 4. And this truth of God's everlasting being, the holy Scripture teacheth every where, as Gen. 21.33. And Abraham called on the name of the everlasting God. Exod. 15.18. The Lord shall reign for ever and ever. Deut. 32.40. I live for ever. Psal. 90.2. Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever the earth and the world were made, thou art God from everlasting to everlasting. So Psal. 41.13. & 106.48. and Rev. 11.17. We give thee thanks Lord God Almighty, which art, which waist, and which art to come. Psal. 145.13. Thy kingdom is of all eternity, and thy dominion in every generation. Notes. (a) HAth power to continue infinitely] the Schoolmen say, Thom. contra Gentes lib. 1. cap 16. and often elsewhere. Quod potest esse, potest etiam non esse; which you may construe, That which hath power to be, hath also power not to be; or that which may be, may also not be; which seems directly to cross this argument. But you must understand the Doctor there, to speak of a thing which is in the power of being, whereto it hath not yet attained, as a kernel is in power to become a tree; in which the power of being is passive, importing a privation of the being to come. But in this place power to be, means an actual power, not privative, but positive, whereby the thing which hath the power, shows by the actions the power which it hath: as of the understanding to apply itself to this or that. The passive power can no way be in God. The second is a power of absolute perfection, without which he could not be God. (b) Impossible necessarily.] See the rule of this consequence Logono. Cap. 18. n. 7. & Cap. 26. n. 1. (c) Infinite causes. Re. 2.] That which is infinite in power may work in a time finite; not that which is infinite in number only which is here meant. That God is Infinite. CHAP. III. infinity cannot here be meant of multitude: for the more that multitude is increased in any kind, the more the dignities of one are abated. Neither yet can this infinity be of quantity: for infinity cannot be in quantity, no more than eternity can be in time. ᵃ Neither is God a body, which only is capable of quantity; yet is not infinity of extension denied; in as much as he fills all places infinitely beyond all place, as the Prophet Esay speaks Chap. 40.12. That he measures the waters in his fist and the heavens in his span. Neither is God infinite privatively, in regard of any defect or want of being: because he hath the compliment of all perfections in himself. But he is infinite negatively: because there is no limit or bound to be set to his being, to his perfection, or superabundance in goodness, wisdom, power, truth and glory. The reasons are these. 1. Whatsoever is supersupreme, or highest in all degrees of perfection, must needs be infinite; because there is nothing above it which may limit or restrain it. But such is the being of God, above which it is confessed, that nothing can be thought more excellent. Therefore God is infinite. 2. Being taken absolutely; that is, simply by itself without any limitation, must needs be infinite: because infinite things by infinite means may be partakers thereof. But such is the being of God, that is absolute and simple: for neither is his being from another as the cause thereof, seeing he is eternal; neither yet in another, as a form in the matter: for so something should be more excellent than he; as every total is more excellent than any part thereof: or as the accident in the subject; for so something should be before him, and also be more worthy than he, as every subject in regard of the accidents. Neither yet is he for any other as the end thereof: for as all things are from him and by him as the first cause; so are they for him, as for their first and chiefest end, and secondly for themselves, to find themselves happy in him as fare as they are capable, as the Apostle concludes Rom. 11.36. Of him, through him, and for him are all things, to him be glory for ever, Amen. Therefore God is infinite. 3. If the being of God be not actually infinite, then should it be inferior to the possibilities of the creature: for man's understanding though actually finite, yet admits the possibility of an infinite actual being, as was showed in space and in numbers. Chap. 1. Re. 6. But it is impossible that the being of God should be inferior to those possibilities which the creature can reasonably give unto him: for so the activity of the understanding should be created in vain, if there were no being actually infinite to be apprehended thereby. So also the effect, that is the understanding, should be extended beyond the being of the cause, that is God, if it could conceive any excellency of being, goodness, wisdom, etc. greater than his. Therefore it is necessary that God be infinite. You may see more Reasons Chap. 10. and there also the ground of this discourse. 4. The authorities of Scripture are these. Psal. 143.3. Great is the Lord, and most worthy to be praised, and his greatness is incomprehensible. Psal. 93.3. The Lord is a great God, a great king above all Gods. Psal. 104.1. O Lord my God, thou art exceeding great, thou art clothed with majesty and honour. Note. (a) God is not a body pref.] The proof of this, see in the ninth chapter. That God is infinitely good. CHAP. FOUR THings in their being are the object of our understanding, that we may know the truth of their being; and therein is the understanding perfected: But things, as fare as they are good are the object of our desire; as fare as we find the likeness of ourselves, or of something in ourselves therein. But good is of divers kinds; the first and lowest kind is conditional or civil, as riches, honour, favour of great men, authority; which are good or ill, according as they are used. Secondly moral, as the virtues and abilities of the mind, and the fruits thereof. Thirdly natural, which is in every thing: and that either essentially, in the perfection of the being whereto it is ordained; which every thing desires, as the proper good thereof: or specifically, in respect of those proper effects which proceed from the essential form; inasmuch as every good thing imparts the goodness of itself as much as it may. But the goodness of God comes not into account with these: for although for that love's sake which he hath of goodness, he were pleased to imprint certain likenesses of himself in the creature; yet this was not out of any need which he had of the creature, without which he was and is infinitely happy in himself, Psal. 16.2. Therefore the creation only manifested the goodness of God, that the creature according to the measure thereof might be good, perfect, and blessed in him, who is infinitely good in himself, as is manifest by these reasons. 1. It is proved Chap 2. that the being of God is infinite. Hence it follows thus. Whatsoever is equal to an infinite being, must of necessity be infinite. The goodness of God is equal to his infinite being: for otherwise his being should be defective, and ill, if by his goodness it should not be wholly and infinitely good. And if in any thing his being were defective, then should it not be infinitely distant from not being, and so his being should not be infinite: but all these things are impossible. Therefore the goodness of God is infinite. 2. Being and Goodness are terms convertible, inasmuch as every thing desires the perfection of it own being, as the proper goodness thereof. But it is necessary that some thing be chief and superexcellent in being, as the cause of all other beings; therefore also in goodness; and this is most eminently true in God, that his goodness is his being; because it cannot be in him as a property proceeding from any form, he being utterly free from any composition; nor yet by any superaddition, or putting to of any thing unto his being, he being the cause of all, and utterly free from suffering any thing from without. Therefore God is infinitely and essentially good. 3. In the order of things being, it is necessary that something be supereminent and chief, either good or ill, which must of necessity be that which is the first, and cause of all other things. Good is a positive being, and brings in perfection: Ill is only privative, and puts nothing in being. And seeing the excellency of every effect is in the multitude of the likenesses thereof unto the cause, if the first cause thereof be not supereminently good, then that which is ill and privative, shall be more actual, perfect, and excellent, than that which is good: and every thing the worse it is, shall be more like unto it, and that which is worst of all shall be most like unto it; and that which is most of all not being, to wit, that which is utterly impossible to be, most actual and perfect: but these things are manifest contradictions and utterly impossible. Therefore God the first cause of all, is supereminently and infinitely good. 4. Whatsoever hath all the perfections of being in it, must needs be infinitely good. But God hath all the perfections of being in himself, as being the cause of all. Therefore God is infinitely good. 5. And this is that goodness which our Lord would not suffer to be given unto any other. There is none good but one, even God. Mark 10.18. But the representation of this infinite goodness is diversely imparted, first without measure, john 3.34. To him that is the image of his being. Hebr. 1.3. Then to them who of his fullness have received, even grace for grace, john 1.16. Thirdly to every thing in the being thereof, as I spoke before Gen. 1.31. And hereby you may see the force of that argument which our Saviour uses, Matth. 7.11. If you then which are ill can give good gifts to your children; how much more shall your heavenly father give good things to them that ask him? Seeing he is goodness itself, and this goodness of God is the argument of so many Psalms: Praise ye the Lord, because he is good; for his mercy endureth for ever. Psal. 118.136: etc. CHAP. V That the wisdom of God is infinite. EVery thing naturally seeks the preservation of itself in the being which it hath, as the perfection and happiness of itself, and therefore first avoids those things that are contrary thereto, as you may see in a green stick put into the fire, how the water shuns the heat, as the greatest enemy it hath. Secondly increaseth itself by those things which it can make like, and turn into itself, as I have elsewhere showed, how every seed increaseth by the earth and moisture thereof, which cannot be but with a wehling out, or choice of things that are homogeneous, or of parts like thereto; and a refusing of those things that are heterogeneous, that is of unlike parts, or of another kind. And over and above this, every thing doth spread itself in that goodness which it hath, upon those things that are capable thereof, as it appears in the effect of every medicine. And nothing of all these things can be done, but by a certain degree of natural knowledge inbred in every thing; according to which it doth choose or avoid those things which are within the compass of that knowledge. And this is seen in every thing simple, or compound, in things elemental, mineral and vegetable. But in things wherein life is more manifest, by moving, which we call Animal, the fruits of knowledge and understanding appear in fare greater differences of degrees, as you may find between the oyster, or the snail, and the fox, the horse, or the elephant; of which they writ, he may be taught to know letters. Plinhist. nat. lib. 8. cap. 3. & Aquin. contra Gent. lib. 3. Cap. 57 what knowledge these things have of the Creator, it is not easy to define. See Plin. hist. lib. 8. Cap. 1. But certain it is, that the whole creature hath a most earnest desire and hope to be delivered from that corruption and change whereto it is subject, Rom. 8.19. But that man, though knowing nothing at all, but by the help of things sensible, was created to know and honour the creator by, and for his knowledge, is most manifest: for otherwise the Creator should lose his honour, which he might, and consequently aught to have, by the outward senses, from things sensible. And this was the condemnation of the world, that thus knowing by the creature, they did not honour him accordingly, Rom. 1.17. Of how much sorer punishment than shall the jew, and yet much more the false Christian be worthy of? who having not only the dawning light in the creature, whereby to see the power, the wisdom, and goodness of God; but also the clear Sunshine and use thereof in the Scriptures of the old Testament, and yet much more evidence and proof of the same in jesus Christ; for neglect of that grace so freely offered? The Angels yet in more excellent manner, though with their differences and degrees of understanding, without either sense or imagination, by the only sight or beholding of things, know the truth of their being, properties, and possibilities: or else yet in a superexcellent manner, beholding the Creator, know by him his admirable workmanship. But how much more wonderful is his wisdom, Who is made more excellent than the Angels? Hebr. 1.4. Whom God hath exalted and given him a name (and being also) above every name? Philip. 2.9. Who is the image of the invisible God, the first begotten of every creature? Colos. 1.15. And lastlie, how superabundantly infinite is that wisdom, whose brightness shines, first upon that image, and thence reflected upon the creatures, becomes that light which enlightens the Angels, and everyman that comes into the world? john 1.9. And that this wisdom of God is infinite, it is apparent, not only by these degrees afore declared, but also by the reasons following. 1 Whatsoever is imperfect and yet ordained unto a degree of further perfection, must needs be from that which is perfect, and able to bring it to that perfection, whereto it is ordained. But such is the wisdom and knowledge of man; both by his own experience of the present imperfection, and sacred authority of our future hopes: For now we know in part: now we see thorough a glass darkly. But hereafter we shall know as we are known, perfectly. 1 Cor. 13.9. to 12. Therefore the wisdom of God is perfect and beseeming himself; that is infinite. 2. The apprehension of the truth of things, is the object and delight of the understanding; and infinite truth of an infinite understanding. Seeing then, that the truth of things being is so manifold; and the possibilities of truths, in the possibilities of all beings much more indefinite: and the Fountain of all these truths infinite: ᵃ if the wisdom of God were not infinite, that it might be answerable to all truths: then should they be in vain, and the knowledge thereof wanting in Him, in whom, and from whom, all truth both created and increated is. But this is impossible. For although the understanding of the Creature be admitted to see the truths of things created; yea, and all the possibilities thereof that God may have his glory from the Creature which is due unto him; yet cannot all the wisdom of all the Creature sound the depth of that Sea, whence all these truths proceed, but that must be understood only by that wisdom, and glorified only within that glory which is in himself. Therefore it is necessary, that the wisdom of God be infinite. 3. If the truth of Gods being be infinite, than it is necessary that his wisdom also be infinite; For otherwise he could not know the truth of his own being, and so not desire, nor will it; nor yet be happy and glorious in his own being. But all this is impossible. But the truth of Gods being is infinite. For as all falsehood is in not being, and necessary falsehood in the impossibility of being; So all truth is grounded in being, ᵇ necessary truth in actual being, and possible truth in the possibility of being. And it is manifest before, cap. 3. that the being of God is infinite. Therefore his Truth, and so necessarily his wisdom is infinite. 4 No perfection which is in any kind of being, can be wanting unto God, which is the cause of all being, as it is manifest in this, that he is eternal and made all things. But if infinite wisdom be wanting unto him, a principal perfection is wanting. Therefore God is infinitely wise. 5. And this Argument the Prophet uses. Psal. 94.8. O ye fools when will ye be wise? shall not he that planted the ear hear? or be that form the eye, see? he that teacheth man knowledge, shall not He know? That is, He that hath given to every thing a degree of knowledge answerable to the perfection of that being, shall not He according to the infinity of his own being, have the infinity and perfection of knowledge? as job speaks, 37.16. So again, Psal. 147.5. Great is our Lord, and great is his power, his wisdom is infinite. Read Psal. 139. also Rom. 11.33. O the depth, both of the wisdom, and knowledge of God how unsearchable are his judgements, and his ways past finding out! Notes. (a) IF the wisdom of God were not infinite, that it might be answerable to all these § 1. truths. Rea. 2.] Because the wisdom of God is infinite, and such as no addition can be made thereto; it must of force be held for an undoubted truth; That God doth know not only the infinity of his own Being, but also He hath the most certain, most particular, and uttermost knowledge of all things that are, or are any way possible to be, or not to be; past, present, or to come; how infinite soever in number; how mean, how ill, how uncertain soever they seem to us: yet to Him they are good, certain, and determined: yea, our very desires, and thoughts, He understands long before us: As by many reasons, and these Texts of Scripture, and many more it may appear, Psal. 33.14.15. & 94.11. & 139 all. 113.9. Heb. 4.13. And yet because it is as certain, that whatsoever is in God, is essentially Himself; As it will be manifest, Chap. 8. & 9 And that the being of the Creature is no way necessary to His being, infinitely and absolutely perfect without it: it will be necessary to inquire, how the multitude of things created can be in the wisdom and knowledge of God. And because it is necessary to put this: that the understanding of God, is by the most excellent and perfect way of knowing: therefore it cannot be either by infusion from another: nor gotten by experience and practice; nor by discourse; as all the knowledge of man is by some of these; nor yet by the view of the things in themselves, or of the things in another; as is the knowledge of the Angels; but only by the pure and simple sight of His own being; which although it be most simple, and one; yet it is the pattern and sample of all things, that can either be, or be known. Because that on his being and power alone, the being and possibilities of all things depend. Neither can any thing be, live, or understand; but that in one or more of these it expresses his Image. So that he in that one simple working of his own understanding and sight of himself, sees at once, both himself, and in himself; the being and possibilities of all things beside. For seeing his understanding is his being, chap. 8. if He did understand by any other means than by the sight of his own Being; then He should have in himself a Being and a Being: then there should be a cause of understanding to him without himself: So his understanding should be in possibility only, actuated, or brought to work by an outward understandable object: So his understanding should be accidental to Him, as ours to us; and so it should not be infinite. For nothing can be infinite which is in possibility of being: because it hath not all those perfections of being which it may possibly have. So then, God by the fight of his own being, knows all things being * See chap. 9 num. 6. or not being. And to know all things in their cause, and by their cause, is the excellency or perfection of knowledge. For although the effect be not necessary to the being of the cause; yet is the first cause more essential to the effect, than all other succeeding causes whatsoever they are. And therefore it is said. Act. 17.28. In him we live, move, and have our being. Seeing then that all effects are in the power of the cause; and that every thing which is in another, must be therein according to the manner of that being wherein it is. If God be understanding and wisdom itself: they must be in Him understandably, and therefore be perfectly known by Him. But (you say) If the creature be known and seen by the infinite wisdom; and if nothing can be in God, beside His very being, chap. 9 then that knowledge of the Creature must be in the very being of God, because it is in Him. Then it is necessary that in the divine being there be a manifold or divers being, because a different knowledge; one, that whereby He knows himself which will easily be yielded to be essential, and his very being, see chap. 8. and another of the creature: which is it be essential, His essence must be divers. Because the essence and being of the Creator, and of the creature are most different. If not essential, it must be accidental to Him; and so His being should not be infinite, and in absolute perfection of being, if capable of accidents. I say, that if the divine wisdom should view the being of the creature in any other being beside himself, than the divine understanding, for as much as concerns the creature, should be dependent on that, which must be inferior and after Him. Therefore all this quarrel is, because that which was first deluded, was either not understood, or not remembered. It was said, that the knowledge of all things is in God most certainly, most particularly, and that not according to the being of things as they are; but according to all possibilities whereto they are subject. But as the being of the creature comes not unto it, but by Him: so this knowledge of the creature in God, comes not to Him, as raised or gathered from the things in their own being (for so it should be chanceful, as they had happened to be) But by that being which they have in Him, as in their cause. For God knowing his power answerable to all possibilities of being, and Himself able thereby to work according to the pleasure of his own will, according to that pleasure, appointed of all causes to the bringing forth of things in their being. Therefore as the power of all causes is from Him, the first of causes; so that knowledge of His, is a creating knowledge and essential to Him. For because He is the first of beings, it is necessary, and essential to him, not only to be the best, most wise, powerful, infinite, etc. and yet the most simple, and pure of all beings, but also the cause of all beings that can come after Him. Therefore as the being, so the knowledge of the creature also is in God; that is, in the object of his understanding, which is his word, seen by one infinite action of understanding: For by his own absolute perfection, doth He measure all the distances of imperfection, as by one simple unity all the proportions in numbers are both made and measured. Neither doth it any way follow, that because the beings of God and the creature are divers, therefore his knowledge of Himself and the creature should be also different so fare, as to make a different essence or being in Him. For the understanding of man though one in itself, yet sees and knows the things that are most different and contrary. As a looking glass may represent all bodily shows without any change in the being of it, either essential, or accidental: Beside, that being of the creature, which He beholds, is no other than that being which it hath in Him increated, eternally, intellectually, and caufally. And if our imagination, or thought, which takes hold of nothing but by the outward sense, doth yet turn itself from the sense, to view the same likeness though absent, though long ago beheld; and the understanding much more taking that likeness from the imagination, and utterly withdrawing it from matter, doth frame to itself a pattern or likeness of the common or universal being, under which all things of the same kind are contained, expressed in the definition: how much more shall the divine wisdom know the being, and possibilities of all things? not by that being which is in them, derived and dependant, whereby the Angels know; but most perfectly by that being which all things have in Him, which is in dependent. Of which being of the Creature, you shall have further occasion to consider in the 13. chap. when we shall speak of the eternity of the world, and the original being of the creature. 2. This may seem an answer (you say) for things that are being, if good, if worthy His knowledge. But seeing that every thing that is known is after some sort in Him that doth know: it may seem that the excellency of his being and understanding cannot suffer, that the knowledge of things that are vile, and base, or especially, that are ill, should be in Him. For seeing those things that are base and ill, seem altogether to be in want and defect of perfection, if the knowledge of them be in God, and consequently his essence, than his being should be of things which are in defect, which cannot agree to Him that is the most perfect of all being. Moreover, if the things that are known by Him be in Him, as in their cause; then must it follow necessarily, that if He know things that are ill, He should also be the cause of ill; which can no way stand with the infinity of his goodness. I answer. Base or vile, and excellent are only words of Comparison; And if all things created were excellent alike, then could nothing at all be excellent. But because it is necessary for the beauty of the whole frame of the creature, that there be difference of degrees in greater or less excellency; therefore are these things which have fewer degrees of perfection in them, called mean, or vile, though not truly and indeed such. For there is nothing so mean or base, but as it is being, it is a proof and image of His being who created it, and so though not of itself, yet in itself is exceeding good Gen. 1.31. And if the order of Nature be well marked, as we know that the whole Creature was brought out of not being, into the meanest and first degree of being, which was water, Gen. 1.2. 2 Pet. 3.5. so all the excellency that is in the creature, is but by addition of one degree of perfection unto another, which perfections taken together, with their cause and original, are in their many differences; first being, than life, after sense; fourthly Reason, as in a man; Fifthly understanding by the only sight of the being, as in the Angels: the sixth is of the received power of the Mediator, joh. 17.2. Eph. 1.20.21.22. Heb. 1.2. that runs into infinity; the seventh is Infinity itself, in the simplicity of self being, beyond which is nothing. But whether these perfections of the creature, come into it by addition, as I have spoken, or that it be so raised from nothing immediately into those perfections which it hath: it is necessary that these differences of degrees be therein, that that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Eph. 3.10. that manifold wisdom of God may be manifest in the Creature. In which creature how perfect soever in itself, no degree can be found so excellent, but that it must differ infinitely on the one side from the perfection of the Creator: not none so mean, but that on the other side it must differ infinitely from not being: I mean that not being which it had of itself and in itself, for in him it had an eternal being, being eternally foreseen and appointed in him. §. 3. But in things that are ill, you think this answer will not serve; For though you can be content to think, that the glory of the divine wisdom is nothing abated in the beholding of things, no not in their present being, how differing soever in their degrees of perfection, as it is said Psal. 113.5. Who is like unto jehova our God, that lifteth up Himself high to sit; that abaseth Himself low to see in the heavens and in the earth? no more than the lustre and shine of the Sun is more or less clear, whether it light upon the beautiful hill of Libanus or Carmell; or the dirty land of Cabul: yet if he know also things that are ill; and that his knowledge be a causing or creating knowledge, it cannot be avoided, but that he must also be the cause of ill. I answer. Ill is of three kinds; one natural, whereby every thing is subjected to some other thing contrary thereto, whereby it may be corrupted, for the destruction of that particular being, that some other thing may be raised thereout, according to the possibility of the matter, and the manner of the corrupting. Hitherto we may bring poisons and all those things that we call hurtful and ill, because if they be not rightly used, they are harmful to our kind, which are not simply ill, but only accidentally; seeing that if they be rightly used, they may be helpful to our nature: as it appears in the trocisks of the viper's flesh, and other medicines, as Physic teaches. So these things of themselves naturally good, may be ill; that is, good causes of ill effects: as riches, and authority, things civilly indifferent, may be ill, if abused to pride, idleness, and the oppression of others. The second kind of ill is that of punishment, which cannot justly be termed ill, if you consider the use and benefit thereof, as S. Paul hath taught Heb. 12. from ver. 5. to ver. 12. For neither can wisdom be in things civil, or moral; but with the judgement of good and bad: neither is that judgement in the discerning of good and ill aught worth, if the good be not praised and rewarded, and the ill punished. So that without justice and mercy, in reward and punishment; neither wisdom, nor goodness can be either perfect or praised. Therefore this kind of ill, because it is just that the ill-doer should bear the burden of his own desert, is no way ill, but only in the smart of the guilty sufferer deserving it. So these two kinds of ill (only so called for some respects) though in themselves necessary, and therefore good; will easily be acknowledged to be from God. The main question therefore is only about that ill of ills which is sin: for sin, both in regard of the effect, which is punishment, and in itself the deserving cause thereof; and much more taking occasion by the Law holy and good to work death in the sinner; must needs be exceedingly sinful, as it is concluded, Rom. 7.11.13. And because it is as certainly and necessarily true, that fin is fin, and ill is ill; as it is, that good is good: and that the knowledge of the truth in every thing, is in the perfection of the understanding; it cannot be, but that all ill and fin is perfectly known unto the infinite wisdom. Moreover, whether ill be only a privation, or taking away of that good which ought to be in the creature; or whether it be any thing of very being therein: it is necessary that the infinite wisdom know all manner of beings, both according to their perfections, and all their possibilities and defects. But concerning the manner of this knowledge, the Doctors say, That because the very being of ill (you remember what ill I speak of) is nothing else but the privation of that goodness which ought to be in the creature; it is known of God only by the contrary goodness, as by the definition, that is to say, to be a defect or privation of goodness. Neither is it any defect in the divine knowledge, to know that which is only a defect by the contrary perfection; seeing nothing can be known further than according to that being which it hath. And therefore they say further, See Thom. Aquin. and his Comment. lib. 1. Cap. 71. and lib. 3. Cap. 4, 5, 6, etc. contra Gentes. That ill, inasmuch as it is such, is in the number of things not being: and that of things not being, there can be no cause efficient, but deficient and privative only. For every agent works as fare forth as it is in actual being, to bring forth something into act or perfection, and that to a good end; so that ill comes into effect by accident, beside the purpose and intent of the doer. Ah blessed Origen! hath thy too much charity been blamed so long? who art said (though unjustly, see the defence of Pamphilus for Origen, and joh. Picus Mirandula de Salute Origenis) to have taught, that all sinners, yea, even the devil himself shall be saved at the last; now thou art justified. Sin is not being, it hath no cause of being, but comes in by chance, beside the good intent of the worker: he answers more directly elsewhere, as you shall hear by and by. It is strange that this Doctor, who sticks every where so close to Aristotle, should here departed so fare from him, as to make privation in the number of things not being, whereas Aristotle ranks it in the order of beginnings with matter and form. In the mean while understand, things not being are either utterly not being, or not being such. In the first kind you may account the second term of contradiction, See Log. Chap. 9 nu. 15, 16. as not a stone, not wise. By the affirming of which no being at all is put to the subject, as to say, Thomas is not a stone. The not being such, which they call Non ens tale, may hold all those terms which we call privative. But privation may mean, at large, either the absence only of any form not due to the subject; and thus it is in the number of things simply not being: for seeing the presence of one form shuts out all other forms unfit for that subject: (although all matter in the root of nature be subject indifferently to all forms successively) the privation of other forms follow thereon necessarily. As the form of iron in the matter of iron is a privation of the matter of gold, so a horse naturally covered with hair is thereby deprived of a covering of feathers like a bird. But this privation is not in the number of things that are ill, seeing it is the law of nature that every thing be upright in that proper kind in which it is. Secondly privation may signify the taking away of that form which was in the subject, as blindness in the eye, which as it may be said to be not being in respect of the taking away of the sight; yet in respect of the causes whence it may proceed, it is in the number of things being, yet ill in both respects; that is, of the want of that which ought to be in nature; and the cause, being such as ought not to be, and so of all other sicknesses. Thirdly privation may be in a subject in respect of the form to which it hath not yet attained, as Tartar or dregs in the wine, by the spirit of salt may be hardened into a hard stone; and so the dispositions to other diseases before they show themselves. And this privation or want of form, is in the number of causes: as drought is in a thirsty man to make him drink. Now sin must be one or both of these two last orders of privation, and not in any order of things not being absolutely: for so, first it should not be ill: for that which is not at all, is neither good nor ill. Secondly it would bring upon God the greatest injustice that might be, to punish the creature for sin, if sin were utterly not being. And thirdly, if sin were not being, than our Lord should have died without cause: but it is plain that sin was the cause of his death, that thereby he might destroy death, and the power of the devil over us, to which we were subject because of sin: but that which is utterly not being, cannot be a cause. Fourthly, if sin be not being, where is then the way which God doth weigh out to his anger, Psal. 78.50. when he doth balance the punishment with the sin? Are all the punishments of sin, all the sorrows of this life, and death at last, both bodily and eternal, nothing? for if they be any thing, they cannot be an answerable punishment to that which is nothing. So many commandments of God, so many threaten by his Prophets, and Apostles, so many woes denounced by our Lord, so many sacrifices and cleansings from all the temporary punishments, and at last the death of the Son of God himself for the eternal remission of sins, and is sin not being? How much more true is it to say, that our righteousness (as fare forth as it is of ourselves) is nothing; and to confess with the Prophet, that it is like a soiled rag? as S. Paul knew, that in himself as a natural man, dwelled nothing that was good, that he had not power, no not to think a good thought, as our Saviour hath taught us, that without him we can do nothing. And he that hath had experience of the combat, that hath so often been foiled in the bickering, must needs confess the strength of sin, and cry out, O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from this body of death? I say not, as some heretics heretofore, that sin is a substance either material or formal: or as the author of that book which is entitled Ratio Rationum, that it came into mankind by that poisonous slaver which the Serpent put upon that apple which he reached unto Eve; but yet I say that sin is something, but the worst of beings: It is that pestilential contagion, wherewith the devil hath infected the mass of all mankind: it is that sickness of the whole man, of which he languisheth unto death; but principally the sickness of the soul, whereto nevertheless the body is also subject, in fulfilling the unorderly lusts both of itself, and of the mind: for one of these works upon another, both for good and bad. Therefore to answer, how God doth will that which is ill; it is not nor can be denied, but that God's punishments of all sorts, being weighed with the sin are just, so one sin as it is the punishment of another, may stand with justice, and both sins together in justice may be punished. When David was in plenty and ease at jerusalem, and had forgotten him that had delivered him out of all his troubles; O treason of prosperity! his eyes wandered in the beauty of Bathsheba, and led his heart to lust: so sin conceived, brought forth adultery, that murder: thus one sin was the punishment of another; which were altogether at last punished to every degree, in the treason and death of his son Absalon: So if you compare the sins and degrees thereof in the Egyptians, you shall find one sin the punishment of another, and all together at last balanced in their plagues; so that it is most truly observed by the Wise, Sap. 11.13. that wherein a man sinneth, thereby he shall be punished. Now it is a clear case, that all the sin of mankind proceeds from the corruption of his own nature, after which we are most justly suffered to wander; because that knowing both the rottenness of our own hearts, and the punishment due to sin, yet we do not strive and and fight against ourselves, to subdue those wicked thoughts, from whence is the stream of all our sin. Hear you will question what strength we have to fight, and universal grace, and free will: but they are beside this present purpose; whereby it is clear, that all our fins being but issues of our own corruption, against which we strive not; it is just with God, both to punish our carelessness, and neglect of his commandment, and our own safety, with sin, and to leave us in that corruption, to be guided by him whom we choose to serve, having forsaken our true Lord and owner. But because this corruption is from our birth, and that we made not ourselves such; but that by the fault of Adam, sin and death reign over all; the sum of the question is knit up in that one sin of our first father, concerning whose fall we are brought to this point. If God so foresaw the fall of Adam, that he willed it; it was impossible but that he should fall; it he willed it not, it was impossible that he should. To which doubt Thomas Aquinas in lib 1. Sen. Dist. 46. q. 4. answers wittily and modestly: that although the proposition be true and necessary, yet it is not necessary that the will should be carried to either side of the contradiction. His reason (as I think) is, because truth is not the object of the will, but of the understanding only; and therefore he saith, that God doth permit ill only; not because it is ill; but because of the annexes or dependences thereon; either precedent, as because it is good that the creature should have the power, whereby it may be enabled to do ill, or not to do ill: or consequent, which is that good that is occasioned by the ill. I reverence the judgement: but yet (Doctor) the question is here concerning good and ill, the proper object of the will: and as the understanding cannot avoid it, but must consent to a truth which it knows; so neither can the will in that which it takes to be good or ill, but that it must choose one, and refuse the other. For as the outward senses cannot refuse to be moved by their proper objects; as the ear to hear a sound within a meet distance; no more can the inward faculties of the mind. Besides, the question is here of the will of God, an infinite will, and convertible with an infinite understanding: for in God there is not one being of his will, and another being of his understanding; as will appear more large hereafter in the 8. and 9 Chap. Neither is the will of God as man's will, which may sit still while his understanding works; but what he understands, he wills it also to be, or not to be; as his promises are not yea and nay, but in him, all is yea, and Amen. Therefore to let pass those questions which are moved hereabout, concerning the freedom of Adam's will; why God should forbid that to Adam, wherein he saw that Adam would transgress, and so make his eating to be sin: for where no law is, there is no fiune; and such unnecessary questions; I answer directly, that it is utterly impossible, but that God did foresee the fall of Adam, the taint of all mankind thereby, all the sins and all the punishments whereunto any one particular person is liable, all the wander, backslidings, and wants which can be in the creature. Neither will I blush to affirm with the Apostle, Rom. 11.32. That God hath shut up all under sin, that he might have mercy upon all. But it followeth not hereupon that he decreed our misery in Adam; because he foresaw it: yet such was his mercy, that out of this great evil, he wrought a greater good; so that it may seem by consequence we are rather gainers by Adam's fall: for though we lost by the sin of Adam an inheritance of holiness, etc. Yet that holiness was like the morning dew, that vanished at the heat of the first tentation; it was a created holiness, it was in a low degree; fit to his being in whom it was. Is not the present inheritance of our holiness more sure, more excellent, who are made partakers of his holiness, who is holiness itself? his knowledge was but of worldly things, ours of eternal: and though our natural knowledge be by Adam's sin corrupted, or lost; yet shall it at last be restored again with endless advantage: for the gift is not as the sin. Rom. 5.15. His life but a natural life; so that if Adam had not sinned, he might have lived a natural life till now, and afterward; free from sickness, and want, abounding in all the knowledge of nature, and natural blessings; but that should have been the end of his hope (as fare as I can see) though some there be that give us hopes of the same degrees of happiness and glory, which now we have, although Adam bade not sinned. Yet because they see that that could not be brought to pass, except God should take our nature, that thereby we might be lifted up to that estate of glory; they think that Christ our Lord should have come in the place of Henoch, the seventh from Adam, and that therefore Henoch was taken away in stead of Christ. See Pastellus de Nativitate Mediatoris pag. 116. But we are bound both by reason and authority of holy Writ to know and confess; that the first Adam was of the earth earthly, and such should our happiness have been, if we had continued in our created innocence; the second Adam is the Lord from heaven, heavenly; into whose image being renewed, we are made partakers of his superexcellent and heavenly glory. The means whereby we come to this state of glory is also our assurance that it shall be fully accomplished. God dwells in our flesh, O unspeakable mystery! he hath taken upon himself our sins, O unspeakable love! he calls them his own sins. Psal. 40.12. 2. Cor. 5.21. He hath healed us with his stripes, and is made unto us wisdom, righteousness, holiness, redemption, life, with an over-abounding weight of glory. Is not the exchange well made with this advantage? who would not lose himself that he might win Christ, with all his demerits? who would not forfeit the life and happiness of Adam in his innocence, that he might gain the life and glory of Christ in his eternity? And thus much briefly for the advantage. Is it nothing to see the infinity of the wisdom and goodness of God, which out of the greatest ill, could bring the greatest good? The greatest ill on Adam's part was his sin, which from him spread itself over all mankind, to make it liable to eternal death: on the devils part his malice and murder; yea such a murder as could not be in the world beside, in one man to murder the whole world of men. Is it nothing (I say) that out of this great ill, God could bring the greatest good; that is, our assured and everlasting righteousness and glory? is it nothing that he hath caught the wily in his own craftiness? for whereas the devil envying that happy estate wherein man was created, sought his overthrow by making him subject to sin, and so to death; He our Creator, to show to the principalities and powers, the riches of his wisdom, and goodness in man; did not only redeem him from that thraldom of sin and death; but also exalted him unto an estate of glory and happiness, fare above that in which he was created. Thus out of the eater comes meat, and out of the strong comes sweethes. jud. 14.14. Thus the head of Leviathan is broken in pieces, and given to be meat to us in the wilderness of this world Psal. 74.14. Therefore seeing it was the good will and pleasure of Almighty God to mankind, to make him partaker of these unspeakable mercies, which his goodness hath wrought unto us out of the ill of our sin; and because he that wills the end, wills also those means that lead unto the end, we may with reverence to his wisdom and truth affirm, that although God by his revealed will forbade the tree of knowledge unto Adam, and so made his eating sin, yet in his secret counsel he did foresee that sin in Adam, not as an enforcing or a working cause, but leaving him to himself. But here a doubt must be answered; first, if we be indeed redeemed from the thraldom of sin, why doth God suffer sin still to remain in us, yea so far forth, as that we cannot cease to sin, yea so fare forth as that it makes our best actions, even our prayers abominable, while our tongue utters one thing, and our heart wanders after another? Answer. It was possible and easy to God so to have renewed the heart of man, so as that he should not sin: but yet God would let sin to dwell in us for divers advantages to us; but especially for two; first that at the fight of our sin, we might cast down ourselves before him, and utterly renouncing our own worthiness, we might seek that righteousness which is of him, and in him alone; the second, that by the perpetual remembrance of our sin, & the punishment due unto us for the same, we might be thankful unto our most merciful Redeemer, by faith the anchor of our souls, holding out our hope, that although we fall, we shall not be cast away: and hereupon depends our repentance, our patience, and our endeavour to the masterdom of our own wickedness. Thus as the wise Physician for long continuing and deep rooted maladies, gives strong purging medicines of Seamony, or Colocynthis, and after applies his cordials; so our most gracious Healer, to let us know what we are of ourselves, lest through pride the sin of the rebellious Angels, we should be lost for ever, doth not only suffer us to taste the bitter fruits of our own corruption: but suffers sin also, as the flesh of the venomons tire to be still in us, that by it, the virtues of the precious spices of his graces may be conveyed to our hearts, to preserve us from eternal death, that baleful infection of the devil, unto everlasting life. (b) Necessary truth in actual being, R. 3] Necessary truth is not here meant that truth which depends upon the necessary being of the thing, in respect of the cause thereof: but that necessity which binds the understanding or words to be agreeable to the present being. And thus this proposition Peter sits, is as necessarily true while he doth sit, as to say, Peter is a man. CHAP. VI That God is Almighty. MIght or power is of divers kinds; as you may read log. appendix of Sect. 3. introduct. I will not stand repeating, nor in this question make any mention of that power which they call passive, because it means a power only to suffer in things that are weak and imperfect. The might which I mean here is absolute, perfect, infinite, which belongs to God, and to him alone, as it appears by these reasons. 1. What power soever it is, which is equally powerful over all being, either in act, or in possibility of being, must needs be infinite or almighty: but such is the power of God; therefore God is Almighty. It was manifest before Chap. 2. that God was everlasting, and so not by any other; but that all things either being, or possible to be, are from him above, as it will further appear Chap. 13. and upon this consequence it will further follow necessarily, that God is Almighty, ᵃ in respect of the creature. 2. ᵇ If God be not Almighty, then either that which is, or that which is not must be able to resist him: but neither that which is, nor that which is not, is able to withstand him; therefore God is Almighty. The proposition is plain, that he may do what he will do, who can find no hindrance or let in his doing. The assumption also is as true: for the things that are, are all from him, as the fountain of all being, as it is confessed by the voice of heaven, Reve. Cap. 4.11. Thou art worthy O Lord, to receive glory, and honour, and power: for thou hast created all things; and for thy wills sake, they are, and have been created. And that the things that are not, should be able to withstand him is utterly impossible; for so, not being should be more powerful than being, and being more powerful must of necessity be; and so should both be and not be, which is an absolute contradition, and utterly impossible. Therefore the first, that God is Almighty, is true of necessity. 3. If God be not Almighty, so that his power may be answerable to his other dignities in infinity; then either his power must be accidental to him, or else his being must differ essentially from itself; but both these things are impossible: for in him is no accident, nor shadow of change, ja. 1.17. as it shall appear more at large Chap. 9 And for the second consequence, it is as plain: for that which is infinite, and that which is finite must needs differ essentially, so that if his goodness, his eternity, wisdom, etc. being essentially himself, as is showed Chap. 8. be infinite, and his power likewise essential to him, and yet finite, than his being must needs differ essentially from his being. Therefore it is necessary that God be Almighty. 4. Nothing can either be or work; but by that power which it hath, both to be that which it is, and to do that which it doth; so that if the power of God were not infinite or almighty, neither could his being be everlasting by his eternity, neither could his inward action in himself be infinite and eternal, neither could his goodness, his greatness, his truth, glory, etc. be that which they are, neither by his wisdom could he know himself infinite and eternal, nor yet able to do any thing answerable to his goodness, truth, and glory, Read Psal. 111. Neither could he delight himself and be so happy infinitely in his own goodness, greatness and glory; and so he should not be God. But all these things are impossible: therefore God is Almighty. And this the holy Scripture every where proclaimeth, first by the voice of God himself, Gen. 17.1. & 35.11. I am God Almighty, and Exod. 6.3. I appeared unto Abraham, Isaac, and jacob, by the name of the Almighty God. Then by his Prophets, job 27.3. This is the portion of Tyrants from the Almighty. This is also the voice of heaven Revel. 4.8. Holy holy Lord God Almighty, & Revel. 15.3. Great and marvellous are thy works, Lord God Almighty. Notes. (a) IN respect of the Creature, Rea: 1.] The first argument is the effect of those which Tho. Aquin. hath brought to this question, in his second book, Cont. Gent. cap. 22. And although this infinite power be one of the inward perfections of the being of God; no less than His goodness, eternity, infinity, etc. which the Doctor saw well enough; yet because he could manifest it best by the effects in the Creation, therefore he deferred it to that place. Yet by this means He left the question proved but in the smallest part, because the infinity of God's power, though manifested in the Creation of a Million of worlds, of which every one should be greater and better than this; yet could they not way be an object answerable to his power, to which nothing can be equal but only Himself. Wherefore the Doctor was compelled to add hereto two chapters, 23. & 24. as certain supplies. That God wrought not the Creature by any necessity, but according to the purpose of his own will and wisdom: yet would I not be thought to blame these or the like arguments, though in effect only inductive. For the Holy Scripture, in infinite places uses the like. And to this purpose principally (as concerning the literal interpretation) are all those reasons and instances which are brought in job, from the beginning of the 37. chap. to the end of the 41. (b) If God be not Almighty, then either that which is, or that which is not, R. 2.] Many questions have been moved, and still are by idle and presuming Wits, concerning the knowledge, will, and power of God. In the will and foreknowledge of God is that great doubt, which is about predestination, and reprobation, wherein I have said so much, note a in the 5. chap. as may direct the honest minded, who inquires thereinto, not for controversies and disputations, wherein the practice of godliness doth not at all consist. Concerning the power of God, some questions are moved, merely captious and idle; some, though unnecessarily, yet more pardonablie: but because that in every thing which we know truly of God, there is exceeding comfort; it is not unfit to hear some of them, and to give an answer. First it is demanded; If God be Almighty and all knowing, whether he be able to do that, which he knows to be impossible to be done. I answer, That only such things are utterly impossible to be done, whereof there is neither power nor knowledge; neither do they come into the account of things. But possibility and impossibility are not to be measured by us: for thought to man many things seem impossible; yet to God all things are possible. Mar. 10.17. And this difference we ourselves either out of our own wits, or in our best wits acknowledge, when in sudden or great dangers, out of which we see no possible avoidance, we call upon God, as acknowledging our escape possible to him. 2. Whether God can call bacl or undo the things that have been. Solomon Eccles. 1.9, 10. saith, That which hath been, is that which shall be, and there is no new thing under the Sun. Is there any thing new? it hath been already in the time that was before us. But whereas Solomon speaks by way of comparison or likeness; or that things past may be figures and prophecies of things to come: I think you mean the same in number, and that in respect of their being only; then I answer, No. For that which hath been, is as necessary to have been, as it is necessary for that to be, which is. Now to be, and not to be, implies a contradiction, or a saying and gainsaying of the same thing. And that any thing be, infolds necessarily the will and power of God thereto; so that any thing should have been, and not have been, it must of necessity enforce that God should both will, and not will the same thing: but to will, and not to will proceeds from extreme weakness of foresight, and want of judgement in the difference of things that are good and bad. But nothing of weakness can belong to God; as to be less than he is, in any of his dignities, to cease to be, or will that which is ill, to be inglorious, to forget, to suffer violence, to be weary, sorry, angry, to deny himself 2. Tim. 2.13. as it is said, Heb. 6.18. That by two immutable things, a promise and an oath, wherein it is impossible that God should lie, we may have strong consolation; which lay hold on the hope which is set before us. Neither yet can that belong to God, which is against the necessity of being: as because the being of God must of necessity be independent, therefore God cannot make another God besides himself, which shall be equal to himself, and independent. Neither yet in things being, because all his works are done in truth and judgement, Psal. 111.7. is it possible to change them, as that 2. and 3. should not be 5. that a triangle should not have three corners: and therefore thirdly, if it be questioned; 3. Whether the same things which God hath wrought, were possible to be done otherwise than they are done? I answer, The power of God in the creature is conformable to his will; his will to his goodness; his goodness to his wisdom. So as God in his wisdom seeing what was good in the creature, according to the pleasure of His will, so framed the creature, as it is said, Psal. 134.6. Whatsoever pleased the Lord, that did he in heaven, and in earth; in the sea, and in all deep places. Therefore supposing that it was His will, so to work in the creature as he hath framed it, it was not possible to be done otherwise than it is. For so his will should not be absolute, and unchangeable; nor yet his will and power should be convertible. But yet seeing the creature is no way a proportionable object to his wisdom, and his power; if it had seemed good unto him, He might have done the same things otherwise then he hath, in respect of any limitation which he found in the creature; And may create other worlds and beings, different from this, according as it shall seem good to His infinite wisdom. Therefore all the possibilities mentioned before, are in respect of the creature only; not in respect of the infinite power of the Creator, who by that which He hath wrought in the creature, hath put an impossibility to change or undo that which He hath done. CHAP. VII. 1. That the Will. 2. the Truth. 3. the Glory. 4. And all the other dignities of God, are Infinite. 1. WHatsoever is equal to an infinite being, must of necessity be infinite. But the Will, the truth, the Glory of God, and all his other dignities, are equal to his infinite being. Therefore they are infinite. Concerning his Will, it is apparent, for every thing being (in this representation of God) doth naturally will or desire the being of itself in all the perfections thereof. So ᵃ God wils his own being, because his being is infinitely good, powerful, glorious etc. And if he did not will his own being; He should be against his will; and in that case be most miserable, as being the chiefest of beings. And seeing He is the greatest good that can be, if his will should not Will such a being, than were it defective and ill, if any way opposite to the chiefest good. But all these things are utterly impossible. Therefore his Will is infinite. And as these reasons confirm the infinity of His Will in his own being: So the Holy Scripture witnesss the ab solute freedom of his will in the creature, as Psal. 115.3. He doth whatsoever He will, job. 23.13. He is one and who can turn him? whatsoever His mind desires, He doth. 2. And concerning his Truth, it is also manifest. Truth is either real, that is, in the being of the thing, which elsewhere, log. sect. 3.9. I call metaphy sicall, or intellectual; that is, where the understanding apprehends the thing according to the truth of the being: and if it conceive it otherwise than it is, than deceit or falsehood is in the understanding only, or in the words the expression of the understanding, but not in the thing, as Agrippa makes it, Comment. in Artem brevem Lulli. The real truth is that, whereby the thing is truly that which it is, in what sort of being soever it is. So that if the being of God be infinite, as was proved cap. 3. than it is necessary, that his truth also be infinite. And this is that which God said of himself, Exod. 3.14. I am that I am. speaking of the truth of his infinite being. Or you may take it thus: Seeing every thing is that which it is, by the truth of the being, if the truth of God were not infinite, then could neither His being nor His goodness, nor any of those dignities which we have before proved to be infinite, be such as they are proved to be, and so all the impossibilities should of necessity follow. But these things cannot be so. Therefore it is most necessary that his truth be infinite. Secondly, seeing the truth of all understanding and of all speech is founded in the truth of the being of things. If the truth of God were not infinite, and answerable to his being, but that his being were infinite, and his truth finite, the understanding could not be assured what to conceive truly of God, neither could we know what we might truly affirm or deny concerning him, and so our faith and hope in him should never be settled, neither could we be assured of any truth, either in Religion or any thing else. For if certain truth be not in Him, much less in the things that are by Him; so that all truth should stand only in opinion, and according to that idle fancy of the Sceptics. But this, as it is against all reverence we own to God, so is it against all reason and sense: and those certain truths that have hitherto been proved. Therefore the Prophet Psal. 31.6. calls him the God of Truth, in as much as all truth, which can be in any understanding, or uttered by any speech, must be grounded in the being of things, and all being is only in Him, and from Him. And therefore he saith, Psal. 119.160. Truth is the beginning of his word. So Psal. 100.5. His mercy is everlasting, and his Truth from generation to generation. And Psal. 107.2. The truth of the Lord endureth for ever. 3. Happiness is imputed to every prosperous success in any man's undertaking, and that not only in the last end of his Aims, but likewise in all his means thereunto. Blessedness is only in the last end which a man proposeth, as the Covetous blesseth himself in the multitude of his riches, the proud in his honour, and every Malicious man, when he can make his mischievous imagination to prosper. But the Glory whereof I speak, holds all that holy blessedness or delight, which is in God by the superexcellency of his own being; which if it be not infinite, then must it be, either because there is a greaternesse in his being, and a lessenes of His enjoying of himself; which cannot stand with the action of His infinity, showed, chap. 10. or because he knows not his own worthiness, which stands not within his wisdom, or for some defect or other which cannot stand with the possibility of his perfection, who hath in Himself all things that he can desire. Therefore his glory is infinite. Moreover if no perfection can come to Him from without, it must follow necessarily that he hath all possible perfections in Himself. But it is plain, that no perfection can come to him from without, who gave to all things their being and welfare. Therefore his blessedness or Glory is infinite; As it is said Psal. 104.1. O Lord my God thou art exceeding glorious; thou art clothed with glory and honour. And Apoc. 4.10. Thou art worthy O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power. And Reu. 5.13. I heard all the Creatures saying: Praise and honour, and glory, and power be to him that sitteth upon the throne. And Reu. 7.12. Praise, and glory and wisdom, and thanks, and honour, and power, and might be unto our God forevermore, Amen. 4. And because God is one infinite being, as shall by and by be more fully proved; therefore the proposition of the first Syllogism, N. 1. may serve either for any one of all the dignities of God before spoken; or for any other attribute properly given unto God, as you shall find them in the holy Scripture, as 1. Holiness. 2. Righteousness or justice. 3. Mercy. 4. Grace. 5. Life. 6. Light. 7. Love or the like. And because unto the proposition you may take which of these you will, and I hasten forward; therefore I will only bring some few authorities of the holy Scripture, for every one of these. And first Holiness. 1. Levit. 11.44. 1 Pet. 1.15. Be ye holy, for I am holy. Psal. 99.9. Exalt the Lord our God, for the Lord our God is Holy. And for this he is called The Holy one of Israel. Psal. 71.22. & 74.41. 2. Righteousness, Psal. 71.15. My mouth shall daily rehearse thy righteousness, for I know no end thereof. 3. Mercy, Psal. 103.17. His mercy is from eternity to eternity on them that fear him, and his Righteousness on children's children. Exod. 20. Showing mercy to thousands. 2 Cor. 1.3. He is the Father of mercies. This Mercy is the ground of many psalms, and in especial of the 136. 4. Grace, Gen. 6.8. But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. And Saint Paul in every Epistle wisheth Grace from God to the Churches; so Saint john. Reu. 1.4. 5. 6. Life and Light, Psal. 36.9. For with thee is the well of life, and in thy Light wesh all see light. 7. Love, 1 joh 4.6. God is Love. And whatsoever is answerable to an infinite being, must of necessity be infinite. Therefore the Love of God is infinite. And so of the rest. Notes. (a) GOd wils his own infinite being. Therefore his will is infinite.] And we also will his being; that is, not only desire that he be; but also love him, and desire ourselves in him, as being the cause and upholder of our present Being, and much more the hope of our happy Being hereafter: yet is not our will therefore infinite. It may seem therefore that the first reason holds not. I answer. We will as fare as we know: For of that which is unknown there is no desire nor will; And we know that He is; not what He is. For our most certain knowledge of Him (beside that revelation which he hath made of himself in his own word) is rather by denying what he is not, than by affirming what he is. For although we follow by certain steps of his imprinted in the Creature, and most of all in our own understanding, that He is eternal, almighty, etc. yet for all this we cannot apprehend in any degree what His infinite being, what his eternity, power, and goodness is. But his knowledge of Himself, equals His own being. And because his being is good, and , and a good known moves the will, and an infinite Good apprehended by an infinite knowledge moves an infinite Will; Therefore because His infinite being is known to himself to be infinitely Good, doth he also infinitely will and delight Himself in His own being and Goodness. But our will or desire of his being cannot stretch beyond our knowledge, which is also in the lowest degree, as was declared in the entrance of the 5. chap. So God wils and loves His own infinite Being, and is blessed, and glorious therein infinitely, and necessarily: but we will and love Him, as farrers we know, and are drawn near to him by his Spirit, and promises. CHAP. VIII. That all the dignities which we give unto God, as Eternity, Infinity, Wisdom, Power, etc. are essentially one God. THe art of heavenly meditation is taught every where in the holy Scripture, if we had Eyes to see, or Ears to hear the voice of wisdom, as it is showed, Pro. 8. For there is nothing which offers itself to our senses, but by that voice which it hath, which is the voice of God in it; it calls, yea clamours upon us to know, and acknowledge, and to return to the author thereof. And if for this special end and use we have our senses, thereby to draw our understanding to look up unto Him; how wretchedly sinful are we, if we use them not to that right end; and how abominable, if we abuse them to sinful and worldly lusts? The Things that are, are either artificial, wherein is knowledge: or natural, wherein is understanding: or supernatural and divine, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Exod. 31 3. wherein is wisdom. The two first are of things sensible, and subordinate to the last. The Holy Text is the rule, and teaches the use of all. If the things be artificial; consider who it is that teacheth man knowledge, and to what end: so you find the abuse to avoid the sin, and let your meditation dwell therein, by such remembrances as the Scripture affords you. If natural, remember likewise what you read thereof in the holy Text, and so shall you be led by the hand to the right use. For instance: In the sight; the first object thereof is light: remember then what you read. Thy word is a lantern unto my feet, and a light unto my Paths. Then, ye are the children of the light, that ye should not walk in darkness. And thus if you will follow your light and guide, the Spirit of Christ; you shall at last be brought to him, that dwells in the light that none can approach unto. Add your prayer hereto, that you may so be guided by the light of his word in this life, that you may see his everlasting light in the world to come, you can turn you to no side, you can make use of none of your senses, but if you remember what you read concerning that which your sense lights on, you shall have all your senses to guide you in the way to God, and to hold in that skittish imagination, that will draw you away and betray you, if you do not hold herein. But of all these things, which draw us immediately to God, those Attributes are chief which he hath taken to himself by way of comparison, wherein there is almost nothing so mean, or so vile, whither the kindness and love of God hath not abased itself to win our thoughts to Him, by our senses. As Luke 15.30. Thou hast for his sake killed the fat calf. All the sacrifices of the Law, the Tabernacle, the Temple, and all their furniture may be brought hereto. And yet more meanly, Luk. 17.37. Where the carcase is, thither will the Eagles be gathered. So Hos. 5.12. I will be to Ephraim, as a moth, and to judah as rottenness. You say, what is this to the matiers in hand? very much, For if I teach you the right use of your senses, that your senses by custom maybe exercised to the discerning of things both good and ill; you shall by your knowledge and understanding in things sensible, have a ready way to the more easy apprehension of those points of wisdom, which are the matiers of faith concerning God. The Attributes which concern his high, and superexcellent perfections I have proved to be infinite; it must appear, that all those perfections are but one absolute wonderful being, from which as from one fountain they all arise. And although with us truly distinguished, yet in Him are they but his own most simple being; which may appear by the ensuing reasons. 1. If all the excellencies of God, his goodness, wisdom, power, truth etc. be not essentially in the perfection of his own being: then must they be in him, either as accidents arising from his being, or else they must come to him from without by some other. But in him there can be no accident (as shall appear in the next chapter) neither yet can they come to Him from without. For so his being should not be good, powerful, nor true of itself, nor he wise in Himself, but by the influence of another: So something should be given before him, greater and more excellent than he, from whom these perfections should come unto him. For nothing can be in defect, but by something which is in act or perfect being, which raised it from not being to that estate which it hath in possibility of further perfection. But it is granted at first, that nothing can be of greater excellency than God. Therefore the dignities of God are essentially in the perfection of his own being, and so are his absolute and essential Being. 2. Every thing whose goodness, power, wisdom, glory, etc. are not essentially one with the being thereof, must of necessity be in defect, and in possibility only, to become that which it is not. But the being of God cannot be such. For so should not he be God eternally. So also his goodness, power, glory, etc. should not be infinite. But these things are impossible. Therefore his goodness, power, glory, etc. are essentially his very being; And He is essentially his own goodness, glory, wisdom, power, etc. For the being is always convertible with that whose being it is, as every man is a reasonable creature, every reasonable creature is a man, see, log. cap. 8. n. 2. 3. Whatsoever is simple and utterly uncompounded, must needs be pure and one in itself: neither can it be this, and that; one and another; for so the simplicity were taken away. But the being of God is simple and uncompounded, as shall appear by and by. Therefore in Him is nothing but his own pure essence or being. So then his goodness, truth, wisdom, glory, etc. is no other thing than himself; nor he any other thing than his goodness, wisdom, or glory etc. Nor his goodness, any other thing in Him than his power etc. nor his truth, than his wisdom etc. nor any other dignity, any other thing than another, to wit, in that one perfection of his most pure and absolute being, which comprises all these. Which pure being, because it is neither understandable, nor nameable by us, we speak of goodness, of power, etc. as of the effluences or prime acts thereof, in which it is one, and they one in it, with the concord of sameness or unity of being; but with respect of one toward another, they are this one, and that other, with the difference of concord, or concord of difference. For though we say truly, goodness, is God himself, and God is wholly goodness; yet not exclusively; For truth is God himself, and God is wholly truth; yet not excluding Almightiness, eternity, etc. Therefore goodness, truth, eternity, etc. are different with the difference of concord, not of opposition, see chap. 9 note (h) 4. Whatsoever hath the infinity of being, must of necessity be essentially and actually, whatsoever it is possible to be. But God hath the infinity of being as was proved cap. 3. Therefore he must be. 1. of Necessity, not by chance. 2. Essentially, not an accident, nor accidentally: for so he might both be, and not be. 3. Actually whatsoever He is: not with possibility of being that which He is not: for so there should be defect of being, which cannot stand with the infinity of being. Therefore God is of necessity essentially, and actually goodness, eternity, power, wisdom, will, truth, glory, life, etc. and convertibly. And this is it (as fare as I know) which God saith of himself, Exod. 3.14. I am that I am, or I will be that which I will be. Whereby we may know, first that whatsoever is in God, is essentially and actually himself, as is showed. Secondly, that all the understanding or wisdom of the Creature, Angels, & Men, being all finite. cannot conceive what he is in Himself, being altogether infinite. This the Chaldean wisdom knew well enough, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Because the superessential being excels all words or signification, all thoughts, all the uttermost excess of understanding, as the Clarian oracle confessed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, his name cannot be contained in words: And therefore doth jacob, Gen. 32.29. and Manoah, jud. 13.18. enquiring herein receive an answerless answer, because it is a wonderful secret, and beyond their knowledge. No not Moses himself, like to whom there arose no Prophet, whom jehova knew face to face Deut. 34.10. might see the face of his glory. Exod. 33.20. only the Mediator, because he knew that name. Psal. 21.14. joh. 8.55. was exalted above every name that is named in this world, or in the world to come. Eph. 1.21. Seeing then that all the excellencies of God in their infinity are his very being; it follows from hence as a corollary or consequence. First, that God is wholly or absoluely perfect in himself. Secondly, that he is but one. The reasons of the first. 1. Where the whole power of being is infinitely, there no excellency can be wanting but as it hath the infinity of being, and thereby differs infinitely from not being; so all defect or want must needs be fare therefrom. But the whole power of being is in God infinitely, as hath been proved. Therefore God in himself is wholly perfect. 2. Moreover seeing He is the first cause of all being, and took nothing from any other (as was showed in the first reason) therefore it is necessary that He be perfect in Himself. 3. Whatsoever is actually all that it can be, must needs be perfect in itself. But God is such (as was showed in the fourth reason) Therefore God is pure perfection in himself, not having any thing of weakness, of want, of possibility to be ᵃ more excellent or perfect than he is. The reasons of the second Consequence, That God is One. 1. An infinite being is that which holdeth all beings in itself, and is not itself comprehended of any other. By which it is apparent, that of infinites, there can be but one, and consequently but one God. For if there should be more Gods; every one infinite; then every one must hold in himself the being of the other, and so still there could be but one infinity, and if they be not contained one of another, than they cannot be infinite, and so not God, who is already proved to be infinite; and therefore but one. 2. If there be several indivisible almighty's, or Gods of several infinite power; than it must follow, that none of these powers are absolutely infinite, because each one hath not the infinite power of the other: and besides, that all these infinite powers are conjoined with infinite weakness, because they must be mutually subject to the infinite power one of another, or if they be not subject each to others power, it will follow that none of their powers is infinite. And so none of these supposed Gods, to be God indeed. Therefore there is one only God Almighty. 3. Whatsoever is superexcellent, must be such as cannot be equalled by any other. For multitude abates the dignity of one, as many kings of equal power in a commonwealth would make that state no kingdom. And if there be many Gods, one must be equalled with another, and so none should be superexcellent. But it is manifest in reason, and before proved, Chap. 4. R. 3. that God is super excellent in all his dignities. ᵇ Therefore God is one alone. This argument with many other inductions to the like purpose you may read in Athanasius in his oration against the Gentiles. 4. One individeable and peculiar being cannot belong to more than one, as the being of Thomas cannot be the very same being which is of Peter or john, but the being understood by this name (God) is one individeable and peculiar being, as was put in the beginning of cap. 1. therefore it cannot belong to more than one. 5. If there be two Gods, or more, it is necessary that they be distinguished by something added either to one or to both; which addition, if it be an accident, whether it be of inherence, or circumstance, will not make such difference, but that in essence they may be one: and if no accident can be in God (as shall by and by appear) then this kind of difference will be none: but if the addition make an essential difference, than the being must be compounded: but such a being cannot be God, which must be independent, and uncompounded. 6. Besides, seeing they must be in the highest degree of being, and that He unto whom we confess, is proved to be infinitely and essentially good, wise, powerful, true, glorious, eternal, etc. it must needs be, that whatsoever differs therefrom in the excess of being must be infinitely ill, foolish, weak, false, contemptible, of no continuance, and so none at all, see hereto Plotini Ennead. lib. 7. cap. 23. The truth of this the Holy Scripture confirms Deut. 4.35. & 39 The Lord is God, and there is none but he alone. Deut. 6.4. and Mar. 12.29. Hear O Israel, The Lord our God is one Lord. Mal. 2.10. Have we not all one Father? hath not one God made us? Mar. 12.32. There is one God, and there is none but Herald 1 Cor. 8.4. There is none other God but one. Eph. 4.6. There is one God and Father of all, which is above all, and through all, and in you all. Notes. (a) TO be more excellent or perfect than He. Corol. 1. Re. 3.] Tho. Aquinas lib. 1. Cap. 28. cont. Gent. to this conclusion brins another reason; which is this. In every kind or order of beings there is something most perfect, whereby every thing in that kind is to be measured, because that the greater or less perfection of every thing is tried, by how much it is nearer to to that most perfect being, or further off: therefore in the order of being also, there must be one thing most perfect, which is God; who if he were not most perfect, could not be the common measure of all things. For respect to the person I would feign have let this reason stand, but that it stands not with reason nor the truth: for it puts the Creator and the creature in one rank or order of being, and the difference only in degrees of perfection, and imperfection, which can no way be admitted: for the being of God is absolute, and of itself; the being of the creature is only of Him; His infinite, theirs finite: and how can that which is infinite, be a measure to that which is finite? what proportion is there between them? doth not the Creator which is infinite differ as much from that which is in the highest perfection of being created and finite, as from that which is in the lowest? doth not he as much exceed an Angel, or a man, as the least mote of dust on the earth? how then is that true which the Prophet hath, Esay 40.15.17. All nations are unto him as nothing, yea less than nothing; and vanity, as the dust in the balance, which no man puffs away because it hath no weight. And that he should think this reason good, or the comparison tolerable, is so much the more to be marvelled at; because that in the same book, Chap. 32. he proves that nothing can be affirmeable of God and the creature univocably, but only analogically Chap. 34. And again, in his questions on the first book of the Senten. didst 8. q. 6.7. Though all created beings be brought into the orders and distributions of being, which we call predicaments, either directly or collaterally: yet he proves that God can no way be brought into any predicament; and that because his being contains the excellencies of all beins, as the cause and susteiner of all. And if he cannot come into the predicament of substance, either as the most general substance affirmeable of all, o as any thing contained thereunder, because his being is simple and without addition, or difference; much less can be be brought into any other predicament. And if wisdom be in God, as his very being, and substance; but in an Angel as a quality only: What affinity or nearness can there be between a quality in one, and the substance of another? therefore the comparison of perfection and imperfection is in the creatures only, and not with the Creator: for as the distance is endless from not being to being; and therefore the least atom could not be brought out from not being into being but by an infinite power; so again from a finite being, how excellent soever in respect of other finites, the distance is as great to a being that is infinite. For as in a number actually infinite (if any such could be) five could not be contained oftener than ten, nor one than five; so the greatest perfection of a finite being, is as near unto nothing, and as much exceeded by an infinite Being, as that which is accounted the meanest of Being's. (b) § 1. Therefore God is one alone, Corol. 2. Re. 3.] If the Fathers and Historians of the Church, till toward four hundred years after Christ, recorded the Heresies of those times, as of the divers sects of Christians; I think they were too light of beleese to settle their thoughts in things so foul, and filthy; So against Nature, if not impossible. But if not believing them, they thought themselves forced to proclaim them Heretics that were said to do such deeds. Because the shatnelesse lying Ethnics put such things upon the Christians, by the malice of the Devil invented, only to disgrace the glorious faith: it was a worse deed to brand the Christian name with such villainy, only because the enemies of the faith were passed all shame to lay such things to their charge. For in all heathenism you shall not read of any deeds so roll, of any opinions so fare from reason: but if they whom they call heretics were only the censurers of all opinions in those times, themselves being Libertines of Atheists, and so among other their opinions broached what liked them best concerning Christianity; I see no reason why they should be called Heretics more than Celsus, Porphyry, Lucian, and such professed adversaries, or any of the Philosophers that were before: for if he only can be an Heretic, who being baptised, doth stubbornly maintain a false opinion contrary to some article of our faith; How can the Manichees be counted Heretics who were neither baptised, nor acknowledged one God, nor believed his Scriptures, but as another profane writing so fare as they liked it; who worshipped the Sanne, the Moon, and all their Idols: and although they celebrated their assemblies in coming together as the Christians; yet can you account those mysteries of Beelzebub to be Christian, which were performed with such accursed uncleanness; as I must forbear to write; which I could hardly have been brought to believe, if S. Augustine himself, who had been among them, and proves it by witnesses, had not recorded it de Haeres. Cap. 46. The filthiness of the Gnostics was yet more abominable, if it be possible to be true which they writ; will you account them Christians? The Philosopher Plotinus, no Christian Ennead. 2. lib 9 entitled against the Gnostics shows the falsehood of their opinions concerning the creating of the world; and proves that in the government thereof their opinion was more wicked than that of Epicurus: and though Simon the Sorcerer was baptised, Acts. 8. yet when his gall of bitterness had made him a professed enemy, and father of all those heresies that followed; will you count him a Christian? Therefore you may with the Apostle say of these, of Cerinthus, of Carpocrates, and of many of the rest; They went out from us, but they were not of us. But because I am busied in things of more importance than this (and yet the honour of the Christian name is no small matter) I will most briefly recount the contrary opinions, whether they be of the elder Philosophers, or the later Heretics, as they have been gathered, by the most ancient among the Fathers, Irenaus, Epiphanius, S. Augustine and others: I say, most briefly and only for a taste, that you may love the truth the better, and adore that mercy which hath manifested it unto us. And therefore I will not tell you of Varros thousands of gods, nor trouble you needlessly with remembrance of those gods of the Heathen, which you may read in the holy Scripture, and know better by Master Seldens just Commentary de Djs Syris, if you understand Latin. § 2. Above fortle disagreeing opinions among the Philosophers concerning the gods, are reckoned up by Cic. de natura Deorum. lib. 1. of which some directly gainsay this conclusion of the Unity of the Godhead: for although Antisthenes confessed there was but one God, the God of all nature; yet he added, that there were divers Gods for divers peoples and countries. Xenocrates said there were eight gods, in the seven planets, and one that ruled over all the Stars. Anaximander held many gods, and so many gods, so many worlds; but said that these gods were brought forth in time, and after many ages died again. Alomeon seemed to acknowledge three gods, inasmuch as he gives divinity to the Sun, to the Moon, and to the soul of man. Xenophanes would have all that is infinite to be god, whether in being, or in working, as he held the understanding. Democritus would have all the Ideas or representations of things being, and that understanding whence they proceed, and man's understanding also to be gods. The inconstancle of the Philosophers in their own opinions brought us in yet more gods. Cleanthes one while said the world was god, sometime the soul, whereby it was quickened, and governed; then again the pure and uppermost air that compasseth the whole Globe of heaven and earth; sometime the Stars, other while reason; as so the rest, as you may hear hereafter. And if the Philosophers, the guides were blind, it is no marvel though the blockish rout ran into all Idolatry, as they are described Wisd. Chap. 14. But to suppose it reasonable to give honour to the memory of the dead, who where founders of cities, or procurers of some great and public good, because they (though dead) were thought to favour and maintain their own endeavours: or to be so unreasonable, as to think with the Egyptians, that there was something divine in all those things by which they received any kind of good; and so to worship men, horses, birds, serpents, wolves, dogs, and cats. See juvenal. Sat. 15. Cic. de natura Deorum lib. 3. yet what could so mad the old Romans not only to allow all the he gods, and the she gods of others; but to consecrate imaginations, as Victory, Concord, Peace; yea and among these their own plagues and punishments, as the Ague, Mildew, and blasting, ill fortune, & c? Cic. loc. cit. § 3. But there was no opinion among all these more foolish than that which went out in the name of the Heretics. Cerdon first of all August. count. advers. leg. & Proph. l. 2. c. 12. said there were two gods; one good, whom they called Oeomazes, and another stark naught, whom they named Areimanius. This opinion his scholar Martion upheld, but added * Tertullian, who disputes against him in five books, hath it not, nor Irenaeus, and Augustine brings it doubtfully out of Epiphanius. a third whom he called the Iust. After that the Gnostics reealed the opinion of the two gods with many additions. The Manichees also followed this madness, and added their fiction, that the good God set upon the wicked god to have suppressed him. but in that conflict the powers of darkness took many parts of the good god prisoners, and tied them unto earthly matiers; for the ransoming of which, this good but very weak god, takes great thought, but as these parts of his come to be eaten in the matiers wherein they are tied, by their Catharists or Puritans, they are parted from the impure matiers, and so restored to the God again. Are these Heretics? are these Christians? found you any thing like to this among the pure naturalists of the heathen? Phil. Mornay de verit. Christ. Relig. Cap. 2. draws this opinion of two gods by the authority of Plutarch de Iside & Osiride. First from Zoroaster, and so among the Persians: thence to the Manichees. It is true, that Manes their father was a Persian; but it is manifest that Plutarch was most grossly deceived, first in the circumstance of the time, wherein he mistakes about some four thousand two hundred years, a great fault in an Historian: for if Zoroaster lived in the reign of Ninus, as the best Records do make him, See Fra. Patr. in Zor. about three hundred years after the flood, it will not be above eight hundred ninety, or nine hundred years before the destruction of Troy, which is put about the year of the world two thousand eight hundred forty; so that Plutarch who makes him to have lived five thousand years before the destruction of Troy, makes him above two thousand years elder than Adam. Then in the substance of the matter, the mistaking is nothing less: for by the diligence of worthy men, divers of those magical oracles of Zoroaster, who was the Son of Oromazes, Plato Alcib. 1. are come to light, and printed at Paris in the year one thousand six hundred and seven, and before that many more of them gathered out of the old autors by Fra. Patricius, and printed at Venice 1593. and since that elsewhere. By which it is apparent that Zoroaster held the mystery of the Trinity, in Unity of the Deity, and one Godabove all, the Creator of all things, who according to his own goodness made every thing perfect and good, as his words witness. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. For from the Father's workmanship nought runneth waste, Or yet imperfect; as though it were made in haste. But that every thing according to that order of being which it hath, hath all the perfections that belong thereto. Neither can the learned Mornay be excused; that having seen, and citing Zoroaster would believe Plutarch in that wherein he knew the Oracle of Zoroaster was quite contrary. He citys his consent to the Christian positions concerning original sin, Cap. 7. for the immortality of the soul, and resurrection of the body. Cap. 15. yea and for this very point of the Trinity of Persons in the Unity of the Deity, de ver. Christ. Rel. Cap. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Father having made all things, to th' Second wisdom gave: Whom all mankind account the first, all honour due to have. But how could Plutarch, so grave a Writer be so mistaken? He flourished in the Reign of Trajan, before which time Simon Magus had taught that God did not make the world, but certain Angels: which opinion his Scholar Menander upheld: and over and above the filthiness with women, and things offered to Idols, the Nicholaitans also. Cernthus yet added, that the God which made the world, was but a lower power, who did not so much as know the true God, Iren. lib. 1. Ca 25. From these, and especially from Menander and the Nicholaitans, proceeded the Gnostics, though not under that name till afterward. These vaunted of all knowledge, & held Plato as one that knew little or nothing of Philosophy; And this their high knowledge they boasted to have out of the Oracles of Zoroaster, which they pretended to have, & thence falsely gave out what they list, to bring the holy Scripture into contempt. By the falsehood and impudence of these it seems that Plutarch was deceived; which yet is further manifest in this, that in the same place, de Is. & os. he mentions the opinion of the Chialists, as the doctrine of Zoroaster: wherein by his gloss Cerinthus had corrupted the holy Text Apoc. 20. as the Turks at this day understand their Paradise. Now this doctrine of heaven upon earth (for aught that ever I read) was never mentioned in any profane Writer before the time of S. john: but it was no new matter for Plutarch to be deceived in matiers of Religion; as well that of the Chaldees, further from his knowledge; as in the Swine and Ass of the jews; which he might have known better, if by the jews themselves he would have been informed: See I.S. de Diis Syris synt. 2. Ca 16. But to return to our Heretics; for all these follies and contrary opinions afore mentioned, if you compare with the reasons and authorities aforesaid, will vanish into nothing. Of all the heresies about this point there is none so wicked, as that which Augustine writes somewhere to Basilides, Contr. Adver. leg. supra; who first durst affirm, that the God which the Nation of the jews honoured, was not the true God; Then he writes that Carpocrates, denied that God gave the Law to Moses: elsewhere that Cerdon affirmed, that their God of the Law and the Prophets was not the Father of Christ, de haer Cap. 21. this last the jews like well of; but to us all these are one heresy, who hold according to that which is Heb. 1. That God which at sundry times, and after sundry manners had spoken of old to the Fathers, spoke to us in these last days by his son. For evidence of which, because it is the ground of all our hopes, you shall have a reason or two; and if you desire more, read the books of Tertullian against Martion, especially the third, fourth, and fift. 1. § 4. If that God, which was honoured by the Nation of the jews, whom the Christians acknowledge the Father of Christ, be not the true God; than it will follow, either that the true God hath hitherto been utterly unknown to the world, or else that some of those false gods (as we term them) whom the heathens worshipped, as Jupiter, juno, Neptune, etc. must be the true God: But both these things are false. Therefore the God which the nation of the jews adored was the true God. Now that none of the gods of the heathens could be the true God is manifest by this; that (although they were liars) yet durst never any of them take this to himself, that he was God; as may appear by the answer of that Apollo of Claros, where after a long description of God, by which yet he would uphold devill-worship, he concludes with a lie of him and his fellows: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This is God: but we Angels are a little portion of God: where (you see) to save his credit and uphold his sacrifices he gave himself out as a part of God, s if the being of God were divisible into parts. Moreover, whereas the true God in regard of his Lordship and power over the creature, might challenge the service and obedience thereof and give rules how he would be worshipped thereby, as he did to Abraham, Moses, etc. yet none of these devils ever taught their worshippers any other service to themselves, but as enemies of mankind to * Read further to this purpose the second book of S. August. de Civit. Dei and see what Religion they taught their worshippers. murder one another, as is manifest by the sacrifices of Molech, and other Idols of the Canaanites Psal. 106.37.38. And in profane writers, who knows not the altar of the she-devill among the Tauri, which had no sacrifices, but of mands blood, strangers, and enemies overcome in war? Such was the altar of Saturn among the Cretians, and Carthaginians, and such a Priest for jupiter Chamon was Busiris in Egypt: And Marius upon a dream which the devil shown him, became the butcher of his own daughter Calphurnia. Beside this, if any of these gods of the heathens had been the true God; as their will, so their wisdom, goodness, and justice should have been known unto men. Their will you see was murder, their wisdom such, that their chief fortune-teller Apollo of Delphi was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of his crooked and doubtful answers which he made concerning such things to come as he did not know, or knowing would yet deceive therein as a devil. Compare herewith the answers of God to Gedeon, to David, etc. As their wisdom, such was their goodness: for what can be remembered wherein any of these devils did ever any good to any nation, country, city or private man, wherein the providence and wisdom of man was not chief? as you may account the safety of the Athenians in their wooden walls at Salantis, to the wisdom of Themistocles. And although Castor and Pollux saved Simonides for his song, yet they slew his host and all his friends. And for their power it easily appears how weak it was, in that they could not defend their own right in man; which doubtless they had, if any among them had been the true God: but at the name of Christ all their worshippers forsook their service; and set them at naught: so that their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whether he would or no, must plainly confess, as as he did to Augustus after the birth of Christ. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Hebrew Child me bids, who o'er the Gods doth reign, To leave this house; and to return to Hell again. Now to the other part of this long historical argument, it is likewise plain, that the true God hath not hitherto been unknown unto the world: for neither could it stand with His goodness, and mercy to suffer the most holy men to wander ever in error, and to spend their best thoughts and devotions on him that was no God, and thereby also to be unjust to himself, not only refusing the honour due to him, but also excluding himself for ever out of that right which he hath in his creature: for who will now acknowledge any God hereafter besides him, in whom we have hitherto believed, and acknowledged the most High? neither yet could it stand with his truth, to suffer the truth of his own being to be for ever concealed from man, that with all humility and desire hath hitherto sought it. If then neither any of the heathen gods were the true God, neither yet can it stand with the Goodness, justice, or Truth of the true God, to deny to man that knowledge of himself, which man was capable of; nor to refuse that service which he could do Him: it must needs follow of necessity, that the God which the Nation of the Jews worshipped, which we acknowledge the Father of Christ, is the true God; and this his devilship was forced to acknowledge. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Only the Caldees, and Hebrews, have learned true wisdom's lore; Who selfe-begotten God and King in purity adore. Where you must understand that Abraham the Caldee and his son Izaac and jacob are put in the first place, and after all they that hold the faith of Abraham, the honour of Heber's race. 2. Either that God which the jews did serve, and we by his own instruction know to be the Father of Christ, was the true God; or else that other supposed true God cannot be free from the uttermost injustice that can be done. But this last is impossible: therefore the former is true. The consequence is necessary: for if God the Father of Christ be not the true God; all the world hath hitherto been utterly ignorant of the true God: and if that supposed god should either condemn all the world to hell for ignorance of himself, when he had afforded no means to know him, it were the uttermost injustice that could be done, and to save all indifferently, all being ignorant, as well them that cared not to know and serve him, as them that made it their whole life and search, and thought themselves borne for no other end, were as great injustice on the other side. Therefore that God which the jews knew and served, is the true God. 3. That God whose wisdom is infinite, must needs be the only true God. But the Nation of the jews worshipped that God of infinite wisdom; which appears in this, that He alone declared from the beginning what should come to pass at the last, which no other God or Idol of the Heathens hath done; if they have, show it: Let it appear that they are able to do either good, or ill. This argument might not be passed over, because it is the reason which God himself useth to justify himself. Esay Chap. 41. vers. 21.22.23.26.27. And could that God of Bastlides and Cerdon be content to be thus dared to his face, to yield his honour to another, if he had either might, courage, or justice? This sottish opinion was not worth half this pains and time; neither have I vouchsafed it to Basilides: but that we of the Gentiles, which were once fare off and served those Idols, may know, and be thankful that we are now by Christ drawn near unto God, that is rich in mercy to all them that call upon Him. For is God the God of the jews only, and not of the Contiles? yes verily, even of the Gentiles also Rom. 3.29. And he is that one God, and there is none other, there is no other god beside him. Read Esay 45. and especially verses 5.18.20.21. & 22. And if you require further proof hereof by authority of holy Scripture, read that elegant treatise of S. Origen to this purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. 2. Cap. 4. and the answer to the contrary objections you shall find in Irenaeus lib. 4. and Epiphanius haer. 23. CHAP. IX. Sect. 1. That God is neither matter, 2. Form. 3. Compound. 4. Bodily. 5. Nor subject to any accident. 6. And that His being is most simple and pure. We have hitherto dwelled on the consideration of the divine being and according to the weakness of man's understanding have assayed to show what He is. Now as well for further clearing of the premises, as for the avoiding of some lefthanded opinions concerning Him, it is likewise fit that we consider what he is not; And because the author of that book which by him is styled Soiga, (by which forsooth in his deep Cabala, you must understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is (holy) and by sued, dens, and such deep mysteries) doth most falsely affirm pag. 12. that God is the matter of all things that have existence, of a peculiar being; it may appear unto you for these reasons following. Section. 1. That God is not matter. 1. NO matter is eternal. But God is eternal: ᵃ therefore God is not matter. The rule or proposition is thus proved. Whatsoever is moved by any kind of motion cannot be eternal: because it supposes another being whereby it is moved, either from the pure possibility of not being into being, as the first matter of all things; or in being, from one state of being into another. But all matter is one of these: therefore no matter is, or can be eternal; and therefore not God. And if no matter can be God, than God cannot be matter. See log. Cap. 13. B. rule 1. 2. All matter is in possibility to become this or that; that is, to change from one form to another, as the moisture of the earth by the Virtue of the root turns to grass, thence by the virtue of the stomach of the ox, becomes blood, than flesh; which in the stomach of the man being digested again, becomes his blood, than flesh, and so returns to earth again, and is capable of as many forms or shapes as it was before. But God is actually whatsoever he is, and without possibility of change to become this or that. Therefore God is not matter. 3. No matter is a beginning of natural action, but of sufferance only. But God is the beginning of all natural actions. Therefore God is not matter, you may bring hither divers of the reasons following in 2.3.4. Section. 2. That God is not the form of other things being. 1. Every natural compound is a third thing arising from the matter and the form, in which ᵇ the parts that were before understood separate, had power to be joined, and to become that which they were not before. But God can neither be a part of another, nor be joined with another, nor be in possibility to another, nor yet become that which he was not before. Therefore He is neither matter nor form. 2. No form is totally and only for the being of itself, ᶜ but is destinate unto another total, as a thing more excellent than itself. But God is wholly his own being only, not for another; for all things are for him: neither can any thing be more excellent than Herald Therefore ᵈ God is not the form of any other being. 3. No form of any thing begun can be e ternall. But God is eternal: therefore God is not the form of any thing begun. And so thou may conclude likewise of matter. 4. The matter and form are the essential being of all bodily things, and being is affirmable of that, whose being it is. If God then were the being of other things, it were as truly said, This man is God, as this man is a living creature endued with reason; but this is most false, and would justify the Idolatry of all the heathen, yea even of the Egyptians. Therefore God is neither matter nor form. And if God be neither matter nor form, it must needs follow. 3. Section. 3. That God is not Compound. 1. FOr in every compound the parts being actually joined must needs be such as were possible to be joined together, so that there must be therein both actor perfection, in respect of the total wherein the parts are actually joined, and possibility or imperfection in regard of the parts that may be both joined, and consequently disloyned again: so that the total in possibility not to be, as it was not before the parts were joined together. But nothing of all this is possible to be in God: neither parts, nor imperfection; nor possibility to be, and not to be, ᵉ Therefore God is not Compound. 2. Every Compound is a second thing in Nature, whose being follows upon the uniting of the parts compounded. But God is the prime or first being, as was showed. Therefore no compound. 3. Every compound supposeth necessarily a cause efficient which brought the parts together; which cause efficient must needs be before the effect or compound. But nothing of this belongs to God. Therefore He is no compound. Every compound is liable to division, and so to destruction. But this is against the eternity of God; and therefore God is no compound or made of divers things. And if no compound, then necessarily it follows. Section. 4. 4. That God is not a Body. 1. FOr every body whether it be Physical, or Mathematical hath parts divideable into parts. It is also finite, and may be measured. But nothing of all this belongs to God, one infinite being. ᶠ Therefore God is not a Body. 3. No bodily being can be the first of Being's, and the cause of all other: For if it be a body only, it cannot possibly move itself: And if it be a body enlived and quickened by another, than it cannot be the first of beings, because it is compounded. But God is the first, and cause of all beings, as hath been proved. Therefore no Body. 3. No bodily being is abundantly sufficient for itself. For if it be a whole and entire body, it needs the parts, without which it could not be whole; and if it be a part, it needs the other parts as helpers, and the whole as the sustayner; And yet the outward being or causer which brought altogether. But God is abundantly sufficient for himself; of whom alone all other things have their sufficiency. Therefore God is no body. And if God in himself be abundantly sufficient for himself, it follows necessarily, that he needs not any thing from without, And therefore. Section. 5. 5. That no Accident can be in God. 1. FOr every Accident, whether it be of Inherence, or circumstance, comes to the subject beside the being thereof. The accidents of circumstance come to the subject, for the better being thereof; as to be clothed, to have a wife, etc. But all these come from without; And as they are needless to him that hath all sufficiency without; And as they are needless to him that hath all sufficiency in Himself, so are they impossible to belong unto God. The accidents of inherence proceed either form the matter, form, or composition of the subject. In God is neither matter, form or composition, as hath been proved, ᵍ Therefore in God is no accident. 2 Nothing can be in any thing most excellently and perfectly but only the being thereof. Whatsoever is in God is in Him most excellently and perfectly. Therefore whatsoever is in God is only his being; And then no accident. 3. If no addition can be unto God, to make him any thing other than He is; then can no accident be in him: which ever makes the subject somewhat that it was not before. But no addition, taking away, or change can come to Him, who is eternally, infinitely, and actually whatsoever He may be. Therefore no accident can be in God. 4. Every Accident is near unto not being, as having no being but in that subject wherein it is. But the being of God is infinitely distant from not being. And therefore God is no way subject to Accidents. 5. If any thing can come to God as an Accident, it must come to Him, either from Himself, or from another. Not from himself, as having neither matter, form, composition, or bodily being, from which all accidents do proceed. Neither can it suffer any thing from another; for all such accidents as proceed from without, proceed from the possibility, or weakness of the subject unable to resist, as heat is in water. But his being is infinitely perfect and such as cannot suffer: For so should be cease to be happy, and to be God; and therefore nothing can be in him but essentially. 6. And moreover seeing He is the first of all beings, and the only thing being of himself eternally; it is impossible that he should either suffer violence, or have any thing added to him by another, or be moved by another; seeing he is the first cause & mover of all things. If then no accident can be in God, neither from himself, nor yet from without; it is manifest that in him can be no accident at all. And seeing nothing of all these things before spoken matter, form, composition, body or accident can be in God, it follows necessarily. Section. 6. 6. That the Being of God is most simple and pure. 1. Which is further manifest by this. That He is the first of beings, and so must needs be simple. And again, that which is simple, must needs be the first. For that which is not the first of all beings, must needs have dependence on another, and so two things must be therein. First somewhat from the cause whereby it is; Secondly somewhat peculiar to itself, whereby it differs from the cause. But God is the first of all Being's, because he is eternal and one, as was proved, cap. 2. & 8. ʰ Therefore his being is most simple and pure. 2. If nothing can be in God, but only his own essence or being, than purity itself, or simplicity must needs be his being: which being, because it is proved to be infinite, it necessarily follows that his purity is also infinite, beyond which no purity or simplicity can be greater. 3. Whatsoever is infinite and no way limited must needs be most simple or uncompounded and only one. The being of God is infinite; Therefore most simple and pure. 4. God is no compound, as was proved, therefore his being is most simple. And because all our knowledge which we have of all things being, is only by the help of our senses, taking them either directly or further of by comparison, by composition, or by negation; whereby we judge of the properties or accidents which we find in the things; and not by the understanding of the most inward and true being thereof; no not of our own very souls, whereby we live, or that whereby we are most guided, our very imagination; we must confess that this highest and first being of all, being so utterly without all our senses, must needs be as fare beyond all our most finite understanding; Neither that we can assign any name which may equal his being, see Cusan. de Deo abscondito. And that we may ends as we did begin, let us return by the ways we came, and we shall find that all these names and beings, which we have given unto God, yea even all together cannot equal him. For if we call him the beginning of all things, we make him not an absolute Being, but speak with relation to that which is begun. If we say he is infinity eternity, power, wisdom, and the rest of those dignities which we have viewed, they are but so many particular essential attributes to one most perfect being: yet when we have said Most perfect Being, we have not said right. For He by his Infinity and Almightiness is utterly beyond both being & not being, for he hath power over not being to make it to be, & over being to make it not to be: Neither can not being be even very nothing, but by him that commanded it to be nothing. Such therefore is He, Infinite beyond both being, and not being. If we say he is most perfect only, we cannot understanding his perfection to be any thing else than the union of his essential attributes. If by unity though most simple and absolute without respect to number or magnitude, we say he is One; yet we cannot truly say so, but by his truth. And although that which is first must needs be one, and nothing can be more simple than unity: yet seeing we cannot think but that he which is the first of beings, must needs be the best of beings, we are enforced to return from the Centre of his unity into that infinite circle of his goodness, his power, his glory, his wisdom, his truth. Therefore whether in the innermost centre, and first consideration of that most one and absolve simplicity, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. as the Philosopher Plotinus Ennead. 6. l. 8. cap. 11. saith we ought in silence to adore as the Psalmist speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 silence is praise to thee, Psal. 65.2. or whether in the circumference, we dwell in the consideration of those titles which He for our understanding hath been pleased to fit unto himself; because we would as the Areopagîte speaks lib. de Diu. nom. cap. 13. understand and speak something of that unspeakable excellency, let us ever endeavour a further knowledge of him; because we know that the least knowledge that we have of the most excellent being is more worth than the knowledge of all things beside. And although the endeavour be high and hard, yet have we so much the more encouragement by the helps or means of our knowledge; and so much the greater hopes in respect of the reward. The means common to every man are in sum either discursive; or experimental. The discursive are two, and in our power; two are experimental and above it, but yet not hopeless if we endeavour. The first of these discursive ways whereby we endeavour to come to the knowledge of God, is by denying unto Him all those things which are common; and every where meeting our senses; such are all things, that have matter, outward shape, composition, that are bodily; subject to motion, place, time, and other accidents. And hitherto you must bring all those things which are spoken in the holy Scripture by way of Example and for our understanding only, as when God is said to have hands, feet, eyes, jealousy, anger, and such like, wherein we must forsake that which is outward and sensible, and inward in ourselves, because these titles are only to lift up our understanding by sensible and well known things to those that are truly and essential in him; as by his hand, is meant his power; by his feet, his continual presence in every place; by his eyes, his wisdom; by his jealousy and anger, his justice against Sinners, etc. And thus by the help of our senses in things that are, and in things that are not, our understanding is furthered in the knowledge of God; and that especially if in both these ways of discourse, that is, denying things that agree not to God, and affirming those honourable dignities that are due unto him, we use the rule and guidance of the holy Scripture, and the strangth of our best understanding, to approve those things that are excelelnt, and to reprove that which stands not with his truth, as I have already showed in both kinds, as well as I can. The first of those ways that are experimental in the knowledge of God are those inbred thoughts, and apprehensions of Him, whereby every man, will he, nill he, confesses in his heart that there is something greater than himself, whereof he stands in awe and dread; which he cannot choose but acknowledge an avenger of all wickedness and sin. And this the witness of God in every man, his conscience within accusing or excusing him, in the judgement of his own heart. This Plotinus often, & jamblichus De mist. cap. 1. call the touch of the deity, and affirm truly that it is more powerful over the mind than that discursive knowledge of which I spoke before. But because this knowledge is ever with affrighting, and addressed only as the two former, to the last: it beseems every man that would know God truly, as he may be known for his own comfort, to cleanse his own heart with all his diligence, in prayer, in meditation, in reading of the holy Scripture, in denying of himself in all his ungodly and sinful lusts; that he may become a holy and a meet Temple for God to dwell in. And so he may assure himself that God will give him experience of himself; as he hath promised, joh. 14.23. That he will come and make his abode with him. This is that wise merchant who for this precious pearl sells all that he hath, to buy it. This is he that eats of the hidden Manna. joh. 6.50.51. Rev. 2.17. that receives that white stone, and a new name written, which none knows saving he that receiveth it: This is he that in the face of jesus Christ, as in a mirror, beholds the glory of the Lord, so that he is changed into the same Image from Glory to Glory, as by the spirit of the Lord. Notes. (a) GOd is not matter] Anaximenes said the air was God; that he was therefore unmeasureable, but had a beginning, & was always in motion. Diagoras of Apollonia (for he of Melos was the Atheist) consented unto him as concerning the matter. The opinion of Cleanthes I told you before, which one while held God to be matter in this sensible world, in the uppermost air and in the Statres. Parmenides imagined a mighty wide circle which encompassed the world like a Crown or garland (therefore called by him Stephano) to be God. Xenophon, and with him Plato where he speaks in jest, saith the word was God, which we call Mammon, and yields there were more such, but where he speaks in earnest, (as in his Epistles) he speaks of one God the Author of all things, as we do. Aristotle could not tell how to gainsay his master with his own credit, and so followed his judgement. Heraclides of Pontus somewhiles said the Stars were Gods, than heaven, and earth. So Theophrastus, and sometime Zeno was for the Stars, Chrysippus that was accounted most subtle amongst the scholars of Zeno, was most wavering in his opinions; sometime he thought the world was God: sometime the uttermost or burning air: then water: now earth; after this air below; and by and by the Sun, and the Moon, and the Stars, at last all together was but one God, yet men canonised for their virtues must needs be Gods apart; and then much more the virtues for which they were immortal. And thus they that would seem wise, while they cared to know more than the truth of God, became idle in their imaginations, and there foolish heart was full of darkness. The parts which were before separate. 2.1.] (b) All parts are understood apart, as things differing. And therefore although divers forms are brought out of the power of the matter, or propagate with the matter; yet that affords no objection to weaken this argument. But is destinate unto another total. 2.2.] (c) If you look on the question, you shall find it only to be about such forms as these. For it is not said that God is utterly no form. For form is the most simple or pure being which we can conceive; but he is none of those forms, which are allied to matter. The Angels are accounted forms, but separate. But I run not with that opinion. The Ideas are conceived to be forms altogether separate, not destinate unto matter, much less is that most simple form of forms, the original of all forms. God is not the form of any other Being. 2.2.] (d) The opinion of Democritus is contrary to this conclusion, in that he makes man's soul to be God. Straton thought that God was only a certain divine power in Nature: so said Chrysippus otherwhile; and so Cleanthes, where he affirmed that God was the life of the world. His opinion that reason was God, was an error, against this conclusion also, if by reason he meant that reasonable soul, the former of man's body. Heraclides supposed God to change his shape at his pleasure. Zeno said that reason in every thing was God, or that he was that living law, that gave life to everything. Wavering Chrysippus sometime held the life of the world to be God, somewhile he called him destiny. Therefore God is no compound. 3.1.] (e) Among the matiers reckoned up before [note a.] some you see are compounded, and they belong properly to this place, as earth, water, and our air below, of which none are simple elements, but mixed one with another for generation sake, and fitted to the inhabitants that dwell therein; of which none could live in elements that are pure being themselves compounded. Therefore God is not a body. 4.1.] (f) The school of Epicurus taught that God was in shape like a man; and that he was also bodily. For they thought that if he were without a body (as Plato taught) he could neither have sense nor wisdom, and so could no way be partaker of any pleasure, or happiness. But concerning the pleasure which God enjoys, Plato teaches, Epist. ad Dionys. that it is not in outward or bodily things; which hinder the happiness of the mind. The weakness of Epicurus argument is showed by Cotta a follower of Plato, Cic. de Nat. D. l. 1 & the opinion itself confuted by the arguments here brought; especially against the Audean heretics, that were called Anthropomorphites, whoupheld the opinion of the Epicurean Philosophers, because the holy Scripture, teaching men by their senses, speaks of God's powerful right hand, and treading down his enemies; that he was sorry in heart, and specially where it is said, Gen. 1. Let us make man in our own likeness: They here understood the likeness of the body, not of the mind, in holiness and knowledge, which we have lost, must endeavour ourselves to recover, as we are exhorted, Eph. 4.24. Put on the new man which is created according to God, in righteousness and holiness of the truth, and again, Put on the new man which is renewed (in you) unto knowledge, according to the Image of Him that created him. Therefore in God is no accident, 5.1.] Zeno (g) sometime affirmed that the year and the seasons thereof, the spring, the harvest, the months also were God. Chrysippus said, the truth of things was God. And if you account truth an accident, you may refer his opinion hither. You have now heard the difference of opinions among the Philosophers; But how much wiser was Simonides that learned Poet, who being demanded by Hiero king of Siracuse, what God was; He desired a day to think of his answer: being the next day asked again, he desired two days: And thus being often asked, still doubled his time. Being demanded the reason, he answered, that the longer he thought thereon, the more hard and dark the thing seemed unto him. What thanks therefore can we give unto God who by his holy word hath so fully revealed himself unto us, that the holy Angels themselves with wonder desire to pry into those mysteries, which he hath made manifest unto his Church by Christ, 1 Pet. 1.12. 1. Therefore his being is most simple. 6.1.] Against this conclusion, a doubt or two may be raised. 1. being without addition, is affirmable of every thing. But the being of God is not so. For we say the body, or soul of a Man, or an Angel is being, yet not God. Therefore the being of God is not a being may be distinguished from other beings, it will seem not to be a simple, but a compound being. I answer, that the proposition being without addition, is affirmable of every thing, is true of that common predicate or transcendent being only of which I speak, Introd. logic. sect. 3. n. 2. & 3. But the being of God is that one proper and pure being which belongs to him alone, and receives no addition, nor is affirmable of any other thing beside himself. Secondly, I answer, that the conclusion of this syllogism, the being of God is not without additition, being granted, takes not away the former conclusion, that his being is simple and pure; Neither is the consequence rightly gahtered thereon: that if Addition be made, it is not then a simple being. For these additions bring in no such beings, as to make the being of God either compound, or mixed, but only distinguishable from other beings. For to say the being of God is one, is pure, is simple, is incommunicable, are here only negation differences, as one, therefore it cannot belong to any beside himself; Pair, that is, not mixed. Simple, that is, not compounded. Incommunicable, whereof none can be partaker beside himself. Nay, those very positive additions of Goodness, eternity, infinity, power, wisdom, etc. are not additions of new beings, but only essential conditions of the same most simple being distinguished by us in our understanding. For, because our understanding receives nothing but by the senses from the creatures; Therefore when it finds these several perfections in the creature, and acknowledges that no perfection can be in the effect, which is not more eminently and excellently in the cause thereof; it is compelled, as it received these perfections in the creature with differences, so also to refer them unto the Creator. So this difference or plurality of attributes in God, grows, first in regard of the weakness of our understanding; and secondly by that superexcellency of the divine nature, whereby the understanding is so fare exceeded. Therefore although our understanding be no way able to compare all these several perfections of goodness, power, wisdom, etc. together; and then to conceive them as one, but only in one: yet our undertake how ever wand'ring, or unable to conceive them as one infinite being, can no way make any difference or otherness in them, or put any thing to the purity and simplicity thereof; but must acknowledge the more pure the being is, the more powerful; and therefore by one only action of that simplicity, and one manner of working, doth it bring forth most different and manifold effects, both of the object, and in the object or matter whereon it works. 2. Secondly it may be objected, that the simplicity is more where there is no distinction, than where there is. But in the Godhead there is distinction of persons. Therefore it may seem his being is not most simple. I answer. That the distinction is not made in the nature or being of the Godhead, which thing only takes away simplicity; but only in the real relations, in which the being is still one and the same in all. And although the relations be truly and really distinct: yet that real distinction, or distinct reality is but only relative, and not bringing in any other being than is in the Godhead, understood without these relations, but only imports the order or manner of being. 3. Thirdly, it may be objected, that every thing that is, must participate of being that it may be, and of some other thing, that it may be something, or a being in itself, distinct from other beings. So God by his being is; and by his greatness, and power, He is infinite, and almighty. Therefore it may seem, his being is not simple. I say the proposition is true only in things that are by participation. But God is absolutely of himself, not by participation; and that absolute and simple being of His, is of itself essentially infinite, and almighty, and not by participation, as was showed, chap. 8. ante. in the answer, to the first objection. CHAP. X. That God is altogether as infinite in working, as he is in Being. A Most necessary truth, and needing sufficient proof, not only for the clearing of that which hath been spoken; but especially for laying the sure groundwork of that which is to follow concerning the Trinity. Therefore lend me the ear of your understanding that we may go together, in a matter of such weight; And although the word work in our common English, in which I desire to speak, is grown to mean almost only bodily toil; yet you know there is the working of the mind also, and according to the things spoken of, you are bound either in your wit, or honesty, ever to be as gentle as you can in the meaning of words, and to take them according to their greatest fitness. But first (you will say) it ought to appear that God doth work. For as Epicurus thought, He neither troubles himself with any care or business of his own, neither yet is troublous to any other; or minds what they do, or say. For if so: then (as he supposed) He cannot in any wise be happy, that hath so many things to think of. But against this thicke-skin lazy opinion of Epicurus it shall appear, that this working or Action of God is his endless glory. But you must understand that this work whereof I speak, is not meant of that, whereby the dignities of God are manifested without in the creature; but of that which is in himself alone. And that he doth work is most plain. 1. For as an infinite action cannot be without an infinite power, so an infinite resting cannot be but either with an infinite unableness, or want of skill, or infinite unwillingness to work; but an infinite unableness cannot stand with an infinite power, nor want of skill with infinite wisdom, nor unwillingness with infinite will. And it was proved before, that the power, wisdom, and will of God are infinite; therefore he worketh also infinitely: but if the resting be not infinite, but supposed to be slackness only, or by turns, because of weariness; that cannot stand with an infinite power, nor with the simplicity of the divine being: for weariness cannot befall but to such a being only as hath heaviness of parts: but in God is neither heaviness nor parts. And so He works, and that infinitely. 2. God is infinite, and so evermore as great as be may be, and that not in being only, but also in working: for otherwise greaternesse and lesnesse should be in him. And because nothing can be in him, beside His very being: if the infinity of greatness were in his being, and a lesnesse in his working, greaternesse and lesnesse should be his very being; so finite and infinite, perfection and want, good and ill, should be convertible in him: but these things are impossible. Therefore God doth either work infinitely, or else he cannot work at all; but so should he not be worthy to be God, so should not his power be infinite: and if his power be infinite and yet he cannot work at all, then should his power be altogether in vain. But all these things are impossible, therefore God doth work, and that infinitely. 3. The wisdom of God is infinite, as was proved, and by the infinity of his wisdom he doth understand the infinity of his own being; but that cannot be but by an infinite action of understanding: therefore the working of God's wisdom is infinite. And as these reasons against Epicurus, that God doth work and that infinitely; so also these that follow prove the question fully: for if the being of God be one, and that most simple, and that nothing can be in him but essentially, as was proved Chap. 9 § 5. & 6. if he work as is showed, than his working or action must be his very being; which because it is proved to be infinite, it must follow, that his action is also infinite. 4. The working of infinite goodness, wisdom, power, life, truth, etc. in eternity is the most destreable thing that may be, and wherein the greatest glory can consist; which action of God, if by his will He would not; then must be will a ceasing of the action of goodness, wisdom, power, etc. and that in eternity. So shoudl these dignities be infinite invaine, so his will were not answerable to the rest of his dignities, so should he not will the infinity of his own glory, nor being. But all these things are impossible: therefore the working of his dignities are answerable to their being; and therefore infinite. 5. The power of God is infinite, as was proved; by which infinity of power, all the other dignities of God, may both be and work infinitely. And if the goodness and other dignities of God did not work infinitely when by his power they might; there should be an inequality or want in his goodness, which should not be answerable to his power; and the deprivation of the working of an infinite goodness, would enforce an infinite ill, so God should cease to be infinitely good. But all these things are impossible. Therefore the action of God's goodness, is of necessity infinite. 6. The power of God is such, as that he is thereby enabled to work, and if by his infinity, he were not able to work infinitely; then his infinity should be of less force to withstand littleness and not being; than his power is to withstand weakness: so defect and want should be in his infinity, which of all his other dignities is set most against it, and so his power should be infinite only in the possibility of working, but finite in the action. But these things are impossible: therefore the power of God is as infinite in the working as it is in the being. 7. If the working of God were not infinite, he could not know it to be infinite, but finite only and in defect: but ᵃ God cannot know any defect in himself, in whom no defect is possible to be; Therefore his working is infinite. 8. If infinite working and being be not all one in God, then there must of necessity be in him, either a multiplicity of being, or of accidents, or of being and accidents. But all these things have been showed to be impossible: chap 8. & 9 therefore infinite being and working are in God all one. So then his working is infinite. 9 An infinite glory cannot be without the conditions of infinity, and eternity; nor yet without the being of goodness: but neither can it be said to have the being of goodness, if it spread not itself in the action of goodness; neither yet of infinite and eternal goodness, if it work not infinitely and eternally: but the glory of God is infinite, with all the conditions of infinity, eternity and goodness. Therefore it works infinitely and eternally, according to the being of infinite and eternal goodness. 10 The truth of God was proved to be infinite and one: but if in the divine dignities there be a greatness in being and a lesnesse in working; the truth in God must likewise be divers and not one, so neither simple nor infinite. But this is impossible: therefore the working of his dignities is infinite as his being. 11. The infinity of God is such, that ᵇ no abatement, want or lesnesse may be understood or found therein: but littleness or abatement might be found therein, if it were not as great in the action thereof, as in the being: for every abatement or want, whether it be of the being, or of the working, in goodness, power, wisdom, etc. is not only a lessening, but even an utter taking away of the infinity thereof. So that to deny the infinite working of God, is to deny his infinity, and so his being. 12. If all the dignities of God be infinite both in being and working, it will follow that their equality and concord one with another, is also infinite; so that they be essentially one God, and the same convertibly one with another, the respects only different as hath been showed Chap. 9 note (h) ob. 1. But if these dignities be not infinite in working, as they are in being, the disagreement will be infinite: because between no working or a finite working, and a being every way infinite, there is an infinite distance; and to put this distance in God, whose being is most simple and one, would be utterly impossible: therefore God is altogether infinite in being and working. If further proof seem yet needful, you may take hereto an inducement or two. 13. The understanding of man is the image of God in him, and as the understanding will not rest: so is it much more meet to think of an endless wisdom. Nay the very fantasy or thought though bodily, though tied to the five outward wits alone, yet will it not rest: and when it cannot work upon the reason, as in sleep (because reason will see that the fantasy was not deceived in the outward senses) then will it press upon the remembrance, as it appears in dreams. 14. If He which is cause of all working should cease to work, than all things at once should cease also both to work and to be, because ᶜ the first mover ceasing to move, all the ensuing motion must be at a stand. And if his power and the working thereof upon the creature did cease; as the creature by his power was raised from nothing, so would it return to nothing, if by the same it were not continually upheld. Therefore God doth work continually, and as the worker is infinite, ᵈ so is his working infinitely. Notes. (a) GOd cannot know any defect in himself. R. 6.] See the reason of this speech Chap. 6. note. (b) n. 2. & 3. (b) No abatement may be understood therein. R. 10.] You have need to know that this reason, and the like which we make from our own understanding, hath a most sure foundation and ground in the truth of God: for therefore is the light of reason and understanding in man, as a glass or image of the divine wisdom created by him in us john 1.4. Ephes. 4.24. that we thereby might be led unto the knowledge of Him, and so unto that happiness for which we are created: therefore the understanding doth evermore apply itself unto the truth, and makes the will to joy therein, and to hate that which is false, and impossible. For reason in man being the image of Christ the second Adam, is set in the Paradise of God, freely to eat of every tree therein, that is, to consider the whole creature, which yields unto reason infinite truths as fruit whereon to feed, to the praise of him that hath created it: but if she that is given to him for his help, that is, the imagination his Hevah the mother of all living (for by the imagination alone the forms of all things live and are lively presented to reason) if she (I say) deal treacherously with him, and without him entertain speech with the crafty Serpent: then is he by her easily persuaded to taste of the forbidden fruit; to follow her foolish and wicked suggestions, and to let into his understanding falsehood and errors, which cannot stand with the light of the truth, but are only according to the traditions of Arts, falsely so called, and the authorities of men misled by opinions. Concerning authorities See postel. de Nat. Med. pag. 16.17. and log. Cap. 23. n. 8. and note (a) (c) The first Mover ceasing to move. R. 14.] Though this reason show the truth of the conclusion a posteriori, yet is not this argument proper to this place, because the question here is only about the inward actions of God in himself, not that which is outward upon the creature, of which you shall hereafter understand more at large in the 13. Chapter. (d) So is his working infinitely. ib.] Seeing it is firmly agreed unto, both by Divines and Philosophers, that God is altogether unmoveable, not only by those kinds of motion properly so called, See Log. introduct. sect. 4. Append. n. 1. but also improper and metaphorical; as change of the will, anger, desire, or other passions; it may seem that this conclusion of God's infinite action or working is enforced utterly against the truth: because it seems that no working can be without motion. I answer, that motion and operation or working are very different; these are like to motions, but neither are motions, nor yet with motions: for to feel, to see, to understand, to will, or any other action immanent or dwelling in the worker, are actions, operations or workings of the senses, the understanding and will: but yet no motions, but most improperly, and only in likeness: for all working, action, or operation, is of a thing that is in perfection; but motion properly so called, is always with imperfection, and leaves the thing wherein the motion is, in possibility only to a further perfection. And yet the very moving from place to place may be an example of this working, which I have proved in God to be infinite. For if you set a ruler upon a pin, and turn it with violence upon that centre, you shall perceive no part of the surface over which it is turned, which you shall not see covered every where with the ruler, and the swifter it is carried about, the better and more closely doth it cover it: so that if you suppose that motion to be infinite in swiftness, with continuance for a certain time, than every part of the ruler in the continual succession of that time, must of necessity be every where upon the under surface, according to the length of that time, which the ruler doth make from the navel point to the hem or circumference. So that you cannot more rightly call it motion than rest, when every part of the ruler is continually upon every part of the surface under it. And even so this working which I have proved to be in the Godhead, because it is infinite, may most truly according to this example be called rest; because his own action in himself is that wherein above all other he can take most glory and delight; as being in the perfection of goodness, power, wisdom, truth and glory, etc. And thus according to the measure of our weak understanding, having considered what God is in his being, it follows that we inquire also, what He is according to the manner of his being. The Father Almighty. CHAP. XI. That there is a Trinity of Persons in the Unity of the Deity. Section. 1. THat the wisdom of God manifested in this lower creature, and all the possibilities that are therein, shall at last be made known to man, for whose sake and use they were created, I have elsewhere sufficiently proved. But as yet how fare we are from thence, every man doth sufficiently know. For is there any Dyer so overweening in his craft of dying, as that he dare take upon him to know all the possibilities that are in the mixing and setting of colours? nay in the service of that great god of our pampered gurmandizers, I mean the belly, is there any Cook, that will take upon him to be able to make all those very things which are day lie sought out to please the taste? if then in those things wherein our senses are most delighted, wherein we study with greediness how to please ourselves, we must confess our dulness; how much more heavy must we needs be in that whereof neither our senses, nor our reason, nor the highest and best part of our understanding, all Nature helping us herein, can give us any knowledge? Who knows the thoughts of a man, but the spirit of a man that is within him? how much more than is it impossible to know the mysteries of God, but by that relation which he hath made unto us of himself? Therefore the knowledge of that mystery of the holy Trinity in the Unity of the Godhead, is that superexcellency of knowledge, which we have by the holy Scripture only; which truth we are so much the more careful to know, and constantly to uphold: first because it concerns that most excellent and high being, even of God himself; secondly, because the revelation thereof is from God alone, manifested by his word; thirdly, because it is the foundation of our faith and hope: for if Christ our Saviour be not very God, and very man; the being of our Mediator, and the all-sufficiency of his merit is utterly vanished; fourth, it is one of the main and principal differences between our most high Religion taught us by God himself, and the false worship of Idolaters, of the jews, Turks, Arians, and other heretics, which from time to time have turned the truth of God into a lie. fifthly, we follow herein the holy Martyrs and the Fathers in the primitive Church, and those Counsels which have from time to time maintained this truth against all heresies. And although it cannot be denied, but that even among the Heathens, some of their wisest, both Poets and Philosophers knew this mystery by hearsay, as they had received it from the Hebrews; as you may read in Thom. Aquin. in lib. 1. dist. 3. q. 2. and more at large in Struchus de peren. Philos. lib. 1. & 2. and from them in Philip Mornay of the trueness of Christian Religion Chap. 6. yet among the Hebrews themselves (except the Prophets, and schools of the Prophets) this secret was not known or taught, and that, (as it may seem) lest the misunderstanding multitude might fall into the Idolatry of many Gods: therefore is this thing so taught in the holy text of the Old Testament, that the wise only might understand it: for although the Prophets knew well enough that in the days of the king Messiah this mystery should be known even to the Gentiles: for of him it is written in the 40. Psalm vers. 9.10. I will not refrain my lips O Lord, thou knowest, but I have declared thy truth and thy salvation, I have not concealed thy mercy and thy truth from the great Congregation: Yet because they knew they ministered those things of which they spoke, not to themselves, nor to the people of their own times, but for us, unto whom the treasuries of the riches of God in Christ were more fully to be opened; therefore they taught according to the dispensation of the Holy Ghost, who hath so from time to time, opened the fountains of knowledge unto his Church, and hereafter will; as the holy Church shall be able to receive it. This glorious truth then being plainly discovered to us in the New Testament; let us see with what diligence and faithfulness, reason that servant of God doth wait on the authority of his Lord, and how thereby (a) we are summoned to hearken unto this truth: for although reason could never have found it out; yet being taught what the truth of God is herein, it joys to see the necessity of that truth which it is bound to believe. But because I have written somewhat to this Argument already (which that you miss not, I have caused to be printed at the end of this book) I may be somewhat more brief herein. Only the reasons I take up here together; and add such other supplies as seem to be wanting in that treatise. §. 2. The word Father is taken either personally, as it signifies the first Person of the blessed Trinity, with the relation to the Eternal Son; or else it is spoken essentially of all the three Persons in the Godhead, with respect of the creature which is created, sustained, and governed thereby. Of this (through his help) we shall speak hereafter Chap. 13. but first of the first person of the holy Trinity. The Greek Churches by the authority of the Apostle, Heb. 1.3. for the several distinctions of the Persons in the Godhead, hold the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hypostasis, which we from the Latin call a Subsistence, or several substantial being by itself. But the Latin Church turned it Persona, from an old word (Persola) because it means one only being entire of itself: for Solus is of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, whole in itself, and entire with all the parts: but yet is Persona a title of honour given unto men alone: for they define it to be Rationalis naturae individua substantia, that is an individeable substance of a reasonable nature, and from thence it is translated to God and Angels. A Person then of the holy Trinity is an incommunicable subsistence in the Divine nature. These words have their ground in the holy Scripture, to which in this great Article of our faith we must ever have recourse, by reason of the many and strong heresies that have been thereabout. Trinity, Triunitie, or a threefold being in one, hath ground in that Text which is in Matthew 28.19. Go teach all Nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. But certain it is, that in our Baptism, we bind our faith and allegiance unto God alone. So 1. john 5.7. There are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one thing, or one being. By subsistence understand a substantial or essential being, not coming to; or being in the Deity by chance. It answers to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is different from substance, nature, being, or the like terms that signify any common, or universal being: for an Hypostasis means a peculiar being wherein the common nature is wholly and entire, as I said before, and will say until you understand me. For example, the whole nature or being of man is understood in that word Man, and so the Angelical nature in that word Angel; but Peter or Gabriel mean that particular person, in which the common being is whole and entire. I mean so, as that there is nothing essential in the being a man, or Angel, whereof Peter and Gabriel are not partakers essentially; so we understand the difference. The being or essence of the Godhead is one individual, most simply, absolutely, and substantially one; which infinite and undivideable being of the Godhead is yet nevertheless in every Person entire and wholly, so that nothing of the essential being of the Godhead is in one, which is not in the other. And therefore justin the Martyr, and from him Damascen Dialect. Cap. 66. and after them our sound Doctors of all sides agree, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or a subsistence is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that manner of being, propriety, or real relation, which belongs to every one Person in the Holy Trinity. You may here not unfitly note the difference of these words, Being, Substance, and Subsistence. Being is that which is common to all things that are. The word Substance, properly doth not so much import the very inward being, as that respect which it hath to the accidents that are therein. Subsistence, signifies that special manner of being which belongs to substances that are actually being. If you will inquire further, you may see what Thom. Aquin. hath writ hereto in Sent. lib. 1. Dist. 23. qu. 4. or if you will, the Introduct. to log. Sect. 4. Incommunicable, that is, peculiar, proper, or belonging to one alone; so that one cannot be another. The divine Nature is used 2. Pet. 1.4. and here means that being or substance, wherein all the three Persons are essentially one, and the same One God. One (I say) not compounded or made of the three Persons, but One most simple and perfect being, in all the three Persons of the Godhead. Now the name of a Father, is most poperly given unto God the first Person of the Trinity (for of him is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all fatherhood of the families both in heaven and earth Ephes. 3.15.) because that out of the perfection of His own being he brings forth a Person coessential, that is, of the same being with himself, and coeternal, yet distinguished from him by certain incommunicable properties, which is the Son; and that by an eternal, most holy, infinite and spiritual working in himself, according to that life, holiness, wisdom, power, glory, etc. which are in him essentially; and this spiritual or eternal working, is the holy Ghost. And because that this action of the Godhead, in the bringing forth, or eternal generation of the Son, is only in the essential being of the Deity eternally: therefore it is not an action of God proceeding merely from the freedom of His will, as it is said of the creature, Revel. 4.11. That for his will sake only they are and were created. For all such actions are exercised only in things of themselves merely not being; in which God hath power to will; or not to will their being: but because that God doth work according to the perfection of his most excellent being, as Prov. chap. 10. So glorious and powerful an action in himself, cannot be in vain; therefore it is necessary that the product, effect, or object of that action, which is the Son, be every way answerable to that action in the infinity of glory, wisdom, power, etc. Neither yet is this action of God the Father ●●mpel'd or enforced: for than it would not be glorious; but it is with the infinity of his own will also, because it is essential to him, and whatsoever works according to the being thereof (b) works both necessarily, that is, according to the unchangeable nature, and yet most willingly; because it cannot will contrary to the being thereof. But in things wherein there is an absolute freedom of the will, one way or other, there must a choice be possible, which cannot be but between two at least: which not only an infinite will doth utterly exclude; but even that natural will also, whereby every thing works according to the inclination or propriety of the kind. So then neither can God in the infinity of his will, but will that being which is the image of himself, the best of beings, infinite in goodness and in glory: Neither can He but work according to the perfection of his being, for the production of that which He doth will. As all our natural senses inward and outward work willingly, yet necessarily; that is, according to their natural being, upon their proper object. For the Eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear with hearing. Now is it yet further to be remembered, that although there be an infinite and eternal production of the Persons in the deity; yet there is no bringing forth, or multiplication of any new being. For the Godhead being eternal, it is not possible that any new Godhead should be brought forth. Neither yet can any addition be made thereto: because it is infinite. And so you may conclude of all those dignities or perfections of the Godhead, as wisdom, power, glory, goodness, etc. Yet seeing goodness doth ever move that which is good to multiply the image of itself; and power joined therewith, enableth goodness to work; and infinity with them causeth goodness and power both to be, and to work infinitely: therefore it is necessary that in the Godhead there be an eternal multiplication or production, of those true and real distinct relations, which we call Persons. So that although goodness, power, infinity, & all the other glorious dignities which are in God, be one infinite being; one only in the most simple, pure, and perfect agreement or concord of being; yet these relations must be distinct, in such clear difference; that that one cannot possibly be that other from which it is really and truly distinguished, though in essence or being they be all one infinity. ᶜ As in the being of goodness there is an infinite producer, or bringeth forth of goodness, which is the Father; an infinite goodness brought forth, which is the Son: and an infinite production or bringing forth of goodness: which could not be, if either the efficient, or bringer forth of goodness, or the goodness brought forth were not. For where either the agent, or the object is wanting, it is impossible that any action at all should be. And therefore as the Son proceeds from the Father; So the holy Ghost is most rightly said to proceed from the Father, and the Son. And this is the distinction of the persons, according to their original or procession. But because all these are infinite, and that in the infinity of being, and working, there must needs be eternity; therefore there can be no beforenesse nor afterness, nor ceasing either to be, or to work. And therefore is none of these Persons before, or after another, but all three distinct Persons are one infinite, and eternal deity. The Reasons. § 3. 1. If God be infinite in his working, as He is in his being, than he must needs work to bring forth such as himself is, and that both infinitely and eternally, answerable to his being; and this in the Godhead alone, seeing that beside it, nothing can be infinite and eternal. But it is sufficiently proved in the 10. chap. That God is infinite in his working, as he is in his being. Therefore by his infinite working, He brings forth such as Himself is. And by these three terms you see the holy Trinity expressed and proved. 1. God infinite, the Father. 2. That which he worketh, the Son; The infinite working itself, which combineth both together, the Holy Ghost. 2. Neither can power be infinite, nor infinity powerful, if there be not such an agreement between them, that they may together both be and work infinitely. But if they be and work infinitely, it is necessary that there be a production in the Godhead: For otherwise that infinite work should be in vain, and not powerful to produce the like. But that is impossible; therefore there is a production in the Godhead. 3. If there be not a production of Persons in the Godhead (as is before spoken:) then an infinite goodness is not a bringer forth of goodness, and so follows a privation or ceasing in the working of goodness, which brings on, either a disability in the power, or a want in the will, or in the wisdom of the worker: which cannot stand with his infinity of power, will, and wisdom, of whom we speak. Besides, seeing in Him, to be, and to work are all one, (as was showed) he that denies the infinity, and eternity of his working, denies also the infinity and eternity of his being. Wherefore seeing all these things are false, and impossible; it follows of necessity, that there is a production of Persons in the oneness of the Godhead. Or take it thus affirmatively. 4. That goodness is truly a great goodness, which doth bring forth a great good; and by how much more it brings forth a greater good, by so much more it comes nearer to infinity. ᵈ Therefore God in whom infinity and goodness are one being, doth bring forth eternally an infinite good, that is, the Son, betwixt whom and himself results an infinite Communion of goodness, viz. the holy Ghost. If there must needs be a distinction of terms in the actions of the Godhead, than there must needs be a difference of Persons; otherwise the difference of the terms were idle and vain, if the being understood thereby were not answerable. But there must needs be a distinction of terms in the working of the Godhead. For an infinite working (already proved) must needs be from an infinite worker, about an infinite work. Therefore there is a difference of Persons in the unity of the deity. 6. If there were not an infinite and eternal production in the Persons of the Godhead; then the being of a beginning could not clearly and evidently be therein; because though the beginner were; yet the working of the beginner, and the being begun were yet wanting: and so these two coming after should be inferior or less both in continuance, and infinity. And so the first and highest cause should be an infinite beginner without any effect or thing begun by him, which must bring on, that the first and chiefest cause of all, should be infinitely defective, and ceasing to work: and of less force than other causes subordinate; which all work incessantly to the bringing forth of their effects, unless they be hindered by lets more powerful. Therefore there be more Persons than one in the unity of the Godhead. 7. Being and the power of Being; working and the power of working are all one in God, as was showed chap. 8. & 9 n. 6. But God by his infinite and eternal power, can bring forth an infinite and eternal being like Himself, by the infinite and eternal working of his power. Therefore He doth bring forth: or if he can, and will not, that power were in vain; and so his power and will were not equal and infinite. So there should be divers beings in God, finite and infinite. But all these things are impossible. Therefore God doth bring forth an infinite being, his Son, by his infinite working, the holy Ghost. 8. If the inward working of the deity be infinite with all the conditions of infinity; then the understanding of God (for example) must be infinite, both in the act or perfection of itself; and in the object which it doth understand, and in the work or action of the understanding about that object. So that God understanding his own being, must needs behold himself by an infinite action of understanding. But the working of God is infinite, with all the conditions of infinity, as hath been proved, for otherwise there should be a greaternesse in being, and a lessenesse in working; and so the being of God should not be simple and one. Therefore in the unity of the infinite deity, there is an infinite understanding, which we call the Father, an infinite object, or image of that understanding, in the sight of which that infinite understanding is most delighted, because nothing can be more excellent than it; and this is God understood, that glorious Son: and an infinite working of the understanding, and that is the Holy Ghost: which you see cannot be conceived to be; if either the infinite understanding, or the object were supposed not to be; and therefore he is said to proceed from them both. And thus is it in all the other dignities of God; his goodness, his infinity, his eternity, power, will, truth, glory, etc. 9 Now the texts whereby this doctrine is taught, more darkly in the old Testament, lest the true Church, with the Heathen, might have fallen into the opinion of many Gods, are these among many other. Gen. 1. v. 26. Let us make man in our own image. & Gen. 3.22. Behold the man is become as one of us. Gen. 11.7. Let us go down; and let us confound their language, Gen. 11.7. which manner of speech is not borrowed for manners sake, from the custom of Princes and great men; who for modesty, speak not in their own name alone (We) but as having determined with their great men, and counsellors, men like themselves. But God doth not so consult nor determine by advice of his Creature; Neither yet doth that language admit such form of speech; but as the Eastern languages even to this day speak to one particular person in the number of one: as you may read. 2 Sam. 12.7. Thou art the man. and 2 Sam. 18 3. Thou shalt not go forth. Thou art worth ten thousand of us. Esth. 7.3. If I have found favour in thy sight O King. But to return to the holy Trinity. You have a like proof in Numb. 6.24.5.6. where the word jehovah is three times repeated in the blessing and every time with a several accent. So that although his name be one. Zach. 14.9. and his being one. Deut. 6.4. yet in that one being is a Trinity of Persons; which you shall better understand, if you consider the blessings in the new Testament, all taken from hence, as that. 2 Cor. 13.14. & Rev. 1.4.5. etc. So likewise in job. 35.10. Where is God my makers? and Psal. 149. Let Israel rejoice in his makers. Eccles. 12.1. Remember thy Creators. and again, Psal. 11.7. His faces or their faces will view the righteous. In which places though for some reason translated singularly, Maker, Creator, Face, yet according to the preciseness of the Hebrew it is as I have told you. And yet a more evident proof is that in Gen. 20.13. where the word Elohim, God, is joined with a verb of the plural number: And in joshuah. 24.19. The Trinity of Persons in unity of the being is most clear. For with the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elohim is joined an adiective of the plural number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Kadoshim, and a personal of the singular 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hu, as if you would say, God He the holy ones, or as Esay explaineth it. Ch. 6.3. Holy, Holy, Holy art thou O Lord. And again in the same Chapter, ver. 8. whom shall I send? there is the unity of the Godhead; and who shall go for us? there is the Trinity of the Persons. And again in Esay, chap. 48.16. Christ speaketh thus. There am. 1. I. and now the. 2. Lord God. and 3. His Spirit hath sent me. So you read in Psal. 33.6. By the 1. Word of 2. Ichovah, were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the 3. Spirit of his mouth. And in Hag. 2.5.6. From the beginning I was; and now I am with you, saith the 1. Lord of hosts, the 2. word which covenanted with you when you came out of Egypt, my 3. Spirit shall dwell among you. And if you desire more proofs out of the old Testament, you may read Ficinus de Christ. Relig. Cap. 31. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ichovah, that great and fearful name of God, Deut. 28.58. one name of his own being, contains the mystery of the Trinity. For in the forming of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hawah, or hayah, whence the name is derived. je is the sign of that which is to come as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yeheweh, He shall be, or He will be: Ho, of that which is; as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being, or He that is: and with of that which hath been, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He hath been and thus is the word opened. Rev. 1.8. He which was in eternity the fountain and eternal Father of Him which shall be in eternity, by the common band of all continuance, that which is in eternity. And this is He that was, and is, and is to come. And in the new Testament, besides the places cited before in the beginning of the chapter, in Math. 3.16.17. and Luc. 3.21.22. you may hear the witness of the Father concerning the Son, and see the Holy Ghost coming down on Him, in the likeness of a dove. And again, joh. 14. vers. 16.17.1. I will pray the 2. Father, and he will send you another Comforter. even the 3. Spirit of truth, And 2 Cor. 13.13. The grace of our Lord jesus Christ, and the Love of God the Father, and the fellowship of the Holy Ghost be with you all. with many other texts not needful here to be cited; because that when we come to speak of the other Persons of the Trinity, in the Articles following; some of them must be remembered. And if the adversaries testimony be aught worth, you may take hereto the Egyptian oracle of Serapis, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.— First God, and then the Word, and Holy Ghost with them: Of essence one, in one accord. And from hence it seems had Merc. Trism: that which he teaches in Pormand of that Light which is God the Father, the word which is the Son, and that life which is the union of them both. See the other arguments inductive in the Notes. a andb. Notes. (a) BY reason we are summoned to hearken to this truth. [Pref.] Tho. Aqu. in his questions on the master of the sentences. lib. 1. Dist. 2. q. 3. brings a couple of reasons to prove a plurality of Persons in the unity of the Godhead, which in effect are these. 1. with the greatest happiness there must be the greatest pleasure and content. But in the Possession of that which is good, there cannot be pleasure and content without company, seeing the perfection of every good thing stands in the community of the use thereof. But company is not without plurality. The second reason is from the perfection of the divine love: and all love ever wishes well to another. But these reasons prove no more a Trinity than a society of Ten; and sit better for an ordinary, than the high mystery in question. And therefore having looked well upon his reasons, and seeing that they were very poor inductions; he resolves, it is no way necessary to put a distinction of Persons in the Deity for the force of reasons; but only for the justifying of our Faith, and for the authority of the Holy Scriptures. And in the third Disc. qu. 4. whether it were possible for the old Philosophers, which knew not the Scripture, by the knowledge of the creature only to come to the knowledge of the Trinity; he saith, that by the view of the creature they might come to the knowledge of the divine power, wisdom, and goodness, as the cause is manifest by the effect; and conclude that there is one God, even as Saint Paul proves, Rom. 1. and again. Rom. 10.18. out of the 19 Psalm: But that they could not thereby attain the knowledge of the Trinity; because the Creature was an insufficient means, to bring them to the knowledge of that high mystery. So in the 4 book of his Sum Contr. Gentiles. Cap. 1. he determines even so concerning the incarnation, and the consequents thereof. So likewise concerning the resurrection, everlasting life and all our hopes that depend thereon. Again in his Sum of Theology, chap. 33. he concludes that by natural reason it is impossible to know God in the distinction of Persons: and that for these reasons. 1. First it takes away from the worthiness of our Faith. 2. Faith is of things not appearing, and such as exceed reason, as it is said. Heb. 11.1. Thirdly, Infidels laugh at that which is not fully proved: and therefore (saith he) it shall be sufficient to defend, that our faith holds nothing that is impossible. But (Doctor) reason must yield that to be impossible which it cannot make to appear that it is possible. And therefore that our faith be not set at nought by misbelievers, as being of things impossible, you tie us for defence thereof to further proof: which if it be full and sufficient, your third reason is nothing worth. The first reason is less worth in itself: For that is the glory of a Christian faith, and the triumph of it over all false worships, that is so surely founded in the truth of God, that the Gates of hell cannot prevail against it. Therefore to speak clearly to this question, I say, the word natural reason, may either mean that reason whereof a man is capable by that light of understanding which is naturally through the gift of Christ in every man, joh. 1.4.9. the holy Scripture hath opened this light most clearly, and therefore is it called the light of Grace; or else it may mean such reasons, as are gathered from the causes, effects and rules which are manifest only in natural things. Now although the articles of our creed by way of Induction only may be manifest by natural reason thus understood, as S. Augustine de Civit. Dei. lib. 11. cap. 26. in this very question hath made it appear; yet by that first light of understanding, which we call natural reason, because it is in every man according to the possibility of nature, they may be understood and approved by other rules, than such as have their grounds in natural things. For God is not the God of nature only; but much more the God of grace; and mercy; and to the knowledge of these principles and the conclusions gathered thereon, we are led by better guides than Aristotle ever knew; that is, the holy Scripture, and the Spirit of Grace, who leads us to the right meaning thereof. Yet how fare even Natural light hath gone in the discovery of the great Mysteries of Divinity, even of the Trinity itself, you may judge by this of Proclus taken out of Plato, as you may read in Steuchus de perenni phi. lib. 2. c. 16. These two (saith he) unity and Being, consisting in the Trinity; the first begetting, the second begotten; the one perfecting, the other perfected: it must needs be, that there is a certain power, by the which, and with the which that unity gives subsistence and perfection unto that being. For both the procession from that unity to being, and the return from that being unto unity, must be by a middle power between them both. For how can unity be Being, or Being be one, but by that power which is in both? And this Trinity is the excellency of all understanding, unity, power, Being, the one bringing forth, the other brought forth, and power proceeding from unity joined with being. And this is the first Trinity that can be understood, or conceived to be; unity, being, and the power of them both, by which, divinity is the Father of being, & being is of unity. The Father is the father of wisdom; and wisdom the Son of the Father; and between these a most high power hidden, in the one of producing, in the other of being produced, as Plato hath showed it wonderfully. Thus Proclus. The argument of Pythagoras is not of less weight. That which is unchangeable must needs be eternal, and always one. And as all change in every body is by reason of inequality of the parts: so that which is absolutely and ever one, must be ever in equality, so verity and equality must be eternal: and multiplicity and inequality must necessarily be after unity and equality. And as unity is the cause of connexion, or being one, so inequality is of division. And the effect of the first cause must have priority before the effects of the second cause. Therefore connexion also must be before division and change: and if before change, than also eternal. And because there can be but one eternal: therefore unity, equality, and connexion, must be one thing. And this is that threefold unity which Pythagoras taught was to be adored. Pet. Blondus de Trenario. pag. 106.107. And Cusa de Docta ignorantia. lib. 1. cap. 7. Neither is that reason which Cusa Exereroit. lib. 7. pag. 134. brings from Aristotle to be slighted; especially by Thomas, that great Aristotelian. Aristotle saith, that the first cause of all must needs be both efficient, formal, and the end. And three firsts there cannot be; because before all plurality there must needs be unity. Therefore it being one first, it must be a threefold cause; efficient, formal, and final. The efficient cause is neither Formal, nor Final; and the formal is neither final, nor efficient. Therefore they are three distinct causes considered in their several subsistences: but considered in their firstness, they are in being one alone: many such reasons and authorities to this purpose you may read in Struchus Deperenni Phi. lib. 1. & 2. But how much yet more fitly, and more fully, hath the illuminated Raimund, shown both this point and all those other, which Tho. Aqu. hath given over as past all proof? For Raimund taking all those conditions of the divine being, which the holy Scripture gives to God; and without which that being could not be perfect: and supposing and proving them to be infinite with all the conditions of infinity, both in being and working; hath taught the way to show the Trinity of Persons in unity of being, by every one of those conditions, see Art. mag. Part. 9 And though his words seem borrel and rude; as bonificans, bonificabile, & Bonificare, in una bonitatis essentia; Possificans, possificabile, and possificare in the being of power: yet they are full of excellent meaning. The learned, and witty Cusa de visione Dei cap. 17. gives instance in the unity: which is either unity uniting, unity united, or the union, or knot of them both: yet all these in the most simple being of unity. And again in love, which is either in the Person loving, or in the Person loved, or in the knot of the Love between them, all according in the nature of Love; and without any of these, Love cannot be perfect and complete, yet may every one of these be understood apart; inasmuch as a man may love, and not be loved; loved, and not love again. But where that which is Lovely, is also loving, there the bond of love is firmly tied, and love in every part entire: yet is this love but in shadows among us, but perfect in the endless and perfect being of love. 1 joh. 4.8.16. And thus in other conditions of the divine nature have other learned and devout men endeavoured to show their understanding and firm consent unto this high article of the christian Faith: one in the power of God; another in his wisdom, etc. according to the proofs you read before. And therefore, not to go about to overthrow the reasons brought by Thomas; because the authority of so great a Doctor may cut deeper than his reasons, and so cut off, if not the strength of the reasons in the articles following; yet that comfort which the faithful soul might have thereby. I say that all the reasons which are brought to this article, and so for the most part in all the rest, are only of two kinds. First and chiefly from the impossibilities which would follow upon the contradiction of the thing in question: which kind of discourse I have taught (as I can) log. cap. 8. n. 7. and chap. 26. more at large. Secondly, by that kind of demonstration, which I call by conversion of terms, as I shown, log. cap. 18. n. 3. in the syllogistical handling of such arguments, as in effect are all one with them which log. cap. 13. n. 5. I shown to be by rule, in the second kind of equivalence. Now both these kinds of argument prove the question only that it is; that is to say, show only that the proposition is true, and neither prove nor inquire how, or for what superior cause, which in this and in many of the other questions here handled cannot be given. And there is no proposition, how true, how universal, or manifest soever, but it may be proved by these means, both in the affirmative; For in things of the same nature, and being, whatsoever agrees to one, must needs agree to the other; and in the negative, the ground of impossibilities and all negative discourse, whatsoever is denied to the predicate, must also be denied to the subject. Now I think it is no more derogation from the truth to be thus confirmed, than it is, simply to be affirmed, as it is in the article of the Creed. As if I say, there is an eternal being, the cause of all Being's: there is an infinite wisdom the disposer of all: an infinite power that governs all, and thereupon conclude, that there is a God. What dishonour is here offered to God or his truth? are not all these terms, an eternal Being, the cause of all beings? An infinite Wisdom, etc. convertible one with another? and all of them meaning one being, which we call God? have they not all authority in the Holy Scripture? And shall not that which is truly affirmed of one, be as truly affirmed of the other? And so on the otherside by impossibilities. If there be not an eternal being, the beginner and cause of all other beings: then that which is begun must be a beginning to itself. But this is impossible, for so it should be a cause, and yet not be. Therefore there is a God. And if any other kind of argument be brought, either by rule, or induction, or syllogism, yet seeing superior causes are not always here to be found, whereby to make analytical demonstration; therefore the reasons for the most part are contained within this bound only to prove the Article that it is true. Nay, I add yet further, that the Theologian or divine is not tied to the use of natural reasons only for proof of his conclusions. For so you should make divinity nothing else but natural Philosophy, except that the one should be intended to the cause of all being, the other to the effect in nature only; But you know that all truth whereinsoever it is, being founded in the truth of God, reason the searcher thereof must fare exceed the limits of nature or natural causes. Therefore although that conclusion of Tho. Aquin. stand sure, that the philosophers could not come to the knowledge of the Trinity by the view of nature; because nature was an insufficient mean to bring them thereunto; which yet may receive limitation, either in respect of the degree of knowledge, which nature brings of the Creator as himself makes difference, Prooem. in lib. 4. contr. gent. or in respect of the manner of concluding inductive only, yet will it not follow from thence, that the articles of our Faith are utterly beyond all proof of reason. For as divinity is of a fare higher strain than natural Philosophy; so are the proofs and reasons thereof, from greater lights than all nature can show. Who knows not that divinity as concerning a great part of the practice holds all moral Philosophy, whose conclusions though from reason, yet are not the reasons natural, but moral? Have not Grammar, Logic, and all other Arts and Sciences, either instrumental or principal, certain rules, or principles which are true, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is universally, necessarily, and convertibly, or peculiar to that Science, and yet not demonstrable by natural Causes? And to this very purpose Saint Augustine saith, De Civ. Dei. lib. 11. Cap. 24. Diligentia rationis est, non praesumptionis audacia; ut in operibus Dei secreto quodam loquendi' modo, quo nostra exerceatur intentio, intelligatur Trinitas. That is, the Holy Trinity may be understood by us in the works of God, by their secret manner of speech, in which they speak to our understanding. And if this high mystery may bed understood by the creature, as the Father shows in that book, and other Christian writers elsewhere, I doubt not but by those honourable titles which the holy Scripture doth give unto God it may much better be made to appear. And if it were lawful to prove the first and principal Article of our faith by reason, and by reason (I say) without presumption of perfection in knowledge, to prove that God is, as it hath been showed by the warrant of the Apostle, is it not likewise as lawful in the Articles following? And these things may seem the more strange in Thom. Aquin. because in the 11. chap. of his fourth book contra Gentiles, he doth so clearly deliver this point of our belief, both by the authority of the holy Scriptures, and the evidence of reason, yea and that on the same grounds whereon Raymundus doctrine is builded, that he may seem to have lighted his torch at the lamp of Thomas. Take the meaning of his words, as they lie. Seeing that in the Divine nature, He that understands, the action of his understanding, and his intention, or object understood, are all one and the same being; it must needs be, that whatsoever belongs to the perfect being of any of these, be most truly in Him. Now it is essential to the inward word, or intention understood, that it do proceed from him that understands, according to the action of his understanding. And seeing that in God all these three are essentially one, (for in him nothing can be but essentially) it is necessary that every one of these be God, and that the difference which is between them, be not of being, but of relation only, or the manner of being, as the intention is referred to him that conceives it, as to him from whom it is: therefore the Evangelist having said, john 1. The word was God, lest all distinction might seem to be taken away between the Father and the Son, adds immediately, That Word was in the beginning with God. Thus saith Thomas. Oh but (say you) it is a dangerous case to commit matters of faith to reason. I, but there is no danger to commit reason to matiers of faith, that is, to make reason a servant of faith, neither is our reason too good to give attendance on faith, nor faith so proud as to scorn the service of reason: therefore let this jangling and frowardness cease. If I say any thing to your content, accept it; if not, you are not bound to read it: but God hath not given us the knowledge of himself in his word, that as parrots in a cage, which with much ado are taught a few words, and then can say no more; so we should hold ourselves content when we can say the Creed: but that by continual meditation in his word, our knowledge, and so our faith, our love and fear of him, might be increased daily. And this is it which S. Paul saith, 1. Cor. 2.6. We speak wisdom among them that are perfect, and again, 1 Cor. 1.22. The Grecians seek wisdom, and we preach Christ the wisdom of God: for in him are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hid. Now it is apparent that he means not the wisdom of this world, but that which is in things concerning God, whereby we may be able to give a reason of the hope that is in us. 1. Pet. 3.15. And this is that perfection whereto we ought to strive, whereof the Catechism, doctrine of repentance, of faith, etc. is but only the foundation, as it is manifest. Heb. 6.1.2. For although the least degree of faith, even as a grain of mustard seed, be sufficient to remove the high mountains of rebellious and wicked thoughts that rise up against the obedience of the truth, and consequently to save the soul, through his mediation and mercy that doth not break the bruised reed, nor quench the smoking flax: yet seeing every man, as he hath received, aught as a faithful Steward of the manifold graces of God to profit thereby; our hearts by faith being purged from dead works, we ought to add virtue to our faith, and to this virtue knowledge, and by these means to make our calling and election sure, 2. Pet. 1.5.10. And for this cause S. Paul prays for the Colossians, that having through faith embraced the truth, they might be filled with knowledge of the will of God, in all wisdom and spiritual understanding. And this is our progress from faith to faith, Rom. 1.17. that is from that pure faith, whereby we first receive the kingdom of God as little children, to that faith, which is strengthened through knowledge: for knowledge doth neither take away faith, nor yet abate any thing of the worthiness thereof; but rather increaseth it more and more, while it is thereby rooted and grounded more firmly in him, in whom at first we did believe, as the learned Father, August. de Trinit. Cap. 14. said, Fides in nobis per scientiam gignitur, nutritur, defenditur, & roboratur. (b) Works both necessarily, yet willingly. Pref.] This Will they call concomitant, because it ever follows the very being of that wherein the will is. The will of God whereby he gives being to the creature, is causal; for by it alone the creature is, without any other working of God, but only the pleasure or motion of his own will, power, and goodness, etc. (c) In the being of goodness there is an infinite producer. Pref.] While I was preparing materials for this building, I read the title of a Mart book, Abstrusa abstrusorum abstrusissima, primaria Symboli Apostolici abstrusa. Though I had been more than once guled with such titles, Arcana arcanorum arcanissima arcana, and the like, wherein these writers sweat more, than for any thing in the book beside: yet being interpreted, a pious and very profound meditation of the deep mysteries of the Apostles Creed, I supposed that such bombast would never be quilted into a treatise upon the grounds of our Religion; so that I verily hoped that all my labour was at an end. At last having got the book, I found that it was nothing in good earnest, but a declamation only of a certain springal for exercise sake, into which, as into a common place book he had gathered the sentences of learned men, wherein they justly bewail the misery of mankind, in his inability to find out the truth of things, whereupon he would utterly shut out the use of reason in matiers of faith. The consequence is not good, as I have showed Praef. n. 6. His special spleen is against Keckerman and his gregales, that is, them of his ging, I think he means the Calvinists, of whom he names only Zanchius, and them of whom he received this learning, Melancthon, and his own very Siren and Phoenix Scaliger; out of whose shreds he hath botched up his declamation, such as it is, yet in this case he could not spare him, that would manifest his understanding of the Trinity according to Raymunds' principles. The wicked conclusion that will follow thereon, Murshel the declamer goes about to show out of Andreas Osiander; as you shall hear anon, Chap. 12. note (a). But what have Scaliger or Raymund done herein, which the ancient Fathers had not done before, save that they made the doctrine clear by foreign comparisons? one, of the Sun, the beam, and the brightness or shine thereof; another by the body, the brightness and heat of the fire; another of the mind, wherein is the word or understanding thereof, and the will: another saith, the mind thinking, the word representing that thought, and the liking or approving thereof: yet another will represent the Trinity by memory, understanding and will: another by the root, the stem, and the branch. Augustine shows it by a man's own experience of himself; who both is, and knows himself to be, and loves both his being and knowledge thereof. de Civit. Dei. lib 11. cap. 26. But his reason in the 24. Chap. from Gen. 1. is of more force, which is this; He that said, Fiat, must needs be the Father of that Word: but you must understand that word in Himself, or that eternal word or decree, of which our Lord speaks, john 5.19. And because the creature was made thereby, it must follow, that it was made by his word. And where it is further said, that all that was made was exceeding good; if by goodness you understand the Holy Ghost, the whole Trinity is manifested unto us in his works: another explains it by the fountain and the stream; to which Cusa adds the sea, and if these (saith he) be supposed infinite, then must all of necessity be one water. And the same Cusa lib. de Filiatione Dei. expresses it by the knowledge in the mind of the master; the word signifying that knowledge, and the spirit, life or meaning of the word proceeding from the knowledge, and the word, whereby the scholars are instructed. And have not many of these comparisons ground in the holy Scripture, joh. 1.1. Heb. 1.3. Esay 11.1. and else where? But Raymund, not by foreign comparisons, but by the essential properties of the infinite being, in the real relations of every term in unity of that one being, hath with more clearness expressed to man's weak understanding, the unspeakable mystery of the Trinity in the unity of one undivideable nature; as I have showed in the Preface, in the being of goodness, and Reason 3. of infinity or greatness, and Reason 8. of understanding. And although I would not err from company; yet seeing I have such company both of the ancient and later writers, which by the adversary himself are confessed to be of incomparable learning, and Divine honesty; I need not be ashamed of my company. But notwithstanding all this invective against reason in things of faith; see the young man by and by in the Sorbon. The power of God, saith he, in the creation of the world, wrought upon that which was not to cause it to be. Therefore God is Almighty: for this must be the conclusion, howsoever he would turn it to shut out the use of reason: but that will not follow upon the premises. So in the case of man's redemption, of the incarnation of God, of the resurrection, he is over the head and ears in Aristotle, and history; but all to prove these things in reason impossible. And it is yielded, that all these things are utterly beyond the course of nature, but yet upon better and higher principles than Aristotle knew, they will all appear possible, and necessary, and then his reasons shall be answered. To this order the declamer would bring their consubstantiation, and that which doth necessarily follow thereon, the bodily presence of Christ in every place: And here he doth fare surpass himself, and by two bodies in one place, will prove it possible that one body may be in all places; because God hath absolute power of all the nature of being. But if this reason be good and sufficient, then is he injurious and unconstant to himself, so to Hebarre the use of reason in the questions of faith: and if that bodily presence of Christ in every place for which he labours so, had any ground in the Scripture, if it brought any hope or comfort to the conscience; if the Primitive Church, or the Counsels, or the ancient Fathers had ever taught it; I think that by this time reason would have found how to make it more probable than it is: but because it is no Article of our Creed, it is not fit to trouble you any further hereabout. (d) Therefore God doth bring forth eternally his Son. Re. 4.] The truth of this conclusion hath been diversely gainsaid. For some have utterly denied the Trinity of Persons in the Unity of the Godhead; others with this truth have blended their own devices. The heretics which held that as there was but one being in the Deity, so there was but one Person called by divers names, of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; were of divers families, according to the names of the special maintainers of this opinion; but best known by the name of Sabellius, one of the most subtle defenders thereof, about the year 260. which heresy after a long sleep was again awaked about the year 1110 by one Porretanus, who affirmed that the Persons in the Godhead differ not, save only in the apprehensions of our mind, not by any real or true distinction. The jews likewise among other reasons do therefore disclaim the Christian Religion; because they suppose that by the Trinity of Persons, is taught a plurality of Gods, contrary to that which is Deut. 6.4. The Lord our God is one Lord. The Turks also deny the Trinity of Persons, and hold it therefore impossible for God to have a Son, because he never had a wife. Now of those that held a Trinity, Simon that witch, of whom you read, Acts 8. when the gall of his bitterness had levened him thorowour, gave out of himself, that he in the person of the Father gave the Law to Moses in the days of Tiberius, suffered (in show) under the Person of the Son, and afterward came down on the Apostles in fiery tongues. August. de Haeres. Cap. 1. Hierarcha also, from the words of the Nicen Creed, that Christ was light of light, affirmed, that the three Persons were as three lights, of which one took light of another, and so he made the beings of the persons separate and apart, whereas the Fathers in that Council meant not any division, or being apart, but that the Son is of the substance of the Father, without any lessening or abatement of the Father's being, as one light takes light of another without any loss of light in the former. The Metangismonites, so called from their opinion taken from vessels, that they might avoid the opinion of the separate being of the Persons, held that they were as vessels contained one within another, falsely supposing with the Anthropomorphites, or Man-shapers, that God was bodily, and so contained within a certain space, and again misunderstanding that text of Scripture john 14.11. where our Lord saith, I am in the Father; so that in the Divine nature they supposed some thing greater, which was the Father, and something less, which was the Son, and a third thing within them both, which was the Holy Ghost. But against that bodily being which they conceived, you have reasons sufficient in the 9 Chapter. The text of S. john makes the matter more plain: for as it is impossible that two bodies should be each one within another (except by way of commixation) so it quite overthrows that foolish opinion, because it is thrice there added, that the Father is in the Son; so that of necessity there can be but one being of them both. For if the being of God be not most simple and pure, as was showed before Chap. 9 And if every being answers to the Original, than the essence of the Son must be most pure as the Father is; so that if each of the Persons be in the other, there can be no difference but only in the manner of being only, See August. de Civit. Dei lib. 11. Cap. 10. Then concerning that third falsehood, which they supposed of a greater and lesser being, it cannot possibly stand with the nature of infinity, whether it be understood of extension, or of virtue only. The Triformians likewise to cross the error of Sabellius, affirmed three Persons, and that the whole and entire being of the Godhead was in all the three taken together; yet not in every person wholly, but so, as one part of it was in the Father, another part in the Son, and a third part in the Holy Ghost. By which falsehood it would follow, that the Godhead were in itself a divideable being and so a compound, contrary to that which is concluded Chap. 9 The Tritheites are yet more mad than the former, that it may appear how boundless error is. They make the being of God not one and the same, as the Triformians did; but affirm that there is a threefold nature, and distinguish the Persons in their essence, or absolute being, in place also, and other differences of particular substances, as Peter, James, and john, and so make three Gods, different and apart each from other. The Tetratheites would seem more subtle than all that had been before them: for they beside the three Persons of the Godhead, supposed a fourth being, which did communicate itself to all the three, by which communication of divine nature, every one of those three became God. By which sottish opinion it must follow, that none of those three Persons could be either infinite, or eternal, if they receive their being from another; if they be God by grace only and communication of another being than their own; neither can their being be simple and one, having one being of themselves, and another imparted unto them. But if that being which they call that fourth common being, be that one most simple, pure, and eternal being, which we confess to be God; than it must follow necessarily, that in that being there be three Persons, (as hath been declared in the Chapter before) in every one of which, the whole Godhead is all in all, and all in every one, not by communication from another; nor by participation only; but by the whole and proper possession of every Person essentially; so that the Godhead is no other being than that which is in the three persons; nor the three Persons any other thing than that manner of being which is in the Godhead eternally: but they prove it thus; Where are one, and three truly and really different, there must needs be four: But in the Deity there is one being, and three Persons really distinguished, therefore four several beings. I answer. Where is one, and three absolute beings, there must needs be four: but in the Godhead there is one absolute being, and three manners of being, which are the Persons; but the manner of being doth not make a number, different from the being: as Isaac is one absolute being in himself; yet Jsaac the son of Abraham is not a second, nor Isaac the father of jacob a third. So the folly of this opinion, and the weakness of their reasons appearing; it remains for the better understanding of this most high mystery, first that answer be given to those arguments which Sabellius brought for his opinion; secondly, that the reasons which are brought of the Tritheits be discussed. But that no error or mistaking may grow concerning the faith in the truth of the thing, it will be necessary to declare what manner of distinction or difference that is, which is to be put between the Persons of the Godhead: for if they be truly and really distinguished, it may seem that their essence or being cannot be one, and this was the error of the Tritheites. But if they be not really distinguished, then there must be but one Person in the Godhead, called by divers names, as Sabellius said, or distinguished by our conceits alone, according to the opinion of Porretanus. The difference of things is either in their absolute and essential being, and that either general, special, or individual; as in things living, or lifeless; men and beasts, Peter and john: or else it is according to their proprieties, difference of respects, or manner of being; as in Isaac, his manly subsistence of his own soul and body is his absolute individual essence; yet in respect of the proprieties of his being, his sonship toward Abraham, his fatherhood toward jacob, his lordship toward Rebecca, his mastership towards Eleazar, etc. are several things, and really distinguished by that reality or being which is relative, or with peculiar resects to another. The third manner of difference is by circumstantial accidents only; as one part of the white wall may seem more shining and white than another, because more light doth fall upon it. The fourth sort of differences are only such, as we in our understanding are compelled to make. The Persons of the Godhead are not distinguished one from another in their essence, or absolute being, as the Tritheits affirmed: for this is only one in all substantially: but yet in the manner of this being they are distinct truly and really; contrary to that of Sabellius and Porretanus. For whether you respect that relation, which is among the Persons one to another, the being of the Father, as a Father is with those properties or respects which make a real being of a Father, distinct from the Son, and so from that eternal action of his generation, whereby the Son is produced or brought forth; or whether you respect the Godhead absolutely: yet seeing in that pure and simple being nothing can be but essentially; it cannot be more essential thereunto to be one in the unity of being, than it is to be a Trinity in the difference of proprieties; that is, that God be what he is in his essence or absolute being, and as he is in his manner of being. And as in the absolute being of the Godhead, we say according to the necessity of the truth, that there is wisdom, truth, goodness, etc. not as different essences, but as so many perfections, conditions, or dignities of that one infinite being; so likewise in the manner of his being, we are compelled both by the sacred authority of the holy text, and the enforcement of reason, (as hath been showed) to confess a Trinity of Persons, of which every one is truly and really distinguished from another; so that there cannot possibly be a community or interchange of their personal being. And this is that real distinction that I mean, to wit, that clear differences of the properties in the several Persons, whereby they are not different essences; nor different Gods; yet different beings, or different things, that is, divers terms of relation with the subsistences meant thereby, and in some sort opposed. See log. Cap. 9 n. 14. For as in the uttermost simplicity of their Divine being which is only one; one not accidentally, or numerally, not of quantity, but substantially one; it is not possible to suppose any difference of being, either real, or intellectual: so in the manner, and relative properties of that being, those differences must needs be found, whereby those terms of relation which we call Persons, are so truly and really distinguished, as that they cannot possibly be taken to be one, either in their subsistences, or in our understanding. So then the Persons of the deity differ from the essence of the Deity, not really, as one being differs from another being; which the Tetratheites affirmed: but as the order or manner of being differs from that manner of being wherein it hath the foundation. But the Persons differ one from another, as the relative properties of a being may differ among themselves, that is, not in their essence the foundation of the properties, for so they are but one God; but yet truly and really, according to those differences whereby the properties or relations are distinguished: yet shall not these differences bring in any new or different essence into the simplicity of the Divine being, because they are only relative, and such as follow the manner of being. But because it is essential unto the Divine being, to have in itself all the perfection of being, therefore hath God not only a most pure, simple and absolute being, whereby he is that which he is; but also the properties of an absolute and simple being, whereby he works that which he works infinitely and eternally. Therefore that fear of the jews, that the Christian Religion by the Trinity of Persons brings in a plurality of Gods, is only from their own error, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God, nor his eternal working. But you ask what this manner of being or properties are, which add nothing to the simplicity of the Divine being, and yet are therein essentially? Have I told you all this while, and understand you not? The properties of the Divine being are of two sorts, the first absolute, the other relative. Whatsoever you add to the simplicity of being, must needs be a condition or property thereof; As if you say of the being of God, that it is most simple or pure, that is, One, Infinite, Eternal, Almighty, Glorious, Ever-working, etc. here purity, unity, infinity, etc. are the properties or conditions of that being, which we call God, which although they seem into us differing in their several respects; yet they add no other being beside that one most absolute being of God; but only express to us the properties, conditions, or dignities thereof, without which that being could not be perfect. The relative properties are such as proceed from the eternity of his activity, life, or working: for the uttermost perfection of every thing is manifested by the actions thereof. And because in him being and working are essentially one: therefore whatsoever doth necessarily follow, either his being, or his working, must also be in him essentially; and therefore are these relations which we call persons, in the Godhead essentially, whose differences notwithstanding depend immediately upon the working of the Divine Being. S. Augustine takes up this difference of properties gravely and wittily, thus. The being of God is said to be simple, and so is, because he is that which he hath, except that relation which every Person hath to another: For the Father hath the Son, yet is not the Son; and the Son hath his Father, yet is not that Father; but yet every Person in respect of himself is that which he hath, as life, glory, goodness, etc. This therefore is the simplicity that he hath, and that which he hath is not different, that the quality is not one thing and the substance another; the civet. Dei lib. 11. Cap. 10. we shall understand it better by instance in some of the Divine dignities. All the dignities of God are infinite in all the possibilities of infinity, both of being and working; for otherwise the dignity were not infinity, and he were not worthy to be God, if any thing might be more excellent than he. The glory therefore of God being infinite in working; He by that infinite working of his glory, doth glorify himself infinitely. So God infinitely glorifying is God the Father, God infinitely glorified is God that Son, and that infinite action of glorification is God the Holy Ghost. As when the understanding of a man or Angel doth view or understand itself; then is it in itself, not only by the essence of itself essentially; but also apprehended and understood by itself, according to the action of the understanding: so the mind understanding, is one term really distinct from the mind understood, which is the image, word or expression of the mind understanding; which mind doth also differ from the action of itself, whereby it doth understand itself. So God the Father understanding himself, is in himself God understood, the image, word, or expression of God understanding. This is that eternal Son infinitely and eternally brought forth: thus was the Word eternally with God, and that Word was God, and God was that Word. John 1. For as the actions of God do not cease; for then God should cease to be God, if he were not every way infinite: So do they not proceed de potentia in actum, that is to take a beginning from whence to raise themselves into perfection; for than they were not infinite a part ante, and so not eternal. But because God is wisdom or understanding essentially: therefore is it essential unto him to understand himself eternally. And this is that most glorious Son, God eternised, God understood, God glorified, willed, good, infinite, powerful, etc. by the infinite action of eternity, wisdom, glory, will, goodness, infinity and power: which infinite action is God the Holy Ghost. Now if this infinite working and being of God be one essentially, as hath been proved, Chap. 8. it must of necessity follow, first that all the Persons of the Godhead are coeternal, secondly, that as concerning their absolute essence, there is no difference or inequality among them, inasmuch as every Person is by his own being God eternally, as it is said of the Son, Philip. 2.6. That being in the form or essence of the Godhead, he thought it no robbery to be equal with God. For seeing the essence of the Godhead is one, and that which is one cannot possibly beget itself; therefore neither the Son is from the Father, and the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son, concerning their Godhead: but the Son is of the Father, as concerning his personal subsistence, and so the Holy Ghost is from the Father and the Son, inasmuch as the Son is not understood eternised or glorified; but by the action of that being which is actually understanding, eternal, and glorious: neither can there be any action of understanding, eternising, and glorifying, where there is not both the person understanding, eternising, and glorifying; and there person understood, eternised, and glorified. Then this generation of the Son being only by the eternal action of the Deity, it may appear how beastly and sensual that Religion of Mahomet is, which cannot think of any other generation than that which is between a male and his female. Oh scorn and contempt even of honest thoughts! yet thus these swine plot to themselves their happiness in the life to come, in feasting and sporting, and fleshly pleasure with beautiful women. See Went (a) Bud. pag. 157. Woe unto that covering of God, but his end is at hand, and his destruction lingereth not: But the answer to this argument, See Chap. 34. § 5. n. 8. Concerning the person of the Son more particularly you may read hereafter in the 24. Chapter, and of the Holy Ghost in the 33. It remains here only to answer to those objections which may be brought against this faith of the Holy Trinity. 1. And first it may be said by the adversaries of this truth, that the defenders thereof do not agree among themselves: for Thom. Aquinas in Senten. lib. 1. dist. 2. q. 2. brings this as an objection. That the persons are distinguished by their properties, or manner of being only, therefore not really. In answer to which he saith, That every term of relation inasmuch as it is such, must needs be distinguished from that whereto it is referred, seeing they are opposed by a relative opposition; and therefore are really differing: For things are either absolute, as the essences or simple beings of things in themselves; or relative, as the Father and the Son, which differ also really; so that although they are not different essences, yet are they more or different things. Res. understand, according to the uttermost differences which may be in that manner of being, which is founded immediately in the Divine essence, or which is all one, in the working thereof. Again Keckerman, System. Theolog. Cap. 4. to that objection of the Antitrinitarians; that if there be unity of essence, and difference of persons, a subject and a relation, a substance and an accident; then in the Godhead there should be composition; which because it is not possible to be; therefore there are no such different relations; answers, and brings in the consent of Zanchius, that relation is not any thing of real being; that it is not any accident because it is not being, but imports only the manner, order or respect of being. If this be true, where is then that real difference, as Thomas speaks? But these things are nothing different, if well examined. The purpose of one, and of the other, and of all right meaning Doctors is utterly to deny against the Tritheits all plurality or diversity of essences or absolute beings. And as Keckerman for avoiding of any accidental being in the distinction of the persons, saith; that relation is not a thing of being, but only imports the order, manner, or respect of beings one toward another; so Thomas to meerfully with that heresy of Sabellius and Perretanus, that the distinction of the Persons was only in names, or our understanding, holds the Persons to differ really, and to be different things eternally without and utterly beyond our understanding, yet conceive him so, as that these real differences are only personal, and in the order or manner of their being, as I have showed before. But it may be that you are not yet satisfied for the seeming difference between these Doctors: for if this relation which they make between the Persons of the Deity, be neither substance nor accident, nor at all any thing of very being (as Keckerman supposes) but only a manner of being, which (for aught that I can conceive) being nothing of being, must be but a mere conceit of ours, the opinion of Sabellius must stand for truth; and so on the other side, if these relations be the very beings or things subsisting; nay, if the Divine being be the very relation of the Fatherhood and Sonship, as Thomas affirms both, contra Gent. lib. 4. c. 14. then if the Fatherhood differ from the Sonship, and that really (as being in Divine essence, the difference must be most real) and so the Sonship from the Fatherhood; and both of them from the procession of the Holy Ghost; it seems that the Divine being must differ really from itself, and so there can be but one being of all the Persons, as Arrius affirmed. By relation you may understand either that logical notion which is between the terms relative & correlative, and so the say of Kecker. are justifiable, or else you may mean thereby the things spoken of, with that mutual respect which they have each to other, and so you must understand the doctrine of S. Thomas. For your further satisfaction remembes what I told you Introduct. in log. Sect. 4. n. 11. That those relations which I can necessary, commonly called secundum esse, are such words as signify, first, that mutual respect which they have to their correlatives; and then those beings whereon they depend fundamentally. As the name Father, first hath reference to a child; next, it imports the subsistence, or person, as of Abraham or jesse; so double, first understands single; less greater; next quantities. Therefore though I think it not fitly said, that the fatherhood is the divine essence, or that the essence is in the Fatherhood, as Thomas speaks; for essence imports the simple and absolute being, and fatherhood that reference which is to another: yet these relations shall not be so merely the manner of being, but that they may make a real difference from their correlatives, not only in regard of that substratum, or thing meant in their second signification, which is really differing from the thing opposed; as a Father, from a Son, jesse from David; but also in respect of that being whereon these relations are founded immediately: as in Abrabam that lively or natural strength whereby he is enabled to beget his like; in Isaac that lively humanity which was begotten. As unity the transcendent is convertible with being, both which in quantities are the ground of evenness, or equality; in qualities, of likeness. And therefore Keckerman to shun a plurality of being, doth unnecessarily avoid that real difference, which it is necessary to put in the Persons of the Trinity, wherein there are more or divers subsistent beings, if you respect the Persons, or relations: but one thing alone, if you regard the essence. For the realty in the difference of the relations, can no way enforce a plurality in their absolute beings, but only an incommunicable propriety in the things that are different. For although in natures created, some attributes be essential, which are in the thing most perfectly: Some accidental, as learning, justice, and such other which are not perfect in us: some again are but only relative, which of all other most imperfectly belong unto us, as not necessary to our being, but sometime depend on things without; as a mastership on his servants, a fatherhood on his children; and even those relations which are nearest, do presuppose not only the being of the subject, but also such accidents in the subject, from whence the Relation doth arise; as the right hand, and left hand from the position of the members, yet in the superexcellency of the divine being, whereto no perfection can be wanting, which is possible to be either in the being, or manner of being; in the working, or manner of working; it is necessary that all things be supereminently, according to the most perfect manner of being, that is essentially. And therefore these relations, which are in the Godhead, are not so called properly, as being utterly in the simplicity of that being which is utterly in dependent: yet because he hath reveiled himself unto us by the name of the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, one being: in the consideration of which we come nearest to that relation which is properly so called in the creature: we are compelled for help of our own understanding, which we find so dazzled at that infinite light, to hid our Eyes, and by little and little, as by degrees, to take a glimpse thereof, and so to speak according to that light which we discern. And as in the degrees of light, first we see the dawning, than the shine or clear light; after the Beams, and lastly the body of the Sun: So contrariwise in the knowledge of God from that fountain of Light. His being which is reflected in all the creatures, we view the beams, or immediate perfections thereof. His goodness, eternity, wisdom, and glory: and these show themselves first in their inward working; and afterward at an infinite distance in the creature, outwardly. In their in ward working, because they are infinite, we must acknowledge an infinite agent, an infinite object, an infinite action; or the terms or limits of all action, from whence, whereto, & the middle term between these two, which we call Persons. And so though our guide his word, be that Light which shines in the darkness; yet we must confess that he dwells in the Light, whereto none can approach, which to us is all one with that darkness which he hath made his pavilion. And as in the Being which we conceive absolute, we put different perfections of wisdom, of power, of goodness, etc. which nevertheless we must confess to be one perfection; though they be truly distinguished between themselves: So in the different relations, which we call Persons, though we know and confess them to be really different; yet must we acknowledge the subsistences one in their absolute being. And although the understanding in the consideration of created beings, wonders how all these things can be in that uttermost simplicity and unity of Being, and that after one most imple manner of Being, essentially; yet when it remembers that that being is therefore most perfect, because it is most simple, and that no degree of perfection can be wanting to that which is most perfect, it dispoiles itself of all those rules which it doth verify in created things; and because it is not able by one simple apprehension in itself, either to conceive, much less to express that perfection which is in the simplicity of the divine being; it is content with those expressions which it is able to make thereof; so that the truth and majesty of the thing be not hurt thereby. Therefore whether s. Thomas deliver it thus, or Zanchius thus; So long as we know they mean no other thing than that which the holy Scripture hath taught us, we ought not to receive with the left hand, that which they deliver with the right. 2. Now for the opinion of Sabellius, it is said, That if every one of the Persons, be the divine Being, then shall they all be but one Person. But every Person in the Deity is the whole divine Being: or if the Son, and the Holy Ghost be not the whole divine being, then can they not be God, as Arrius affirmed. Answer, Although nothing of the Divine being be without or beside the Persons, but that every Person is perfectly God, yet the manner of being cannot be the absolute Being of a thing, so the assumption is false. And although every Person, in respect of his absolute Being, be very God, yet is it not said, that any Person according to his personal properties is the whole divine being, no more than the Sonship of Isaac is his humanity, so the consequence for Arrius will not hold. 3. What two things soever agree in a third, must needs agree between themselves. The Father and the Son agree in the unity of essence: therefore they are one between themselves. Answer. The argument is fallations from specialty, as I shown log. chap. 22. n. 2. For the rule holds only in equality of quantities, except you restrain it to that wherein the agreement is: so the Father and the Son agree in the unity of their essence, but differ in their personal properties. 4. The essence of God is most simply and substantially one, and therefore first not differing from itself. Secondly, incommunicable to three. Answer. First the difference is not between itself, and itself: but in the properties which are essentially in itself, as the individual being of Isaac differs not from itself, but his Fatherhood toward jacob, and his Sonship toward Abraham, are as really different, that is as divers properties, as Fatherhood, and Sonship can be. Secondly, The three Persons are not several essences, but all one essence incommunicable to any other, but they are divers relations in that one absolute being. 5. A Person in the deity is either finite, or infinite: if finite, he cannot be God: if infinite, then if there be three Persons, there must also be three infinites; or if these three infinites be but one infinite, then is there but one infinite Person, called by divers names. Answer. Infinity in the Deity is the condition of the absolute being, not of the propriety, or manner of being; as to be reasonable is in Isaac, the property or condition, not of his Fatherhood, nor of his Sonship, but of his humanity only. 6. If there be more Persons than one, in the one only absolute being of the Godhead; than it is necessary that there be something in them whereby they must be distinguished, and so every Person must be compounded; or if to avoid composition, you say that this distinction is only in relation, which brings not any new being, but only respect to another; yet relation cannot be without some absolute being whereon it is grounded. As in a servant there is a being besides that reference which he hath to his master. Nay if this absolute being be the individual and most simple essence of the Deity; yet that cannot be the foundation of divers relations, because of the uttermost unity and simplicity thereof. And if these relations have any other foundation, it is not possible to avoid composition: therefore there is not any plurality or difference of Persons. Answer. You were told before; That whatsoever is in God, is in Him essentially, that it is not more essential to Him to be one God, then to be three in the differences of Persons, because perfection both of being, and manner of being are in him according to his most simple being. For the divers perfections of the creature came thereto by the manifold forms therein over and above the essential forms, and must of force be Accidents. But the superexcellency of the simplicity of the divine being, being the cause of all perfection therein, suffers neither composition nor accident, as hath been showed, chap. 9 therefore as in the divine being, neither goodness, wisdom, nor power, add any thing of new being, so in the working, the divers terms of agent, action, object, or any other words whereby we expressed the difference of relations, or Persons, do not add any thing to the simplicity either of being, or working, though they be therein essentially. No nor yet are they properly said to be founded therein as any other things different therefrom; though we in our weak understanding can neither conceive, nor express them but as different terms of relation properly so called. Neither yet shall it follow from hence that the persons are not really and truly distinguished, for the very being of the Father as he is a Father, is in this, He doth eternally bring forth his Son. And likewise the Being of the Son, that he is brought forth of the Father, by the infinite and eternal action of the Father, in himself; but rather, because this production is infinite and eternal (as was showed) therefore the Persons also as concerning their personal proprieties, must be different eternally, though in their absolute and individual being they be one essentially; so that as in relations properly so called, there is the substance, the attribute, and the relation which follows thereon: so likewise here is first the absolute Being of the Deity; then the working thereof; and lastly the terms of that action, or the relations ensuing, which we call Persons; yet with this difference, that in the relations of the creature, the attribute and the relation succeeding, are both accounted accidents: But here in the deity all things are essentially, so that although the simple or absolute Being of the deity be not the foundation of divers relations, yet the action thereof must needs admit these different terms which we call relations or persons, and that without composition, either to make distinction of the persons, or to avoid confusion in them. 7. That relation whereby the Persons are distinguished, either is something of very being, or else it is in the understanding only. If it be in our understanding only, then can it not make any personal distinction: if it be any thing of very being, yet can it not be that absolute Being common to all; and if it be anything different therefrom, then must something be in the Persons beside their absolute essence; which because it is impossible, it follows, that there is no distinction of Persons. Answer. This argument is in effect all one with the former; And you ought to have remembered, that it hath of ten been said, that the distinction of the persons is real; and therefore not in our understanding only. The Persons taken together in their absolute essence admit to distinction, but are all essenrially one God. And so every person by himself in his essence is likewise God. But the persons understood apart according to the propriety of their personal beings, are really distinguished, and that real distinction is their Personality, and that personality is their real distinction; and that relation whereby they are distinguished, is nothing different from any of these; nor yet the propriety of their personal being is any other thing than that relation. Therefore though the persons are not distinguished by or in that absolute being wherein they are all one; yet is it most falsely brought in thereby, that any thing shall be in them beside their essence, whereby they are distinguished. For the distinction, or difference of the persons arises from the action only, or working of the Absolute Being, which yet is essentially in the absolute Being, and differs not therefrom, no more than heat in the fire doth differ essentially from the fire; or reason, feeling, and growth in a man, doth differ essentially from the soul of man. 8. Every relative depends necessarily upon the correlative. But nothing which is depending upon another, can be truly God. Therefore either the Persons differ not by relations only; or none of the persons can be God; or else there is no relation, and so no distinction of the persons at all. Answer. It is a fallacious and froward kind of arguing, to press the propriety of speech or use of words to darken the truth of things, see log. cap. 21. n. 5. It hath been said, 1. that the being of God is supereminently above all being, above all created understanding to conceive. 2. That relation in created things doth not only presuppose a subject, but also some quantity, quality, action, or other affection in the subject whereon that relation doth depend. 3. That those relations in the persons of the deity are nothing else but the very personal proprieties, and that the word Relation (as many other beside) is taken into use in this argument only, to help the expressing of our understanding, though indeed properly it be not in the divine being, yet can we not conceive but that there is an order in the procession of the persons (as I have said elsewhere) yet not such as shall bring in any dependence, no not in the personal proprieties, because the action or eternal working whence the personal differences do proceed, is essentially in the Godhead; or if dependence must needs be yielded unto, yet seeing it can be nothing but only the order of procession in the persons of the Godhead, it brings in no such inconvenience, as that thereupon it should follow, that either the Son, or the Holy Ghost were not God. So the foundation of the doubt being but a hill of sand, the whole building proves but a trifle. And these are the principal reasons brought for the Sabellian heresy. The authorities of the Holy Scripture which they falsely allege hereto, are such as prove the absolute unity of the divine Being, as you have heard before in the end of the eighth Chapter: which Texts as they do most strongly confirm the eternal truth of the absolute being of one God: so do they nothing gain say the Trinity of the Persons, which other Texts of the Scripture reach, as you have partly heard, and shall hear further hereafter, when we come to speak in particular of the Persons of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. So it remains now, only to answer that which is brought for the opinion of the Tritheites, which poor fancy though it may vanish at the fight of the Reasons which have been brought for the simple and one Being of God in the eight Chapter: yet because it would justify itself by this doctrine of the Trinity; you shall see what the strength of their Reason is. 9 That which is begotten and that which is not begotten, must needs be very different. The persons of the Trinity are begotten, as the Son; and not begotten, as the Father, and the Holy Ghost. Therefore if every person be God, they are different Gods. Answer. The things, which in no respect are different, must be the same; and there can be no difference put between things, which brings not in a denial on the one side, and an affirmation on the other. And this opposition is between all things howsoever differing. So between the Persons of the Deity there must be a relative opposition. As the Father, ergo, not the Son: the Son, ergo, not the Father, etc. because there is a relative distinction; but this doth nothing at all enforce a plurality of Gods, or a difference of absolute Being's, but of the Persons only. And if you desire to see other arguments like these, read Thomas Aquinas. count. Gent. lib. 4. Cap. 10. and their Answers. cap. 14. see also the note (a) on the 24. chap. following, sect. 9 and note (a) on the 33. chap. But the answers to all objections will be easy, if you remember what hath been said, and suffer not yourself to be carried away with show of reasons taken from natural things; which though they be most true in the creature, which had a beginning; yet can they no way bound or bind the infinite and eternal truth of Him that is Lord and Creator of nature, as I have remembered you elsewhere. Remember also to consider in Christ, his essence, which in all the Persons is coeternal and one: and His Person begotten eternally of the Father. And in this Person distinguish His nature's divine, and humane, from his offices: wherein remember. 1. that His sending and obedience abate nothing from His equality with the Father, concerning the unity of their essence. 2. that these names which import His office, are spoken of Him in respect of both His natures. CHAP. XII. That in the Glorious Deity there be Three Persons, and no moe. YOu miss here a great deal of learning and wit, which other men have showed in the mystery of unity, and the number of the Three. But because the reasons that might be made from thence, would be but only inductive; and I desire to stand with you on the lower and plain ground; let us leave those high Speculations to them that please to read them among the Cabalists, in Brixianus his comment. Symbol. and elsewhere, and see what other reasons can be brought for the question in hand. 1. Nothing can possibly be in the Deity but according to the uttermost perfection of Being: that is essentially, and necessarily. Therefore if it be not necessary to put more Persons than Three in the Godhead, then is it not possible. But it is not necessary to put more persons in the divine Being: either Father Son or holy Ghost. For so the Fatherhood, Sonship, and procession of the Holy Ghost should not be perfect in these. And if in these Persons there should not be perfect Production; than it might follow, that there were a disability in the producer; and so the first principle of all should be imperfect, unable and weak. So nothing besides it, nothing after it could be perfect. But all these things are impossible. Or if the other Person, or Persons to be put in the Godhead, should be neither Fathers, because they did not produce; nor Sons, because they were not produced; nor yet Holy Ghosts, as not proceeding: then should they be most idle, and defective in the first principle of all Being; and therefore not necessary, and therefore not possible. 2. The same number must be to the Persons of the deity, which is to the terms or perfections of the divine dignities, for otherwise the perfections of the dignities, and the Persons of the Deity could not be consubstantial and the same, as hath been showed. But the perfections of the dignities are three essentially. For in that which is essentially wisdom or understanding (as we have proved that God is, c. 8.) the action of understanding is an essential means between that which doth understand, and that which is understood, and these three terms are one understanding, and one understanding hath these three essentially. Therefore in God there is unity of essence, and that substantial: and likewise a Trinity of Persons and yet substantial, that the terms may differ infinitely from accident, confusion, & contrariety. But if the Trinity be in the Deity substantially; it is impossible there should be moe, or fewer Persons therein than three. 3. If in the Godhead there be but one infinite Agent, whose Action is likewise one infinite Action like himself, than it must needs be, that the object of this action be also infinite and one. But it hath been proved, that, God this agent of whom I speak, is only one chap. 8. and that his action is infinite and one, chap. 10. For if it were not infinite, it could not be one, nor in Him One, if not infinite: Neither yet can the action be infinite if the object be finite; nor one, if the objects be many. And beyond these it is impossible to assign any limit or term necessary to action; nor yet can action be without any of these, as you may understand by this ensuing induction. Therefore in the Deity, the Persons are three only and no moe. 4. The power and propriety of all inferior causes depends only on the highest and first cause of all. And all effects are the true images of their causes. And no action can be perfect but in the number of three. For the perfection of every action is in the Agent, the object, and the action thereabout, and these are only three. So the terms of motion, from whence, whereto, and the middle term between them are only three. ᵃ Therefore the divine Persons are three and no moe. 5. The whole being of a beginning must needs be most perfectly in that which is the first and chief beginning of all beginnings: so as that it cannot receive a Beginning from another, nor yet be a beginning to itself; so can it not be worthy the name of a beginning, if it be not a beginning to another Being coessential, and like itself. But in the perfect being of a beginning taken actively and passively, there must be three terms and no moe; that is a Beginner, a Being begun, and an action of Beginning. Therefore there be three Persons in the Deity and no moe. And this is that which is said, Eph. 4.6. There is one God and Father of all, and joh. 1.18. The only Begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father hath declared Him unto us. And again, Eph. 4.4. There is one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, etc. And yet more clearly, 1 joh. 5.7. There are three which bear Record in Heaven, the Father, the word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one. Notes. (a) Therefore the Divine Persons are three and no moe. Reason. 4.] Against this conclusion it is urged, out of Andr. Osiander by Murschell the declamer of whom I spoke before cap. 1. note. c. That if the Father by the view and understanding of Himself doth bring forth a Person like Himself; then the Son also, and Holy Ghost by view of Themselves, shall bring forth several Persons like themselves: and so there shall be a multiplication of Persons infinity: or if these two Persons do not bring forth Persons like themselves; it must needs follow, either that they are destitute of the power of understanding; or that the understanding of the Father is more noble and powerful than theirs. But this is impossible. For so the consubstantiality of the Persons should be taken away. And this objection in their opinion is like those great Stones wherewith joshua shut up the five Kings in the Cave. But I say, rather like that feal of the jews on the tomb of Christ, whereby they thought to have shut up the Lord of life among the dead. But thus is He wounded in the house of his friends. For you may not think that hereby they prepare to justify the Tritheites or any other Heretics, but only to set reason against reason, and to show how inconvenient the use of reason is in matiers of Faith. But before I go any further, I would ask a question or two of these opposers. Is not the Son begotten of the Father? you dare not deny it; It is the word of the Scripture, 1 joh. 5.1. Is He not consubstantial with the Father? you dare not deny it. For the Father, and He are one, joh. 10.30. If then Goodness, Infinity, eternity, almightiness, wisdom, etc. be the very being of God, as hath been proved; is it not necessary that these excellencies be active in that divine generation? for how otherwise can He be the Image of his Father? Heb. 1. And if so, wherein have Raimund, Melancthon, Scaliger, Keckerman, or other learned men offended, that they should be so set at nought by a Phrase-gatherer? But I smell the Fox; they can sophisticate authority of Scripture, of Fathers, of Counsels, for their Consubstantiation, the main point of their private opinion: But by no means can they tell how to make it stand with reason, & therefore that their consubstantiation might be a matter of Faith, would they so fain make a divorce between faith & reason. If this were not the very cause, so great a Clerk as Osiander, seeing his reason was contrary to his faith, if he could not have answered it, should have studied thereunto, lest it might turn the unstable from the Faith. But what if wilfully he would not know? had he read nothing of Tho. Aquinas? This Thomas proposes this same doubt, and answers it in his first book on the Master of Sent. Dist. 7. q. 3. etc. 4. where he makes the objection thus. All the power which is in the Father, is also in the Son: therefore also the power of begetting. To which he answers, that the word Power, doth signify either the simple essence of power, and so it is in all the Persons one and the same: or the order thereof to some determinate Act; and so the same power is in the Father, and the Son; but in the Father to beget, and not to be begotten: in the Son to be begotten, and not to beget, and this is the real distinction of their Persons. So that the objection is only from that fallacy of the Accident, see log. chap. 21. n. 3. To this he brings the reasons of Anselme. The least inconveience is not possible to be in the Godhead, but if the Son could beget another Son, and He again another Son, etc. the process might be infinite. But this is impossible. Therefore the Son cannot beget, no more than He can cease to be a Son, and to be begotten. Again, He that cannot be the Father, cannot beget. But the Son cannot be the Father; for so all difference and propriety of the Persons should be taken away. Therefore the Son begets not: nor yet the Father begets any other Son. john. 1.14, 18. For as nothing of the Fatherhood can be out of the Father, so nothing of the Sonship can be out of the Son, for so the production of the Son should not be perfect: neither is the dignity of their essence anything abated hereby: for that in every Person is only one: but in the Father, it is called Fatherhood; in the Son it is called Sonship; and in the Holy Ghost it is called Procession. And again, in his Sum. Theol. part. 1. cap. 42. he proves there can be but one Father, one Son, and one Holy Ghost, for such reasons as you may read there and judge of their force. Moreover in the 4. book count. Gent. cap. 13. he proposes this very objection almost in so many words, and answers it thus. The Son of God is also God, yet not another God; distering only in this, that He proceeds from the Father. And if he be not any other God; then also must there be one Power, one understanding of them both. So that the Son differs from the Father, only in this, that he proceeds from Him; and this is the propriety of the Father, that the Word proceeds from Him; and of the Son, that he proceeds from the Father. Neither is this any weakness in the Son, that he begets not another Son, because both the Father, and the Son, are as the same Deny; so the same power: one of begetting, the other of being begotten, which difference is only in the relations. And again in the 26. chap. of the same book he answers. That he that makes this objection ought to have considered; that the Son of God is God; not as begetting; but only as being begotten. For the essence being one, the difference between them must be only by that relation which is in their original, or procession. Relation (I say) not that which is founded in quality; for so there would be unlikeness: nor that which is in quantity; for so there would be inequality in their being; but that which is in action only, action (I mean) not transient, wherein the Agent hath a prerogative of power, on an outward subject, to cause passion therein; but immanent only; wherein that which is produced, is coessential and coequal with the producer: So that the difference is only in the order of procession only. But I suppose such a learned Master as Osiander, whose petits dare so boldly censure, and set at nought whom they please, could not be ignorant what so great a Doctor as Thomas, had so often answered. It may be he held the answers insufficient; yet he should have showed the weakness thereof. He held it not worth his pains: a careless answer. But let us once more be bold to look on this mighty Goliath a little nearer, and try what cunning he hath, at his weapon. If the Father by the understanding of himself doth bring forth a Person like himself, than the Son also, and Holy Ghost by understanding themselves shall bring forth persons like themselves: for otherwise they cannot be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or consubstantial. I deny the consequence, and why? because the reason thereof binds me to deny it: for if the Persons be consubstantial, that is, of one and the same most simple being; it is necessary, first that the whole being be in every Person: for if the being be divideable (as Hierarcha and the Triformians thought) then can it not be most simply one. Secondly, that that one most simple being, be likewise no other thing than the three Persons: for if that infinite being, might by the manifold actions of the understanding be imparted by every one of those Persons, to multiply more Persons, than should they not be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Arius granted, that is, not of one and the same, but only of like being, as Peter, james and john, of which every one hath the common ability of kind to propagate his like. But thus the being in the three Persons could not be individual and one, but the Father communicates his whole being to the Son, so that there remains no difference of being, but of principal, original, or begetting only. Moreover the consequence cannot follow but upon this most false supposition, that there be divers intellections or several workings of the Divine understanding in every Person: whereas the understanding of God, being his most simple being, and that most individually one, the action likewise of his understanding must be but one most simple act of understanding, infinitely and eternally: for as he cannot cease to be; so can he not cease to understand at one action infinitely and eternally whatsoever is understandable in himself or his creature: so that the Persons cannot have several acts of understanding, as accidents or proprieties, nor yet can they be any other thing than the several terms properties or subsistences in that one infinite understanding, as our Lord teacheth us John 5.19. The Son can do nothing of himself, save what he seethe the Father do: for whatsoever things he doth, the same things also doth the Son like wise. Thirdly, this consequence doth not only utterly take away the distinction of persons (as was showed) but would also thrust into the Divine understanding that which is utterly false and utterly impossible, & that contrary to the evidence of the Holy text: for our Lord saith, john 10.15. As the Father knoweth me, so know I the Father. But it is certain that the Father knoweth not any thing but as it is: therefore not the Son, but as the Son; neither doth the Son know the Father, but as the Father; nor yet himself, but as the Son: therefore it being impossible for the Persons to understand themselves otherwise than they are; it is not possible for the Son or the Holy Ghost by understanding themselves, to become the Father, and so to bring out other Persons, as this lewd consequence would enforce. But the ground of this mistaking (which I tell you of for avoiding of the like cavils) is this, that they consider not the superexcellency of the Divine being; but measure it by the short and scanty rules whereby they measure the creature. It is true, in things here below, that according to those natural causes whereby every thing is brought forth; so may it likewise bring forth the like: because that strength or power is given thereto, for the propagation and preservation of kind in the like, which it cannot uphold in itself; by reason of corruption, neither is the generation of natural things but with imperfection; and their multiplication by decision of natural things but with imperfection; and their multiplication by decision of the seed into divers parts. Neither doth any father communicate his whole being to that which is begotten by him, neither can the species or common nature (so fare forth as it is multiplicable even by one alone) be saved whole and entire any one individual. But nothing of all this is in the most glorious spiritual and divine generation: for that power of generation is not received, but essential; so that which is begotten, is eternal and incorruptible. The generation also is in the uttermost perfection, because the whole infinite being is communicate thereby: but that not for any abasement in the principle, but because of the infinite perfection thereof. Neither is matter for multiplication, either possible, or needful here; because all the fullness of Fatherhood, Sonship, and procession are herein perfectly, substantially, infinitely, and eternally; because the procession is not such as tends to any thing without: for so that which proceedeth should not be coequal to the principle from whence it doth proceed. But this procession is in the Divine being only, in every Person according to his peculiar subsistence, answerable whereto, no generation can be found in all the creatures. 2. Another objection there is to the like purpose out of Heb. 1.3. where it is said of the second Person, that he sustaineth all things by the Word of his power. So that if he being the Word of his Father, have also a Word whereby he sustaineth all things, which therefore is another Word, and not the things that are sustained thereby: it may seem that there is a multiplication of Persons, and that the former objection is not fully answered. I have said, Log. Chap. 29. n. 5. That the appointment of all natural causes to the bringing forth of their effects, is the rule or law of Nature. Now this law is that necessity, fate, or destiny which is ordained by his eternal decree that made Nature, and all things therein, and blessed all the living creature with power to bring forth according to kind, as it appears Gen. 1. And this is that Word of which S. Paul speaks, No other divine Person, but that Word whereby he melteth the ice, and Snow, Psal. 147.18. that ordinance which the creature cannot pass, Psal. 148.6. Of which you may read every where in the Holy text, and especially in that admirable book of natural and Divine Philosophy, the book of job, in comparison of which all Aristotle's naturals are not worth the while. For seeing all natural causes have their strength from him, hath not he bound nature within those limits, beyond which he gave it no further power to work? And within which he is truly said to work by his word, or by his power, in the strength of which alone, Nature herself doth work. Maker of Heaven and Earth. CHAP. XIII. That the World is not Eternal. Section. I. THe purity, or uttermost simplicity of the Divine being, is the fountain from whence all the perfections which are therein, do flow: for neither can any thing be living, powerful, wise, continual, glorious, etc. except it be: neither can any thing be such infinitely, if it have not an infinite being: but an infinite of being cannot be but with the uttermost simplicity of being. For whatsoever is put to being, takes away the simplicity thereof, and must needs be a limitation thereto, and so take away the infinity also. The manifold perfections therefore in the Divine being, are not additions of other beings to make composition therein, or to take away the simplicity thereof, seeing they all signify one and the same being; but because the most simple being must needs be the first of beings, as being altogether in act or perfection, and no way in possibility of being: for than were it not a most simple being, if it were both in act of being that which it is, and in possibility of being that which it is not: therefore must all other beings depend hereon; nay be herein: because all things are virtually contained in their principles. And this is that eternity of the creature which it had in the infinite wisdom and power of God before it was, Gen. 2.5. For seeing that in God is infinite perfection, and that nothing can be wanting to that which is perfect; neither yet can any thing be perfect but in him: therefore the first and highest being of all things must be in his perfection. But because absolute perfection must needs be with the uttermost simplicity, without otherness or change: therefore must all things in God be one, and he though one alone, yet virtually all things. But because all things were in him eternally one; that they might in time be different in themselves, (for otherwise they could never at all, either have been, or have been different) It is necessary to grant, that in that one absolute being which the creature had in God, there must be first a possibility for it to be in itself: for as things utterly impossible can never be; so can there be no possibility of being but by him. Secondly, a possibility for the things being to be different among themselves, and that not only in their several kinds, but also in their particular existences; and this for the manifestation of that manifold wisdom of the Maker. And from hence thirdly succeeds that actual being, which things that are being have, by that Holy pleasure or will, by which they are, and continue in their several beings: which Will must needs be partaker both of the infinite power, and infinite wisdom; that it might effect that which was possible, and foreseen. And thus is there in the Unity of the creature, a Trinity also in possibility, in difference, and actual being; that we should never forget to adore the eternal Trinity in the Unity. But the question of the world's eternity, is only about this last manner of actual being: for it is not denied that it is eternal in respect of that being which it had in God, as the cause; or in itself, as possible to be: because that while it was not being, it had not any power to resist that Almightiness, which called it out of not being into being; though to speak more properly, that eternity which it had in pure possibility, was not in itself, because it was not: and seeing that which any thing hath of itself is first therein, and more proper thereto than that which it hath of another: therefore the world of itself having not being, it could not possible be eternal, but only in his eternal purpose which had appointed it unto this being. The World therefore in God, the principle, is not begun, but eternal, and one: but whatsoever is severed from this Principle, can neither be one, nor yet eternal, but comes into the reckoning of otherness and change, and so of necessity must be subject to time, wherein alone all change is wrought. §2. 1. But here it will be asked, whether God who before the creation of the world rested eternally in his own glory and happiness, suffered not some alteration in this, that he wrought without himself that which he had not wrought before, and how he can be said both to work and to rest, Gen. 2.2 and yet to be without all shadow of change jam. 1.17. 2. Then how He infinite in goodness and truth, and ever one in himself, subjected the creature to wretchedness, continual corruption and change. 3. Thirdly, seeing that to an infinite and eternal power all things are always possible; why the world was not brought forth many ages heretofore; that seeing it must be subject to vanity, it might before this have been freed from corruption, and brought to that liberty whereto it doth year, Rom. 8.22. 1. To the first I answer; that, although the creature doth of necessity suppose a Creator, without which it could not be, yet on God's part there was no necessity to enforce him to create; but he created only according to the pleasure of his own will, as it is confessed Revel. 4.11. For nothing was able to impose necessity, but only that which was superior in dignity and power, which the superexcellency of the Divine being suffers not; neither can the freedom of an infinite will, such as the will of God is, be guided either by chance, by destiny, or by necessity. But because he is infinite in goodness, he envied not to any thing the being thereof, but out of not being brought it into being, by his Word our Lord jesus Christ. Athanasius de Incarnate. Verbi. But in this creation he suffered no alteration, who had eternally wiled the creature to be in the time appointed, and in the time appointed brought it out, only by the motion of his will: for his will, his wisdom, & his power being infinite and one being, no other motion, labour or alteration needed, but only to will that the creature should then be created, when he had from all eternity willed that it should be created. So than it was in him both to create, that it might appear that he had no necessity of the creature, who was absolutely perfect without it, and yet at his pleasure to create; lest that which was not, might seem to be exempted from his power: and again, that the creature might be blessed in his goodness, and yet he himself without all shadow of change. As the mind of a man, which hath plotted a convenient house, and given or described the model to the builder; suffers no alteration by the house being builded. Therefore after the commandment of water, the first matter of all things to be: the labour of the Creator mentioned in the six days, was only the appointment of secondary causes, to work in their times, to those ends which he had determined, for the bringing forth of their several effects: for as the first agent moves all secondary agents; so it is necessary that all their ends be ordered to the ends of their first mover. So then the six Evenings of the being of things, first potentially in their immediate or next causes; and in the fieri, or way to perfection, and the Mornings of their actual and perfect being, are the times * See Esay 66.8. ages or days wherein they were brought forth by their natural causes, all moving in the power of the first cause, unto their perfection appointed by his eternal decree. And this ordering of causes, and giving strength thereto, was his first work: as his continual blessing and upholding the creature by his word, is his continual work wherein he takes delight. Heb. 1.3. & Psal. 104.31. But his rest in the seventh day, was his ceasing to bring forth new creatures; which day is therefore said not to have any evening, because his rest, delight, or glory is eternal: and is therefore commanded to be sanctified by us with a Memento, because it is a pledge unto us, that after the six ages of this world's travel and weariness in vain, we shall at last be made partakers of his rest. Compare herewith Gen. 1. & 2. to ver. 4. Esay 46.10. and 2. Pet. 3.8. But this is beside my purpose, and therefore I leave it. 2. To the second question of that ill which is in the creature, though I have answered sufficiently note (a) on Chap. 6. yet I say further, that contraries are best known one by another: light by darkness; health by sickness. And therefore, that we may not only desire, but also better know and enjoy our future happiness; it is fit that we should taste the momentary wretchedness and miseries of this life; yea drink at last the gar-ans of death itself, that we may truly enjoy the happiness of everlasting life. O death! how bitter is the remembrance of thee to a man that hath rest with his possessions? But how acceptable is thy doom to him that is vexed in all things? Eccles. 41.1. And questionless, if the elect Angels never had any experience of sorrow; neither did at any time sin (for he found no steadfastness in his servants, and laid folly upon his Angels. job. 4.18. And in his beloved Son alone is he well pleased. Matth. 3.17.) Then do they wonderfully by our afflictions enjoy their own happiness while they daily behold our manifold miseries, and yet know us to be heirs of equal glory, Luke 20.36. for therefore are the sons of David daily scourged with the rods of men, corrected every morning, and die at last, that they may be like unto their Lord, & be made conformable unto his death: for if the Prince of our salvation was consecrated in afflictions; how should we hope for any portion in his glory; if we should not with joy be partakers of his sufferings? For therefore by his own example did he teach us obedience, because in obedience only we must walk the way to everlasting life. A second reason is, that we may be humbled before him when we consider whereto we are come of ourselves, that is, into misery, but not out; and consequently that we may be thankful for that abundant grace, by which we are delivered, when our sufferings shall be recompensed with an exceeding weight of glory. 3. The third doubt concerning the time of the world's creation hath heretofore so troubled some men's brains, that they thought there had been infinite worlds, yet so, that after every ten thousand years all things return again to the same state wherein they had been before: for whether through the weakness or strength of the imagination, in some fore-catchings of the shadows of things to come, (for it may be argued both ways) a man oftentimes persuades himself, that he hath been in the same place, with the same persons, seen or done the same things, heard or spoken the same words before; upon which ground it seems this Pythagorean fancy was builded. But to the doubt I answer: That it would have been as great, if the world had been made ten thousand times the whole age of the world before and no greater, if it should have been made as much after the present age: for as if you suppose an infinite space; wheresoever you shall set a prick or point therein, it must needs be in the midst thereof: so time, how long soever, yet compared to eternity, can be no more then as an indivisible centre therein. And therefore S. Paul takes up this question Act. 17.26. That God hath assigned the seasons which were ordained before, and he that puts not all things in his power, to do both what he will, and as he will, and when he will, denies him to be God. Now let us see the reasons for the Christian faith, that ᵇ the world is not eternal or everlasting, but made by Almighty God, as the Article affirms. § 3. By the world you can understand no other thing, than this frame of the whole being of things (beside the Godhead) whether heavenly or earthly, understanding, bodily, or mixed; ethereal, or elemental; with all the causes, and effects, proprieties, actions, or other actions that belong to every one of them. But the word Eternal signifies diversly. For our purpose, either it may mean an age or state of long continuance, as the land of Canaan was promised to Abraham and his seed for an eternal or everlasting possession Gen. 17.8. which eternity must be limited, either to that age of the world before Christ, or at the farthest to the uttermost age and time of this world, after the desolation determined shall be fulfilled, and they brought to their own land again. And this must needs be the uttermost eternity of that promise concerning the letter, as of the everlasting Covenant of Circumcision. Another taking of eternity may be in that being which hath a beginning and no ending, as our hope is of the state of the soul, and everlasting or eternal life after the resurrection. So the promise of the everlasting possession of Canaan, was a type and Promise that heaven should be our eternal inheritance; whereof we have already assurance, yea delivery, and seizure, in that the Canaanite the devil is driven out from thence by jesus our unconquered Captain Apoc. 12.7, 8. etc. A third and chief meaning of eternity, is that which hath neither beginning nor ending. And so we say that God only is eternal. In the first signification the world is eternal in that state wherein it is, and hath continued from the creation, which we hold, and so shall continue unto the dissolution, which we hope for. In the second signification also it may be said to be eternal, as concerning the most excellent and noble parts thereof; as the Angels and men restored from corruption, and in them the second Ideas or forms of all the creatures. But the last degree of eternity is utterly denied to the actual being of the world, and that for these reasons following. 1. Whatsoever is eternal, must also be infinite, both in the being, and the manner of being, because there could be nothing before it, by which it might receive any kind of limit or bounds, any defect or lesnesse of being. But ᶜ the world is not infinite in the being thereof: for it is concluded already Chap. 3. that God is infinite, and of infinites there can be but one. Chap. 8. cons. 2. And in the manner of being it cannot be infinite: for in all things brought forth, there is either quantity, contrary to infinity or time, contrary to eternity; there is defect, or failing, by reason of corruption and death: there is abatement, or lesning; because that in every kind, one particular is not so excellent as another in understanding, memory, strength, beauty, continuance, or one virtue or other. Therefore the world is not eternal. 2. If the world be eternal, than eternity must either be the whole essence and convertible with the essence of the world; or else it must agree thereto as the essential form, or as a property, or as a common accident. Eternity is not the essence of the world, for so should it belong to every part thereof essentially: for every part is partaker of the essence of the whole. But this is most false in all experience; neither is it the essential form thereof: for even from thence would it follow, that the world were not eternal, inasmuch as having matter and form, it must needs presuppose an efficient cause, who both created the parts, and disposed the matter: for the form, it cannot be a property thereto: for all properties proceed from the composition or joining together of the matter and form. But composition takes away eternity for the reason aforesaid, neither is it an accident, nor yet appropriate thereto by accident, as any relation: for all such, by the order of nature, are after that subject whereto they belong; whether they be immediate accidents, or relations depending thereupon. Therefore the world in the actual being is no way eternal. 3. Whatsoever hath parts must needs be compounded, and whatsoever is compounded or put together must needs have parts that were once asunder, and so cannot be eternal à parte ante. And again every compound, by that power whereby it was made, may be resolved into those parts of which it was made, whether the parts be essential, as body and soul to a man; or entire, as stones, timber, iron, glass, etc. to a house. But the World hath parts ethereal, elemental, incorruptible, and corruptible, animal, vegetable, mineral, etc. Ergo, the World is not eternal. 4. All real truth is verified, first in the things of actual being, that is, in the individuals. Secondly, in the notions or apprehensions of the things in their intentional or common being, either special, or more general. But if the world be eternal, that eternity can agree only to the common being, and not to the particular or individual beings, as to this man, that horse, that tree, etc. So the truth of the world's eternity, shall be intentional only, not real: so common intentions only may be true, where there is no individual. But this is most false and impossible: therefore it is most false that the world is eternal. 5. The whole World, consisting of all the parts thereof, is either a body, or not a body. If our sense (from whence all our discourse proceeds) be judge, it is a body. Now every body in regard of the extent thereof, is finite, is of parts which may be measured, either one by another in halfs, quarters, etc. or else by common measures, of inches, yards, miles, pints, gallons, etc. It hath likewise shape or figure, and dimension, by length, breadth, depth, without which it could not be a body. But if the world be eternal; then must it be both finite it regard of the extension, and infinite in the continuance: so infinity shall be more powerful in a foreign subject, that is, in continuance to make it infinite, than it can be in it own proper subject, that is, in measure to make it unlimited: so also infinity shall be powerful in the contrariety of good and ill, to make them eternal, and weak in the littleness of extension. So also the world being eternal, must be for this end, that it may be that which it is as God. Whereby it would follow that the end of the world's being could not be one, but contrary to itself in generation and corruption, in good and ill; and all other contrarieties, that are now therein. But all these things are impossible: therefore the contrary is necessary, See Log. Cap. 26. n. 1. 6. Eternity cannot admit before and after, so that one eternal should be before another eternal. But if the world be eternal, this must follow necessarily: for every generation is with the corruption or taking away of that form which was in the matter before; and every corruption is of something that was generate before: So each of these eternals must be each before another, and so neither of them eternal, and yet the eternity of the world brings in these contradictions, inasmuch as generation and corruption have been ever since the world was. Therefore the world's eternity is impossible. 7. If the world be eternal, that eternity shall be rather ill, than good; because the longer the continuance of the world is, the greater is the increase of wickedness and ill, more than of that which is good: at least because of the continuance of good and ill, the world's eternity shall be both good and ill. And yet because every worldly good hath a beginning and an end in time, and that every privation or taking away of any good eternally, must needs be an eternal ill: that eternity of the world shall be nearer to ill than to good, both because of the positive ills, and the deprivations of the goodnesses that are therein. Moreover seeing nothing which is corrupted returns to be the same in number, which it was before; generation shall be good and available to the maintenance of the species only, not to the restoring of the actual or individual Being's: But Corruption shall be powerful both against the individual, and therein against the species also. And so the world's eternity shall be much nearer to ill than to good, and a bringing in of all these inconveniences. Therefore it is not eternal. 8. If the world be eternal, than neither was there any first man, neither can there be any last: without which lastnesse there cannot be any general resurrection of men, nor place to contain them. So this eternity of the world must be the greatest ill, as being that which brings in an impossibility of the greatest good, that is, the hope of the resurrection and everlasting life, the end of all our hopes. But it is impossible that this hope of man should be frustrate, as it will appear further in the 38. chap. Therefore the world is not eternal. 9 And if you look bacl on the things that have been already spoken concerning the dignities of the Godhead, in the nine first chapters, you may from thence make a great supply of arguments to this purpose, thus; God is, chap. 1. And He is being essentially, with all the perfection of being infinitely, eternally, actually; not in possibility of being any thing that he is not, and therefore God is the perfection of being: and convertible the perfection of being is God. Now terms convertible cannot possibly belong to foreign beings: as to guide a ship at Sea, cannot belong to any but to man alone. Therefore being cannot belong to any thing but to God alone, primarily and of itself, but only Analogically, as it hath received the Being from Him. Therefore if the world be not God, which the fool cannot say in his heart, the world is not eternal. 10. God is eternal, chap. 2. and eternity belongs essentially to God alone, chap. 8. If then the world be not God; then can it not be coeternal with Him. For as it is not possible that there should be more Gods, chap. 8. n. 7. so it is not possible that there should be more eternals than one. Therefore the world is not eternal. So you may reason from the simplicity of His being proved, chap. 9 n. 6.7. and from the other dignities of God which are proved to belong to Him in the chapter before; & no less from those things which are denied to belong to Him, as to be matter, bodily compounded; etc. chap. 9 But in this plenty and plainness of the matter I take only that one which followeth. 11. If God be almighty and one: then it is not possible, that any thing can be but by his power alone. But it hath been proved that God is almighty, chap. 6. and one, chap. 8. n. 7. Therefore the world is by his power alone. But if it be objected, that by his eternal power, he brought out the world eternally; yet must it needs be, that he created it, either of nothing; or of some matter that was not eternal; or else that he made it of a matter that was eternal. To say that God from all eternity had created the world, either of nothing; or of a matter not eternal, would imply a manifest contradiction. To say that he made it of a matter which was coeternal to himself, would enforce that the world were consubstantial with God; or rather that it were God. For seeing his being is most simple and one entire being, without parts, and is not communicated, but whole and all, and that eternity (as all his other attributes) was proved to be God essentially, it cannot be but that the world must be God, if it be eternal. Or if that impossibility could be avoided; yet to say that God had eternally made the world of eternal matter, would necessitate him to an action without himself, which would take away the infinite freedom of his will, his glory, and perfection, which he hath in himself. Or if it be said, that the world is eternal without or beside any action of God upon it, but of itself alone, beside the endless absurdities, contradictions, and impossibilities that would follow thereby; It would directly enforce, that there is no God. For if the power by which the world is, and works; if the wisdom manifest in the ordering causes therein; if the truth, goodness, continuance, and other attributes of worldly things, had any other original than God; then must it of necessity follow, that God is not infinite in these dignities of power, wisdom, truth, eternity, goodness, etc. when so great effects of these things are altogether without Him. And to deny unto God the infinity or perfection of these dignities, were utterly to deny his Being, and to make him unworthy to be that which He is, contrary to all that hath heretofore been proved. 12. The holy Scriptures every where teach this truth Gen. 1. & 2. chap. job. 38. and many places in that book beside. Neh. 9.6. confesses to God. Thou art Lord alone: thou hast made heaven, and the heaven of heavens, with all their host; the earth and all things that are therein; the Seas, and all that are in them: and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth Thee. Psal. 95.5. The Sea is His, and He made it; and his hands prepared the dryland. Psal. 96.5. All the gods of the people are Idols: But the Lord made the heavens, whose armies, in Psal. 136. are more particularly reckoned up. And therefore doth God by his own right challenge the heavens for his seat, and the earth for his footstool; because his hand hath made all these things. Esay 66.1.2. To this purpose you may road other Texts cited by S. Origen, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. 3. cap. 5. The continual preservation also of the Creature, as it is manifest in reason by the arguments afore going; So it is taught, Psal. 36.6.7. Psal. 147.8.9. Psal. 145.15. And Psal. 104. is wholly in this Argument. And that all this frame shall come to nought at last, you may read, Psal. 102.25.26. which is also cited by S. Paul, Heb. 1. v. 10.11.12. Read moreover to this purpose, 2 Pet. 3.10. Reu. 20.11. And that because it was made of nought. Heb. 11.3. Sap. 11.14. §. 4. These things then being thus manifest, we are now by the way. 1. First to consider what necessary conclusions follow hereupon. 2. And then to see whether the creation of the world do belong to every Person of the Trinity alike, or to any one more particularly than another. First, it is certain, that not being cannot be the beginning of Being. And therefore it is necessary that Being be eternal. And that which is the first of beings must needs be the cause of all therest: So that all other beings must acknowledge their original from thence. And because all things that are, were in time created by that first of Being's, not according to any necessity of natural working; as the fire according to the necessity thereof, doth burn any matter that is fit to be burnt; but only according to the pleasure of his own will: therefore first of all it must necessarily ensue hereof, that the continuance of all things must have the same cause, which was also of their Being. So that for his holy wills sake alone they also continue. If he then withdraw his supportance either from all, or from any particular creature, it must of necessity come to nought in an instant. Secondly, because every agent works for some end: and the greatest and best of workmasters must needs work for the greatest and chiefest good; and seeing there neither is, nor can be any thing greater or better than God himself; Therefore it is necessary, that this world was created for Him. But because He, infinitely blessed in Himself, needed not the world, nor any thing of the world, as though he could be better thereby Psal. 16.2. Act. 17.25. it must follow; that the creature was for this end; that as by his Being, it was made partaker of being, so by his infinite goodness it might also be partaker of glory and happiness. For because his goodness, and life and happiness, and all his glories are answerable to his own being; therefore are they infinitely sufficient for every thing, that in any sort can possibly be partaker of being. So then the goodness of God was not increased in the creation, but manifested only; that the creature, according to the measure thereof, might be blessed in him. Thus then is God the end of all the creature; Because he is that supersupreme perfection of goodness, and happiness whereof the whole creature desires to be partaker: but that not out of any choice or purpose of the creature; but of him alone that hath created it to be partaker of that image of his goodness. From the first conclusion we are taught with what reverence and fear we ought to live before him; to whose only pleasure we own our being and continuance. Next with what great respect and care we ought to behave ourselves toward the creature; not only men which have the same precious hopes of immortality which we have; but likewise toward every other creature, even the least of Being's. For although we know that all the more bodily creature was made for the use of that which hath understanding; and that not only for the exercise of the mind in his wisdom and power that created it; but for thankfulness also to that goodness which hath subjected it to our use in food, in clothing, and other such services for our ease, or conveniences; that being destitute of no good thing, we might give ourselves to his service, and praise him alone: And lastly, that the whole creature might be blessed in man, in whom it is to possess an eternal being: yet when we remember, that there is nothing so mean, or seeming so base in the Creature, but that it was eternally foreseen to that infinite wisdom even as we; that it was created by the same power, appointed by the same foreknowledge to this or that very use; with what reverence and fear should we carry ourselves lest we abuse it, and so offer dishonour unto the Lord and owner both of it, and us alike? especially seeing that when we were not, he had determined so to bless us. From the second conclusion we may learn with what patience we ought to endure all the troubles and afflictions of this life; because we know those precious promises whereto we are created, if we acknowledge Him faithful, and hold our hopes unto the end, see Tit. 1.2. The question moved, to which Person the Creation belongs, is full of perplexity, and of any other most hard and dark, if it be well thought on. And therefore in the solution thereof it is most safe for us to hearken to the oracles of God alone. It is commonly and truly said, that the works of the Holy Trinity which are without are undivided; yet so as that they receive a certain determination or order from that manner of Being which is in the Persons. And therefore because the Father is the fountain of Being they commonly ascribe the creation or bringing of things into being unto Him. So because all perfection of Sonship is in the second Person, and that there can be no more Sons than one: therefore the redemption of mankind by the indwelling of God in Man is given unto the Son, and so the sanctifying of the church to the Holy Ghost. But if we look diligently unto the text of the Holy Scripture, we shall find how necessary it was that the Mediator should satisfy for the sin of the creature, because the whole creature, was made by Him. For so we may read joh. 1.2.3. All things were made by that word which in the beginning was with God, And without it was nothing made which was made. And vers. 10. He was in the world, and the world was made by him. And vers. 14. And that word was made flesh, (that is, took on him the whole nature of man, body and soul) and dwelled among us, and we saw on the holy mount, Mat. 17.2. etc. 2 Pet. 1.18. the glory thereof, that is, of that flesh or man, as the glory of the only begotten Son of the Father. And again Col. 1.16. By him that is the Son were all things created which are in heaven, and which are in earth: things visible, and invisible, all things were created by him, and for him, and in him all things consist. 1 Cor. 8.6. There is one God the Father, of whom were all things, and we by him. Eph. 3.9. God hath created all things by jesus Christ. And Heb. 1. v. 1.2. God hath spoken unto us in these last days by his Son, whom He hath made heir of all things: by whom also he made the worlds. By all which texts it is clear which S. Paul hath Rom. 11.36. of him, through him, and for Him are all things. That is, that God the deliverer, which should come out of Zion, vers. 26. And thus have these Apostles explained that which is written. Gen. 1.1. In the beginning Elohim created heaven and earth, which word in the whole body of the old Testament (as wisemen have observed) is almost never spoken but of the Person of the Mediator only. I suppose then that it is plain enough, which is spoken by our Lord, john. 5. v. 19 The Son can do nothing of Himself save what he seethe the Father do: for whatsoever things He doth, the same things doth the Son in like manner. That is, whatsoever the eternal Godhead ordained in his everlasting Counsel and decree to be done, that same doth the Son execute and perform in the creature answerably, and brings forth every thing in time according to the possibilities and opportunities of the creature. For as the wiseman saith, Ecclus. 18.1. He that liveth for ever made all things together, or at once. So the Psalmist, as also the other Scriptures, tells us by whom and in whom, Psal. 104.24. In wisdom hast thou made them all, that is in our Creator and Saviour. So then, it being cleared by the text of the holy Scripture that the creation of the world was of God the Father in Christ, by Christ and for Christ; it will easily follow how necessary it was that He our creator by His eternal Spirit should offer himself to God for the sin of his creature, as it will further appear when I come to that article. Notes. (a) EVery ten thousand years.] You may read the position in Aug. de Haer. cap. 43. and the refutation thereof in his, 20.21.22. books the civet. Dei. But the Cabalists, for the renewing of this lower world, put seven thousand years and no more: for the restoring of the whole creature both heavenly and earthly, they put fifty thousand years. You may read the opinion, and partly see their reasons in Leo Hebr. de Amore. pag. 500 etc. (b) The world is not eternal.] The most famoused opinions that have been concerning the world's eternity, are these. One, that which the Christian faith doth hold, according to the truth of the holy oracles of God, and the voice of Reason, as you have heard: and to this truth the Stoics are said to have consented. The second opinion is that of Plato, and his followers, who held that the world had a beginning in time, but of an eternal matter, and that the continuance thereof should be eternal. For seeing generation and corruption is only by the change of forms, the matter still remaining one: therefore they thought, that as that form which is purely without matter was incorruptible and eternal; So likewise must matter be, which of it own nature is utterly without form. And because matter is greedy of all forms how differing or contrary soever; Therefore it is ever subject to change. Neither is the heaven itself utterly freed from all power of Change, because of that matter whereof it is, in which the power of Change is ever hid. Therefore the world is not eternal in respect of any power in itself, either to the production of forms or the continuance of itself under the same forms: but first in respect of the unformed matter, and most of all in respect of that Spirit or life, whereby it is guided and ordered; as by the internal causes: and in respect of the divine will, and goodness, as the outward principle, and the end: which will as it cannot repent to have done good in giving being unto the world, and the things therein contained; so can it not will contrary to itself, and cease to do good in the continuance of the creature in that being which it hath. You may read more to his purpose in Plot. Ennead. 2. lib. 1. and his commentator, Marsilius Ficinus. The third opinion is that of Aristotle, that the world was eternal, and from God, as an eternal effect of an eternal cause. For because it seemed to him impossible (and if you look no higher than nature alone, it is indeed impossible) that any thing being can come out of nothing: therefore matter must needs be eternal, and therewith generation and corruption, without which nothing is brought forth; And because these two could not be thought to be without the moving of the heavens, as the cause thereof, therefore both the heavenly bodies and motion, especially circular, must be also eternal; and herewith time, which is measured by the motion of the heavens. But what this eternal matter should be, the Philosophers went into divers opinions. Heraclitus thought it to be fire: Archelaus air; Empedocles all the elements; and among the rest, one, one thing; and another, another; as you may read in Aristotle, where he refutes them: in Tull. Acad. q. lib. 4. and especially in Plutarch de placitis Philosophorum: and from him in many other. Aristotle himself from Hesiod and they that had been before him, calls it Chaos. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.— In theogonia. First was the Chaos, than the earth. which word if they borrowed not of Moses his Tohu, which signifies empty, of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that sometimes means to bring to nought: nor of that, which seems to come from thence, Chohus, whereby, as Festus saith, the old Latins called the world: yet of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they meant by it confusion, and no way of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies a country, or an appointed place. Sometime this matter is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, mud: For so the conclusion of earth and water is best understood, and fittest for generation of earthly things, as Ovid delivers the opinion, and clears it by comparison of the overflowing Nilus. Metam. lib. 1. All other Creatures took their different birth, And figures, from the voluntary Earth: When her cold moisture with the Sun did sweat, And Slimy Marshes grew big with heat. So when seven-mouthed Nile forsakes the plain; Anantient channel doth his streams contain, And late left slime the heavenly warmth doth feel, Men sundry shapes beneath the sod reveile; Some new begun, and some to half do grow, That half alive, the rest but earth below. But Moses, Gen. 1. delivers it unto us in the parts active and passive, heaven, and earth; which yet before their division were both of water, as it is manifest in that place, and 2. Pet. 3.5. According hereunto Homer. Iliad. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and after him Thales affirms the first matter of all things to be water. But the opinions of the less reckoning are those that are found amongst the heretics of the Christians, For all the Philosophers and Poets of the heathen, which held not the eternity of the world, acknowledged God the author of the world under one name or other: but Simon Magus, and with him Menander, said that the Angels were the makers of the world. Saturnius gives the honour unto seven Angels alone, whom he makes the Creators of the world, without the consent or knowledge of God. Carpocrates, and the Priscillianists affirmed, that the world was made by certain inferior Angels, among whom the devil was chief workemaster. Valentinus gave it out, that a devil which was begotten of the thirtieth Aion begot other devils, and these Sons of Aveugles made the world; and mischief, and sin are in the world, not through the wickedness and free will of man, but even by the very creation of the world itself. The Nicholaitanes tell us, of Angels the makers of the world; and that Barbelo, who was ruler of the eight Sphere, was overseer of the works, His mother's name was Yaldaboth. But I have not read so fare in heraldry, as to tell you who was his Dad, nor of what house his mother came, nor yet whether his follow workmen were good or bad Angels. The Gnostics of the two Gods which they make (as you have heard before) make the ill God the creator of the world; which though it appear not, either by Irenaeus, Clement, Tertullian, Epiphanius, or by S. Augustine; yet it is plain by Plotinus, Aenead. 2. lib. 9 who writes against their opinions, and this in particular. Martion made three creators: one good, another bad, and another between them, whom they called Just. So you see how all these heretics had madded themselves and their followers, in their opinions concerning the Creator of all things. Others erred concerning some parts of the creature only; as the Seleucians', and Hermians or Hermogenians, beside their error of the world's matter coeternal with God, denied that God created the souls of men, but would have them created by the Angels of fire and Spirit; contrary to that which is In Gen. 2.7. & Esay 57.16. & 1 Pet. 4.9. That God is the faithful Creator of the soul. The Priscillianists said that the souls of men were of the same substance and nature with God; and being by him sent down from heaven, the devil met with them by the way, and sowed them as seed in the flesh: whereupon it must follow, either that the being of God is divisible into infinite parts; or that there is but one only soul of all men; and both ways avoidable, that God (at least in part of Himself) must be subject to Sin; and so that either He must need a Saviour; or by His own law, be subject to eternal death. This is the fruit of heresy. The Patricians denied God to be the Creator of the body of man, and gave that honour to the devil; contrary to that which is in Gen. 2. v. 7. and v. 21.22. yea, and so detested the flesh, as that to be out of the body, some of them killed themselves. The Paternians said that the lower parts of the body, (it seems only those that are affixed thereto for generations sake, that flesh which the law so often commands to be washed) were made by the devil, and thereupon took occasion to live in filthiness, and Just, contrary to the Commandment of God. The Marcionites, and Manichees said, that wickedness and ill, was partly from God, and partly from the matter of the world. Florinus and his followers said, that things were created ill, according to their substances; contrary to the Scripture, Gen. 1.31. But contrarily, the Coluthians would not have God the Author of ill; no not that of punishment: which nevertheless the Scripture teaches Esay 45.7. and 54.16. Amos. 3.6. Some also of the heretics followed the opinions of the ancient Philosophers; as they that were called Aquei, that of Thales; and said that water was the matter of the would, but yet eternal, and not created. The Audian and Manichean heretics instead of Aristotle's eternals, brought in darkness, fire, and water; you might bring hither their foolish thoughts concerning the transplantation of souls, and such like questions: but there will be fit place thereto in the article of everlasting life. And because these upstart weenings are so witless, as they are false; I will not vouchsafe to inquire into their reasons: the only authority of the holy Scripture is sufficient to grind them all to dust; and to bring that dust to nought at all. But least any man contrary to the truth of God, be overswayed with the reasons of the Philosophers, it will not be unfit to examine, and answer them. 1. And first concerning the reasons of the Platonics, that the matter of the world should therefore be eternal, because it is simple, and uncompounded. I answer, That it is but petitio principii; or a taking of that which is not granted: for it is utterly denied that there was ever such matter as they suppose, utterly informed. I say according to the Sacred Philosophy, that when water the first matter of all things, was created, darkness or confusion was upon the face of the deep: but yet with that water, under that confusion, was concreated all manner of forms, which afterward were all brought forth out of the possibility of the matter; so that matter was impregnate or great with all kind of forms, which afterward were made to appear: for otherwise could not the effect be answerable to the cause, if he being in himself the Jdeas or forms of all beings, had not brought forth the first matter full fraught with all material forms, by which afterwards, according to the disposition of their natural causes, the different kinds of things were informed. And therefore here also are all things said, by him to have been made at once. And although in the works of the fifth day, the whales, with other things which had a life, with the power of moving, are said to be created; yet is that spoken only in regard of that more manifest life than the vegetable had, in the works of the third day: but that life nevertheless was brought out of the power of the matter by more powerful causes, his blessing coming thereto; even as it was afterward upon them to bring forth after their kind. Only in the sixth day, because it was not in the power of all nature to bring forth a reasonable and an immortal soul, he breathed into man a Spirit of new life, and man became a living soul, the epitome or model of all the creature, earthly and heavenly, bodily and spiritual. This truth is so plain, that Ovid the prince of all the heathen Poets for wit, judgement and manifold learning, read it in the book of nature Metam. lib. 1. Before the Sea, the earth, and heaven all hiding, There was one face on all the world abiding; Which men name Chaos; an unordered load, Wherein the seeds of things contrary abode. But though it be granted that the first matter was merely and purely simple, yet can it not follow that therefore it was eternal, except it may withal appear, that it had power to be of itself, without the power of the Creator. But that would utterly take away the infinite power of God; if beside his power, any power could be supposed to another thing, which could uphold an eternal being. And seeing in all corruption every thing returns to those principles of which it was; as in man his body to the earth, and his Spirit unto God that gave it, and that nothing material returns to a simple and pure being, but that it is still found under some form or other; it is manifest, first, that that first matter was not created simple; but by his decree ever subject to composition: and therefore secondly impossible to be eternal. Concerning that eternal Spirit or life of the world, in respect of which they thought it should be eternal, both before and after; you shall understand more in the 24. Chap. note (g) § 10. yet in the mean time I answer, that if that Spirit whereby the world both is, and is ordered, work according to that pattern which he sees in another; it cannot follow, that the world shall thereby be for ever, except it appear to stand with that will, according to which he works. Now what that will is we understand better, by his own Revelation in his own word, than Plato and all his followers could see in all the subtlety of their understanding. By which word also we know, that the last end and hope of the creature is more excellent and glorious by the change, than by the continuance of the world for ever in that state wherein it is. And thus the special reasons of that Sect are answered. See more to this question (if you will) in Tertullian against Hermogenes. 2. But it is further objected, that whatsoever gins to work which did not work before, must be moved thereto, either by itself, or by another. But God is not moved, that is, changed from that which he was before, either by himself, nor by any other: for neither can his action be new, or begun, seeing his action is his being; neither can he be affected otherwise, than he was before. And therefore is he an eternal cause of the world, an eternal effect, as Aristotle affirmed. I answer, That no new motion or purpose can come unto God concerning the creature: for all his works are known to him from eternity, Acts 15.18. But seeing that these works of which we speak, are of his will alone; they must be according to the limitation or appointment of that will: so that although he had eternally willed to create the world; yet had he eternally willed, when, by whom, and after what fashion, the world and all the things therein should be created. And this by one only will and one only action of the same will eternally. The newness then of the world is in the actual being of the world, not in the will or power whereby it was wrought. But for the better understanding of this thing, you may observe a difference of actions, of which some are immanent, or indwelling in the doer and are accounted among the perfections of the thing; such are the works of the will or understanding: some again are transeunt, or passing from the doer upon that which is done; as the work of the Smith upon the steel in making a sword. The works of God in himself are immanent; neither do these of necessity put the outward object into actual being; as a man may conceive of a house, which is not yet built; or the Smith by his art or skill hath power to make a lock which he hath not yet made. So God though he foresaw and willed eternally that the world should be, yet the effect followed not, but according to the determination of that will, when, by whom, and how the world should receive an actual being. 3. But it may again be said, that God is an Eternal, and an Almighty agent; and that not in possibility only, but in act also: for whatsoever is brought from the possibility of doing unto the act of doing, must be enforced thereto by a former, and more powerful agent, and that actually, which in God is utterly impossible: and if he be an eternal and a powerful agent, and that actually, the effect must necessarily follow, and that actually: for otherwise neither could the effect be answerable to the cause; nor yet the cause be said to be sufficient and Almighty, if the cause were in act, and the effect in possibility only: therefore it seems the world must of necessity be eternal. Answer. Although God be actually and eternally whatsoever he may be in himself, yet seeing he works in outward things, not according to any necessity, but only according to the pleasure of his own will; the outward effect of his power must be limited according to the circumstances of his will, which I declared before. Therefore this reason doth no more enforce the eternity of the world, than it doth that all the possibilities of the creature should be actually at once; and that every thing created should be eternal, because the cause is eternal, actual, and all-sufficient. But these things as they can no way stand with the possibility of the creature; so would they utterly take away the working of all natural causes, by which the glory of his manifold wisdom is declared: neither doth the all-sufficiency of the cause bring any sufficiency to the reason to prove the world eternal. For although the creature be an effect of the infinite power of God; yet because it is not an adequate or proportionable object thereto, that is, wherein that power may be wholly and only exercised; therefore is it but a foreign effect, wherein that power works only according to the will of the worker. Therefore observe here secondly a difference of agents, of which some work naturally, and these work always necessarily according to their uttermost power, in the diversity of things whereon they work, as the Sun by his heat melts that which hath thin parts, as butter, or wax, and hardens that which hath parts more stiff, as clay. Some agents again are voluntary, and these work not necessarily, but according to the choice and freedom of their own will; as the Physician gives not to his patiented all that he can give, but that which he knows to be with his strength to the procuring of health. Now God is first and principal among these agents only, as concerning all things without himself; and no way tied by any necessity: therefore the world being an effect of the will of God; it must be subject to all the conditions of that will, that it be such as he will have it, that it be when he will have it, that it be according to those causes by which he will have it, that it be of that continuance as he will have it, and this unchangeably, because there is no superior being whereby that will can possibly be changed. 4. But what God willed he willed, from eternity, and because his will (as you truly say) cannot be changed; therefore no new motion can come thereto, and because no defect can be therein, nor yet any hindrance, as being convertible with an infinite power; therefore it is necessary that the world was created eternally, that his will eternally might take effect. Answer. It is not denied but that the world in the purpose of God was willed to be eternally, and that no change, defect or hindrance was or ever could be found in this will: for if any of these things were not thus; it had been impossible that ever the world should have been. But yet to put the eternitle of the world, lest this will should be without effect, would necessitate this will to the actual being of the creature; in that it might seem deficient and hindered, and so, miserable; if the creature had not been eternal: but this by no means may be yielded unto; because it would utterly take away the absolute liberty of of an infinite will: for although God doth not, or cannot be said both to will and unwill the same things, in respect of the effect of his will, or the actual being of the things themselves; because he cannot deny himself, 2. Tim. 2.13. Yet in regard of any superior cause which might enforce his will to the one side, or the other, it cannot be denied but that he had absolute liberty, both to will, or not to will the being of any thing without himself: for otherwise his will were more limited than the will of a man, who hath freedom of will to do or not to do the things that are in his own power; and therefore his will took effect in this, neither could it be effected otherwise than thus, that the creature was then when he had determined that it should be. But for the better understanding and assoiling of this doubt, remember this third difference concerning the necessity of God's will; which is either absolute, or conditional. The absolute necessity of Gods will is in that which concerns himself alone; as, that he be, that his being be such as it is, infinite, eternal, glorious, etc. The conditional necessity which they call of supposition is of things without himself; as because he knows his infinite being sufficient for supportance of all manner of being; his own goodness to be likewise in finite, and yet loves the multiplicity of goodness, as the similitude or representation of his own; therefore wils he that the creature be the image of his being and goodness; and although there be but one action of the will whereby it is carried to the desire of good; yet because goodness cannot be infinite, but in himself alone; therefore doth he will his own being with an absolute necessity of his will: but he wils other things as he hath limited the times of their being, and degrees of their perfection. So that as by one eternal act of knowledge he knows both his own being, and therein all the possibilities of being; so by one act of his will, which is moved by the show of good, doth he will himself as an infinite, good, with an absolute necessity of his will, and other things as the represEntations of his goodness; which goodness is that condition for which he wils them necessarily, ex supposito, I mean, that they may be partakers of his goodness, not that he hath need of any of them. So having willed that man should be, it is necessary that he will also all those things which are necessary to his being; as that he have a soul endued with reason, and election, etc. which things though he willed eternally, and necessarily; yet not with any absolute necessity; because he is absolutely perfect in himself without them: therefore as it follows not, that all things possible should be at once, because he is Almighty; so neither doth it follow, that any thing created should be eternal, because he from eternity willed that it should be; but rather because he willed that it should be in time, therefore it cannot in any case be eternal. 5. Whatsoever gins to be that which it was not before, must needs have the present being by some kind of change whereby it was brought to be that which it is. But before all change it is necessary that there be something that may be changed; and this may seem to be eternal. Answer. The proposition is true only in things that are changed according to natural causes. But creation is a thing above nature; by which nature herself had her beginning, not only in regard of the subject or matter wherein she works; but also of the causes by which she brings forth all natural effects. But you will say, that all things are not material: for the spiritual beings, of whom it is fit to think that they are both more in number, and in greater differences of essential forms than the bodily are; yet are not material: in which respect, not being subject to change, they may well be thought eternal. I may answer hereto as to the first objection from the simplicity of the matter: for first, it is not granted, that the spiritual beings spoken of, are utterly without matter: then although that were given; yet it follows not but that they were brought into being out of not being, and so created as the Article affirms. And these are the chief arguments brought by the Platonics and Aristotelians to prove the world's eternity. Other objections of less importance you may read (if you will) with their answers in Thomas Aquinas contra Gentes, lib. 2. Cap. 32.33.34. etc. But if you understand the answers, and the differences which have been observed; I suppose you shall be able thereby to answer for the truth. 6. The opinion of the world's crention from a precedent matter, was recalled by Hermogenes against whom Tertullian disputes, as you may read. But infinity is not only of continuance, which we call eternity, which we may seem to have refuted sufficiently; but of greatness or extent, of number also, of power, of goodness, or the like: but if it hath been proved, that the world took a beginning as concerning the continuance; it may easily follow that no manner of infinity can belong unto it. Yet Fran. Patricius Pancos. lib. 8. upon the same arguments of the infinity of the power, goodness, and will of God, would build up the infinite of the world, at lest concerning the extension or space thereof. And although the answers heretofore made to the arguments above, may seem to answer his reasons sufficiently; yet I suppose you may better understand whatsoever is to be said hereto, if you have well perused that which is said in the second and eighth Chapter. In the mean time you may do well to remember who measured the water in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with his span, Esay 40.12. And if all these things were made in number, weight and measure, Sap. 11.17. It may well follow, that the world cannot be infinite in any of these. 7. But the infinity or uncertainty of number hath most doubt, because it is said, Heb. 1.2. & 11.3. That God hath appointed Christ to be heir of all things; because that by him he made the Worlds. But the word World answers to two words in Greek, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The first signifies oftentimes the frame of the whole creature, as in Matth. 25.34. but not always: for sometimes it signifies the world of the wicked only, as john 14.17. sometimes of the elect only, as john 3.17. sometime an age or time of the world, and the people of that age, as S. Peter 2. Epist. 2.5. saith, that God spared not the old world; and again 2. Pet. 3.6. The world that then was, perished by waters, to which meaning the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used in that text of Heb. 1.2. doth most directly answer. So that the ages there spoken of may well receive interpretation by the days of the creation, by which God foretold what should afterward come to pass, as it is said, Esay 46.10. and elsewhere. * See Brocard● Mystica in Gen. So then the first day of nature when darkness was upon the deep, signified that time when the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and the thoughts of his heart were only evil continually. And although they had the light of reason in them; yet because they did not walk according to that light, therefore God brought the flood upon the world of the ungodly. The second day wherein was the division of the waters by the firmament of heaven, meant that time when God separated his Church from the people of the world, and parted them by the firmament of his Covenants, first of circumcision given to Abraham, afterward of the ceremonial Law by Moses, which work of the second day is therefore not praised as good; because the Law works wrath, Rom. 4.15. And because these ceremonies were not able to give life to the doers of the same: for Moses might not bring Israel into the land of promise. Deut. 34.4. Esay 66.3. Gal. 2.16. & 19 & 30.10. The third day signifies the third age or state of the Church, when the earth, that is these worldly rites, by the lively interpretation of the Prophets, who unfolded their meaning, and taught the people of their times to have hope in him that was to come, brought forth the herb and fruit tree yielding seed unto everlasting life. The fourth age of the Church was that time wherein the Sun or righteousness did shine, and brought in that new light, that true light which lightens every man that come into the world of his Church, that Sun which gave shine unto the Moon, the Apostolic Church, and to the Stars, those Doctors whose knowledge, zeal, and constancy, gave light in that dark night of persecutions and heresy which did ensue. And these and such other are the ages (even until the great jubilee) of which the Apostle speaks in that place Heb. 1.2. which is brought for the proof of many worlds. So this Democritan fancy may vanish. 8. Concerning the infinity of multitude in the different species or kinds of things, the Cabalists have an opinion that although they rise to an excessive number, yet they must needs be definite; and that according to the difference of words, in all the possible change and joining of the letters: for if either the things were not different, according to the signification of words; or that the words had not their meaning according to the difference of things: that wisdom who both made the things, and gave words to express their differences, should seem disproportionable, and wanting on one side or on the other; neither could that word be verified Gen. 2.19. which saith, And whatsoever Adam called every living creature, so was the name thereof. The opinion is delivered in the book which they call jezirah, the author of the tradition they make Abraham the Patriarch, the description of juda an ancient rabbin, the collection of the number is of Fr. Georgius in his 244 Probl. tit. 67. and this * You may see also the comment of Postellus on that book, and Archangels apology of the Cabala. pag. 548, etc. is the number 1124002590827719680000. that is, one thousand one hundred twenty four millions of great millions, two thousand five hundred and ninety great millions, eight hundred twenty seven thousand seven hundred and nineteen millions, fix hundred and fourscore thousand. But although the possible combination of letters be so different as they make it, yet the reason holds not for the actions and passions as well as the proprieties of things must be expressible with all the differences of times, past, present, and to come, and that either alone, or with others. Besides, words express the defects of things, the vices also and imaginations of the mind, which are neither created beings, nor always true. Moreover although Adam had power over all words, yet it appears not that he had knowledge also of the nature, and differences of the heavenly and spiritual creatures; so that the words may perhaps fall short of the number of different beings. But because they will not be out bidden, they six this number to the combination of consonants (it seems for the different species) to which if you add the different vowels above or below (as the manner of that writing is) you shall have a number so great as may equal all the individuals, of all the specials that ever have been or shall be hereafter: which by Patricius must needs be infinite: for thus he reasons, Panarch. lib. 19 from three infinities, essential, potential, and actual, a fourth infinite must needs proceed, at least of number: for otherwise the effect should not be answerable to the cause. The infinite essence he supposes the Father; the infinite power, the Son; and the infinite worker, the Holy Ghost. And by these three are three Trinities brought out of spiritual creatures, or Angels, as he by Psellus understands the Chaldaean wisdom; whether well or ill, it skils not much; For we are taught joh. 1.3. That By the word all things were made, and without him was nothing made that was made. But to his reason. Can an infinite Being bring forth an effect without power, and working thereto? or can an infinite power be, but in an infinite being? or can an infinite work be without an infinite power? so that these three which he makes divers Creators, and that of several Trinities, can be but one Creator, as they are but one Trinity in unity of essence, as hath afore been declared at large. And as concerning the conclusion, it is yielded that the number of individuals or particular beings is infinite to us, utterly beyond our reckoning: but yet to Him, without whom a Sparrow lights not on the ground, they are all numbered. Nay I say further, that through his blessing upon the creature to multiply according to kind, Gen. 1. the individuals are in nature potentially infinite: but no way to Him, by whose only power nature doth work. For otherwise, His wisdom and power could not be coequal. And thus have men wearied themselves in vain to find out his ways, that are past finding out. The first supply concerning Man. CHAP. XIV. That Man was created one alone, male and female, as the Scripture names them, Adam and Eve. CHAP. XV. That Man was created innocent and without sin. CHAP. XVI. That Man continued not in that innocence, but that he sinned, and thereby became subject to eternal death. CHAP. XVII. That by the sin of our first parents, the whole mass of mankind was corrupted, and made liable to eternal death both of body and soul. CHAP. XVIII: That there is a restoring of man to a better life, and further hope, than that from which our parents fell. CHAP. XIX. That this restoring could not be made by any means that was in man, nor by any one that was man only. CHAP. XIIII. That Man was created one alone, male and female. THese questions seem necessary for the knitting of that which follows, to the conclusions that have been made before. And because they are taken as suppositions in the brief of our Creed, and seem plain enough of themselves; they may be handled with the more shortness, but yet may they not here be let pass altogether untouched: for although it be given that man is the creature of God; yet if he made many men, and many women, though one or moe sinned; yet the rest might continue in their innocence, and so the whole race of mankind was not corrupted. Or if he made but one man; yet if he made him such as men now are, then could not his actions be accounted any way sinful: or if Adam by his sin lost not his estate of happiness, or his own alone, or if there were no hope of restoring; then to believe any Saviour were altogether in vain; or if there were any other means of salvation by man or Angel, than that which the Christian faith doth hold; then were all that which follows utterly needless: therefore it must appear that man was created, first one, male and female, and no moe; secondly upright and without any taint of original or actual sin; only such freewill he had, as that he might sinne if he would, or if he would not, he might not have sinned. And first that he created them one only male, and for continuance of kind his female, it is plain by this. 1. The works of God are so made in the perfection of number, and measure, as that it is not possible to find any defect or excess therein. But if more men than one had been made; if without the power of bringing forth their like, there had been defect in them, and they needless and in vain; if with such power of multiplication as Adam had, than had there been excess in the creature, and God had needlessly brought out mankind from many roots, which might be brought out from one alone: but this was unnecessary in the creature; therefore it could not be fitting in the wisdom of the Creator. And therefore he being but one, he created man in his own image, one man, male, and female. Gen. 1.27. 2. The excellency of Lordship or rule must be in one alone, & cannot possibly consist in many: so that if many men had been created, the Lordship of man over the inferior creature had not been perfect in one: & although there be now many millions of men, yet the Lordship over the creature is to every one equal with Adam, or Noah, inasmuch as every man claims as the perfection of his kind, so the dignities and prerogatives thereof from his first original, which if it had been many, could not have been so excellent. 3. Every natural motion, or instinct of nature which is ordered according to one rule; must needs have one author and one beginning. But all the ordinary and natural motions of every species are according unto one rule, to join with their like, to propagate their like, to maintain their life alike, etc. Therefore mankind had but one author of all their kind; and so were not brought out of stones nor trees, neither yet were they 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or springing of themselves out of the earth, as the fancies of the heathen that knew not their original, lead them to believe. 4. The work of God must needs be of the highest and greatest perfection that may be. But the beginning of a species from one root is more noble, excellent, and perfect than from many; because in that one both the individual, and the whole kind also is contained. Therefore the first creature in mankind was one alone. 5. It was necessary that the God of Unity and peace should so create man, as it might be most available for the maintenance of that love and peace which should afterward be, and flourish amongst men. But when men know themselves to be the sons of one common father of them all, they are more straight tied to brotherly love, and the upholding of fellowship among themselves. And this being the end, the means must be available to the end. Therefore the beginning of mankind was only from one man, whereby it seems that Adam had not his name from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Adamah which signifies earth, but rather (as a master observed) of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Achad dam one blood as S. Paul urges it Act. 17.26. That God of one blood made all the nations of men that dwell upon the face of the earth. CHAP. XV. That Man was created innocent and without Sinne. THis may appear by the consideration of those excellencies which belong to the Creator. For no cause can work contrary to the being, and perfections of itself. But if the cause be powerful and able to bring forth the effect, then must the effect also be perfect and upright, and especially free from that which is most contrary to the cause thereof. But it is before manifest that all things had their beginnings from God the most powerful and working of all causes: and because of the infinity of his goodness and justice, hating wickedness and sin above all things; therefore as all his creature was exceeding good, so it follows likewise that man (as fare as he had any being from God) was also good and upright in his being, and so without sin. 2. The ability and excellency of the end is more than the worthiness of all those things which are ordained for the end. But it is manifest, that all the visible creature of this world was created for man's use; that he was prince and Lord of all. For by the Law of nature, and justice that ought to be chief which hath most excellency above other. Now to set aside the abilities of the mind in the knowledge of things eternal and divine, whereof no other bodily creature hath any feeling or understanding: what creature under the whole heaven, in the earth, or Sea, may set itself in comparison with man for those gifts which the Creator hath vouchsafe to him, in the use of all things, in the knowledge of their nature, in memory and remembrance, in the inventions of arts, in the guiding and compelling of the creature to his service, or utter destruction of the rebellious. And the refore both in the creation, Gen. 1.28. and again after the flood, the type of Regeneration, 1 Pet. 3.21. were they all delivered into the power of man. Now if all these things were for man, and his use, and they every one good in their kind, much more was man good and upright in his creation. 3. Every thing is more excellent, as it is for a more excellent and noble end. But the end of man is more excellent than all the creature beside. For they are for his use as their end, but man for the service and glory of God as his end, in the attainment of which alone he can be happy. And because that which is for any end, must have conditions or fitness for that end; it was necessary that man should be created without sin, which above all other things the soul of his Creator did hate, and for which alone he was put out of his service. 4. Every corruption or marring of a thing must needs be of that which was once good; and the greater the perfection thereof was, the worse is the corruption or wickedness that is therein. But it is too manifest that the nature of man is most corrupt; therefore it was once very good and upright. 5. If God had made man such as man now is, rebellious and unthankful towards Himself; a plague and calamity to other men through injury, pride, and oppression, a slave to his own sensual desires in gluttony and filthy lust; ignorant of the truth, an enemy to all good, following with greediness all manner of ill; subject as to Sin, so to the due punishment thereof, all manner of misery, sickness, and death, both of body and soul; then had He brought the greatest disorder into the creature, even there where order was mosT necessary, that is, in the prince and Lord thereof, yea such disorder as should be contrary to itself, in respect of that hatred which men have one toward another: then would he not in justice have brought those punishments on men which are due for their sin in this life, and damnation in that which is to come. But all these things are against the wisdom, goodness, and justice of God. Therefore man was created in a Contrary estate, of innocency, justice, and holiness. 6. This truth the holy text doth show. For beside that which is said, Gen. 1.31. That God saw every thing that he had made, and behold it was very good; it is said of man in particular, that he was created in the image of God. Which because it is there three times repeated; it is necessary to consider what that threefold Image of God in man is, that it may the better appear what his excellency was, and how great that loss was, which he endured by his sin against so gracious a Creator. Some among the most ancient Fathers, as Irenaeus and Tertullian, thought that the Mediator in that form wherein he afterward appeared in our flesh and was seen and known to Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and many of the Prophets, (for which they were called Seers 1 Sam. 9.9.) form man of the dust of the earth. The word there used is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Kidmuthenu, according to our likeness, and signifies to be like by cutting or carving, and so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used Gen. 2.7 & 8. which signifies to fashion out of clay like a Potter, seems to favour this interpretation. (you may see herewith Rom 9.21. and think on it) Bucanus also Inst Theol. Loc. 8. q. 18. confesseth that there is nothing in his opinion, but according to the Analogy of faith, and brings his reason to justify it. Yet as if he had forgot himself, he condemns Osiander of madness that follows it lib. cit. loc. 9 q. 15. And because other late Doctors though without reason disallow this judgement of the ancient fathers, see Med. Patr. Scult. de nevis Iren. & Tertull Reoberts Fund. Rel cap. 17. I leave it in the midst, till further proof of the truth be made on the one side, or the other. Notwithstanding man is truly said to be created in the image, or according to the image of Elohim, or Christ the Creator, either naturally, or else supernaturally: naturally; either according to the state of his body, or of his soul, or of the whole composition: his body is an abridgement or compound of all bodily being, because there is nothing in the bodily creature, which is not in some sort in that little world of man's body, as reason proves by his food, and medicine, out of all bodies here below; and as the Physicians, and all naturalists affirm, and as Paracelsus more particularly every where shows and proves. So that as all things even bodily beings, were created in Christ, and therefore were in Him eminently, by their forms, and potentially, as being by Him brought into act, or effect: So are they all in the body of man representatively: and though by his sin subject to the curse, as he their Presbyter is; yet shall they be delivered from this bondage of corruption, when the glorious liberty of the Sons of God, shall appear, Rom. 8.19.20. to 24. And concerning the soul, if you look into the faculties thereof, beyond them that concern the body alone in growth, and sense; if in the understanding you consider the powers of the imagination or thought, of the discourse, of memory, of the will and the freedom thereof, in civil and moral things; you may truly say, that all things are subject to their Lord and Creator; so hath He made all things subject to the possibilities of man's understanding, in as much as the Spirit of man considers all things; yea presumes to search even the deep things of God. Now one soul with all these properties argues the wonderful excellency thereof; and what a lively stamp of his wisdom He hath imprinted therein. But because the whole of every thing is more excellent than the parts which are for the perfection of the whole, and that the soul out of the body hath no power of growth, of sense, of imagination (and because it would not be destitute of the native abilities and powers of itself, it parts so unwillingly from the body, & cannot possibly forsake it for ever, as it will appear hereafter) therefore the excellency of that image appears not only in the parts, as I have showed, but much more in the compound of the body and soul together, wherein are all things both bodily and spiritual so represented, as that the shape of a man cannot be more lively seen in a looking glass, than the whole creature is represented in man, the epitome or sum of all. Moreover, what is there in all nature which he makes not art to imitate? yea and beyond any pattern in nature, adventures in a frame of wood? to compass both land and Sea, what arts doth not he find out, and because he knows he cannot come to nought, what dares he not to undertake in peace or war? And if every effect do represent the cause, with the power, & virtues thereof, as it is said, Psal. 19 & Rom. 1.29. then much more that which is the sum and principle effect of all. And this is that threefold image in which Adam was created, and which remains unblotted out, yet wonderfully stained in every man, Gen. 9.6. & 1 Cor. 11.7. But because it is spoken of the whole man, that he was created in the image of God; you are to understand that Image first in the natural composition of his body and soul, as I have showed: Secondly, in regard of his Lordship over all this visible creature: and thirdly, and most of all in those supernatural endowments of righteousness and holiness wherein he was created. Eph. 4.24. Col. 3.10. Wisd. 2.23. With the ability to continue in that state, if he had not sinned, and a freedom also of will to sin, or not to sin. And thus was Adam the Image of Elohim supernaturally, and for the renewing of his Image being now lost, are all those benefits which God in Christ hath vouchsafed to his Church. Object. 1. But if man were created in the image of God, what pre-eminence is that which is given unto Christ. Col. 1.15. That he is the Image of the invisible God? An Image is twofold, homageneous, which is in the perfection of the same being, as Adam, Gen. 5.3. begat a Son in his own likeness, after his own Image; and so Christ the Son of God is the image of the Father, as was showed, chap. 11. or heterogeneous, that is, of a different being, which is either in the understanding only, as the Ideas or forms of things conceived in the mind: or else material, wherein is the representation of some property belonging to another, as the image of Alexander may express that shape which was proper to his person. And thus man was created in the image of God, as I shown. And if this representation be more dark and further off in some one particular thing, it is rather called a sign, a proof, a footstep, or mark than an Image. As the pricking of an hare in the snow, is a mark or sign that she hath been there. And thus every thing created is a sign or mark of the power of the Creator, as the matter, form or propriety in one being, is a step, sign or argument of the Trinity in the Unity, that is, a proof thereof, as every effect is a proof or witness of the cause. CHAP. XVI. That man continued not in his Innocency; but that he sinned, and thereby became subject to eternal death. But Man being made upright in the beginning, and left to the hand of his own Counsel, Eccles. 15.14. they sought out many inventions, Eccles. 7.29. For as he had power both in body and soul to perform all the duty of man if he would; so had he received power to will or not to will all that he could; that his sin and punishment might be of himself. But that man might know that neither his power, nor yet his will, could be well directed without the guidance of his Creator, joh. 15.5. therefore being left unto Himself he quickly found what he was able to do of himself, that he should never after that seek himself in himself, but in Him alone, who of his good pleasure works in man both to will and to do, Phil. 2.13. Thus man being left to himself sinned willingly: the woman being deceived by the craft of the devil, the enemy of mankind, but the man with less sin, if ignorantly. But ignorance is of three sorts, simple, willing, and wilful. Simple ignorance may be in the state of innocency, and is without sin; as in the Angels of heaven, Math. 24.36. as in children, Luc. 2.52. And in them to whom it is not given to know what they would, Act. 1.7. Willing ignorance is in them that care not to know what they ought to know: this is a sin with carelessness, and excuses not from the fewer stripes, Luk. 12.48. But wilful ignorance is in them that stubbornly refuse to know what they both may, and aught to know. This is a sin with scorn, and excuses not from many stripes, because it is with wilful disobedience, as of them that know and do not. If adam's eating had been with ignorance of the first kind, he had not sinned in eating. But this ignorance (as concerning that wherein he sinned) was not in Adam. But if he did eat ignorantly in the second kind, his sin was in this, that he did eat unadvisedly that which he ought to have known, and for which he ought to have given thanks to his Creator. The third kind of ignorance could not be in him: For than he had sinned before he did eat. But if no degree of ignorance were in him, but that he did eat knowing; yet presuming on his mercy whom he did offend, though his sin were greater, yet was it pardonable; because he trusted in his mercy against whom he sinned. But this sin was not in him. But the woman being deceived through her error was the cause of his transgression, 1 Tim. 2.14. And if he had eaten presumptuously, than had his sin been greater than that of Eve; whereas his lesser punishment argues his less offence. So than it seems that the man alone having received the commandment, did faithfully deliver it to the woman after her creation. So that her first sin (though it were not imputed, because there was yet no law whereby she was subjected to her husband) was, that she gave not firm credit to the word of her husband delivering the commandment of God; but that she suffered herself to be withdrawn by the craft of the devil, speaking in the serpent: but that his sin was in this, that he did unaduisedly eat that which the woman gave him, not minding what it was, as he pleads for himself before Him with whom he could not lie, The woman gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And thus was there mercy reserved for man, both in regard of that weak estate wherein he was created in comparison of the Angels; and in respect of the quality, and measure of his sin, and of the means whereby he was drawn thereto: whereas the Angels that kept not their first estate, but wilfully sinned against God, for their three sins, and for four could never find any place of repentance. But it is said, job. 31.33. If I have covered my sin as Adam: By which it seems his sin was more than he confessed. I answer. The word (Adam) there used, and so the word Enoch in divers places of Scripture do signify man in his sinful and wretched estate indefinitely, as Psal. 8.4. & 144.3. jehovah, what is Adam that thou knowest him? the Son of Enoch, that thou makest any account of him? And therefore divers good translations read that text of job, If I have covered my sin as Man, who doth commonly excuse his sin, and lessen his offence. But of what sort soever the sin of man was, it is most certain that he did sin. 1. For as the effect is manifest by the cause; so the cause appears by the effect. Now death is the wages of sin. Rom. 6.23. so then sin is the cause of that punishment. And every punishment is for some offence. But it is ruanifest that Adam was punished, even unto death itself. For otherwise he had lived until now and hereafter. Therefore it is manifest Adam sinned. 2. It is proved before that all the creature was good and upright in every kind, and that man was the prime and chief of all the visible creature, and therefore that he was created for the most excellent end, which is to be happy in Him, who is the chiefest good; of which happiness he could not have failed, if he had continued in the state of his creation. For every thing ordained for an end, by a cause that is powerful thereto; must be furnished with means sufficient for the attainment of that end. But it is manifest, that Adam hath failed of that happiness by the utter loss of life, and present being. Therefore he continued he continued not in the state of his creation, but sinned against his Creator. 3. Death is the punishment of some great offence in the reasonable creature, who is able to make a difference between good ill. But it is manifest that Adam was not created sinful, and therefore not subject to death. And again, it is manifest that that state of Adam was changed, because he is dead. But that change was not made by God, because it was contrary to his ordinance; neither could it be made by enforcement of any outward means; For then Adam had not been made sinful thereby. Therefore it was made by the willing act of Adam himself, and he thereby subjected to Sinne. 4. Nothing can be so inseparably in the whole offspring which is not first in the original; as the fruit cannot be wholly poisonous if the root or stem be not first infected. But it is learned by lamentable experience, that the whole mass of mankind is wholly sinful and corrupted; and that no man can say his heart is clean, therefore it must needs be that the root or original from whence they are descended (which we have already proved to have been one) was sinful and corrupt. 5. Man with much care and government in his youth, with much heed and wariness in his own carriage, is hardly at last brought unto a course of a virtuous life; and that not without many wicked desires and sinful deeds. But if the first man had not corrupted his nature, all virtue, and that alone had been natural to all men. But experience shows the contrary: Therefore Adam sinned, and thereby corrupted his whole nature. But you will say, If that sin of Adam were only a sin of ignorance, and that in so small a thing as the eating of an apple; the punishment of death, and that both of body and soul, can no way seem to be proportionable. For shall not the judge of all the world do right? And if the least sin deserve the greatest punishment, what punishment can be left for the greatest sin? or shall we say (as the Stoics taught) that all sins are equal? I answer. That sins compared one with another, are truly said to be lesser or greater one than another. For it is a less sin to think ill of a man undeservedly, than to hate him; And that, than to maim him; and that, than to murder him; and that, than to defame him. For most of these degrees hold in them, all those sins that are under it. So that as the Stoics truly said, every later exceeds by the multitude of sins that are therein. Yet is there no sin in itself, how little soever it seem, but in the rigour of God's justice deserves more punishment than all that which the sinner can bear, because of his greatness who is dishonoured thereby. For the greater any person is, the greater is the offence whereby he is dishonoured. As for a word of scorn spoken by a mean man against his equal, a small acknowledgement may make amends; for which offence against a Peer a Scandalum Magnatum may be brought; and if it had been spoken to the dishonour of the king, it might justly be accounted high treason in the speaker. How great then may we hold that offence to be, which is against the Majesty of God? before whom all the nations of the earth, are not so much as the drop from a bucket falling into a mighty river, Es. c. 40.15.2. Moreover every commandment of his being a rule of infinite justice; an infinite justice is offended by the breach thereof. And what satisfaction can a finite creature make to an infinite justice that is offended? but because it cannot bear a punishment intensiuè infinite, or infinite in quantity, therefore it is just that it should bear it extensiuè in the infinity of Continuance. Now as it was necessary that God should give a law unto man, that he might evermore acknowledge that duty and obedience which he ought to his Creator: so having enabled him both in body and soul to perform his law, which was also so easy a burden, as that it stood not in doing any thing; but only in the forbearance of one fruit among a million: it was most necessary, that God in His justice should require that breach of His law. Which law, the more easy it was to be kept; so much the sorer punishment did Adam deserve for the breach thereof. And thus did that murderer of mankind by the sin of our first Parents set open a door for the justice of God to break out upon them, being now liable to eternal punishment: yet did they not hereby bring on their own punishment alone, inasmuch as all their children are made liable with them to the same condemnation. §. 2. It may seem a needless question to ask, how long Adam stood in his innocency? but because opinions have been about the time of his fall, wherein they have differed from the first day of his Creation, to three years and an half; between which others have thought a week, some ten days, or seventeen at most, others half a year, Lidg: de Emend. temp. Omitting conjectures, it will not be unfit to examine it by reason, and Scripture, which hath not left us without a guide and instruction in any doubt that may be moved therein. The Hebrews compare Adam to an ox that had horns, and no hoofs; by which they meant he had no strength at all to walk in the commandments of God; but assoon as he was created, he pushed rebelliously against his ordinance. The ordinances of God (over and above the preeminences which He gave him in hiscreation) were three. Marriage, for the due propagation of man's natural life, Gen. 2.24. the law of the tree of knowledge; the figure of the life of grace, ch. 2.17. and the Sabbath, the assurance of the life of glory. For it were a witless thing to think that God sanctified that day for his own use, but for man to meditate in the works of God, and for remembrance of his hopes to come. Adam's transgression was against the second: but it will appear by the circumstances of the other two, when that transgression was committed. Adam was created a perfect man, in the prime and chief of his strength; and accordingly received that blessing to bring forth fruit and multiply. Now, if Adam according to that blessing had in his innocency endeavoured the propagation of mankind; it cannot be supposed, that God, who had immediately before given him that blessing to multiply, would immediately have taken it away again. And that act of Adam not being in vain, that first son of Adam must have been holy, and without the taint of original sin, although the parents had sinned afterward before it was borne. For that stain of original sin comes from the conception, Psal. 51.5. not by the birth. But no such holy seed of Adam is mentioned; nor none such could be; For the Lord looked down from heaven upon the sons of Adam, and they were altogether become filthy. Psal. 14.3. Now, if Adam were created such as he was, ask any lusty young man how many nights he would allow to his beloved and most beautiful Bride in her virginity, and give so many to Adam before he sinned. So than it may seem that we may take that Story of the Scripture concerning Adam, thus. Adam being made in the morning, that God might give him experience of the excellency of that estate wherein he was created, brought the Beasts and Birds before him, and gave him the Lordship over them all: which that he might exercise as he ought, he gave him perfect understanding of their nature, and power of words whereby to express their nature, and to command them. For as Adam named every thing, so was the name thereof. But that man might know that he was for a more noble end than to live among beasts; He took him and put him in the Garden of delight, furnished with fruits for every season, and gave him power to eat of all, excepting the forbidden tree. At noon that heavy sleep fell on him, in which the woman was made out of his side. He awaking, the marriage was solemnised, and the woman by her husband diligently warned to forbear to eat, or to touch the forbidden fruit. But while she wandered from her Husband, to choose fruit to her liking (for it is manifest that her Husband was not with her when she was deceived 1 Tim. 2.14.) she was encountered by the devil possessing the Serpent, and drawn into sin, and this about the ninth hour, or three of the clock in the afternoon; as all the sacrifices of the Law, and that sacrifice for sin whereby the works of the devil were destroyed, do sufficiently witness, Matth. 27.46. & 50. Thus man being in honour, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bal yalin, could not continue a night, but by his sin became subject to death, as the beasts that perish. Psal. 49.12. The heresy of Pelagius was like a Serpent with many heads, of which this was one; that Adam was created mortal, and though he had not sinned, yet should he have died; not for the merit or punishment of his sin, but for the condition or state of his creation: for being made of the elements, which in every elemental body may be separated, and in their simple being are changed one into another; it cannot be thought (said he) that Adam's state could be more continual than that from whence he had his beginning. Besides having in his innocence need of meat to restore the decay of his body, his body cannot be supposed immortal; but the answer is easy. For that immortality depended on the soul which should not have parted from the body, but should have ever been able to uphold the body without corruption, sickness, or death. And although any particular change had been in the body, yet should it not have been in the whole, no more than that corruption or change which is in the simple elements: therefore Adam in his innocence was immortal absolutely, inasmuch as his immortal soul should never have forsaken his body; but he was mortal only on condition, if he did sin. So mortality was the punishment of his sin: but that which is put upon a man as a punishment, can no way belong unto him in the state of his innocence. But it is plain that death was inflicted on him for his sin: for why should it be said to him, In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death. Gen. 2.17. if by the necessity of his creation he should have died, though he had not eaten. CHAP. XVII. That by the sin of Adam, the whole race of mankind is corrupted, and made liable to everlasting death both of body and soul. ANother error of Pelagius was, that Adam by his sin did hurt himself alone; but that his posterity were no way tainted thereby with any original sin, nor brought in danger of eternal death: which as it is contrary to the authority of the holy Scripture; so do they thereby put an absolute necessity on the justice of God, to admit those infants, that never committed any actual sin, into eternal happiness: whereby, as the mercy of God; so also the death of Christ, as far as he should be a Saviour to them, is utterly in vain: for what need they mercy or Mediator, who for their own worthiness must enter into everlasting life? yet this poison the Socinians of late have licked up as a restorative; which heresy with other of theirs you may read in Wentsel a Budowecs pag. 232. & 233. But as Adam had received original righteousness, so by his sin did he lose what he had received, and that not for himself alone; but also for his posterity: for he being that common person in whom the whole race of mankind was, whatsoever gifts or graces God gave unto him, he gave them as a king, to him and his for ever, if he as a faithful liegeman should perform those services that were belonging to that state wherein he was enfeoffed: but if he performed not that service whereto he was bound, then must he also forfeit that estate for him and his for ever. And because contraries are known each by other, as a crooked line by a strait; it may easily appear what that original sin is, whereto all the sons of Adam were made liable by his offence: for if Adam were created in original righteousness; so that he had power both to know, and to do that which was pleasing to God, and a freedom of his will to continue or not to continue in that state (and without any of those conditions he could not be perfect) then must it needs follow that by that sin of his, both he, and his posterity are deprived both of that knowledge of the will of God, of the knowedge of the creature also, and of all ability to do or will any thing (as of ourselves) that may be pleasing in his sight: for as that original righteousness had with it not only an innocence, harmlessness, or freedom from sin, but likewise a positive strength to do that which was good; so likewise that original sin brought with it a corruption of the understanding, a frowardness of the will, a heaviness or unableness to all good; and more than that, a concupiscence or ill desire leading the mind captive unto sin: for contrary causes must have contrary effects; so, as God had created that first righteousness in the heart of man: so when man did willingly forsake his service, and of himself betook himself to the service of his enemy the devil (for to whomsoever a man doth yield himself to obey, his servant he is to whom he doth obey) the devil not only willingly entertained this new come guest, whose service he so much longed for; but also gave him his livery, and infected his heart with contrary conditions, that he might never after be fit for the entertainment of his former Lord. For of contraries about the same subject, one must of necessity be therein, as light or darkness in the air; health or sickness in the body, sight or blindness in the eye: so that in stead of the former virtues, whereby the Spirit of grace did guide man's heart to God, he is now not only utterly disabled to do that whereto his conscience tells him he is bound, but also become a thrall of Satan, to be guided and governed according to his will. And this wretched and sinful estate, with the guiltiness or obligation unto the punishment thereof, which is the death both of body and soul, is that original sin wherein every one of Adam's children is conceived and borne; and for which he is subject unto death: for so was the sentence, that in what day he sinned he should die the death. And though Adam instantly did not find himself to die; yet by the just sentence of the Law and justice of God did he find himself spiritually dead, that is, destitute of the grace of God, and that strength which he had to do his will, and therefore subject to this necessity, that he must die at last, and so in an estate contrary to that in which he was created: neither ought it to seem strange, or unjust, that God should punish this sin of Adam in his posterity also: for as it was personal in respect of himself, to make himself liable to the wrath of God; so his natural gifts being lost and corrupted, the contrary qualities brought in in stead thereof, became a natural contagion to all his posterity. There is here some little question, whether this ignorance, frowardness, heaviness, and concupiscence before spoken of be the effects of original sin, the wounds of nature (as the schools call them) or the sin itself. But as their contraries were in original justice, as the parts, or as the poperties, or as the effects thereof; so must these be in original sin, to me they see me to be that spiritual death that was threatened to Adam, and so the present punishment of that sin; and in them that are not renewed to the life of grace, the assurance of that further punishment that shall come upon the soul hereafter. Let us not stay in needless questions, but look to the proofs of our conclusion: for by the knowledge of original righteousness it will appear what these things are. 1. Because nothing can bring forth naturally any other thing than such as itself is. If Adam were in himself corrupted, as hath been showed, Chap. 16. he could not beget any other children but such as were corrupted. And forasmuch as all men in justice are accounted as one man, in respect of the common nature whereof they are all partakers; it is just with God to punish all men alike for their common corruption, from which no man can say his heart is clean: for doth any man forbeareto kill an adder though he never yet stung any man or beast? I think not; but because the whole nature of adders is venomous, therefore will he kill him. 2. It cannot stand with the justice of God to punish any one with death who is not liable to that punishment for some offence. Now the sin of those infants who from their birth are carried to their grave, not being any actual sin to which any election or consent of the mind could come; it is plain that they are punished for their original sin. And concerning them that have lived to take an account of their own ways, there needs no other proof than the testimony of every man's conscience whether they find not the law of sin in themselves warring against themselves and leading them captive unto sin, contrary to the law of their own minds. This is that burden under which the Saints do groan so, as that they hate themselves therefore, and desire to be delivered from this body of death Rom. 7.18. etc. And why of death? because the wages of sin wrought in the body is death Rom. 6.23. yet not of the body only, but of the soul also; both in regard of this inbred contagion, that bitter root, and of that consent which it gives to sin; that I say nothing of them who through custom follow sin with greediness. 3. Every creature naturally continues in that estate and follows those things whereto it was created, except some great contrariety befall to the hindrance thereof. But man was created to know and to love God, and to see his wisdom in the creature, and to honour him therefore, and doing thus to be happy for ever thereby: yet nothing of this is done accordingly by any among all the sons of Adam: therefore some great hindrance and contrariety is come between. But nothing that good is could be an hindrance to this great good; nor yet any thing which is without the man himself. Therefore man's sin alone which hath infected all, hath been the only hindrance of all this good. 4. The holy Scripture shows the truth of this in job 14.4. Who can bring a clean thing out of uncleanness? not one. And Psal. 51.5. Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin hath my mother conceived me. Rom. 5.12. By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men; for that all have sinned. Ephes. 2.3. We are all by nature the children of wrath. And this is that taint of original sin, which being bred in every man's bones will never out of the flesh. And concerning actual sin, you may read those Scriptures which are cited by S. Paul Rom. 3. They are all gone out of the way; they are altogether become filthy; there is none that doth good, no not one, etc. from. v. 9 to 18. CHAP. XVIII. That there is a restoring of Man to a better life and further hope than that from which our parents fell. But if the whole world be thus become guilty before God, is it for this end, that the whole world may be subjected to eternal death? God forbidden; but as sin hath abounded unto condemnation, so hath the grace and righteousness of God abounded much more unto everlasting life: for as by the offence of one, judgement came upon all men to condemnation; so by the righteousness of one, the free pardon came unto all men for justification unto life. See Rom. 5. Chap. Therefore lest man at the sight of his own perfections should sinne through pride unrecoverably as the devils, it was permitted that Adam should sinne as he did, that a way might be made for the justice and mercy of God to be manifest, and that man at the sight of his sin might be humbled before his Creator, and so received to grace. The whole world then being liable to the justice of God by that sin of our first father, as hath been showed; now it remains in this place to prove, that there is a possibility to return to God, in whose favour and acceptance only is life and happiness. And for the more clear proof hereof; let us first lay this sure foundation: that all the works of God, and all the possibilities in the creature are known to him from all eternity. Secondly, that to do well, and right, and to withstand sin, and the temptations of the devil requires a positive strength, and grace in the heart of man, which grace man cannot take unto himself, because no creature can be partaker either of being, or of strength, or any good, but only so far forth as it is imparted thereunto; and where the want of strength is, the effect of that want on all occasions must needs appear. So that since Adam's fall man being not only deprived of that strength to resist sin which Adam had, but also infected with a natural corruption and inclination to sin, which they call concupiscence: man hath no help in himself to help himself, upon which grounds the reason will follow thus. If there be not a possibility of the restoring of man into the favour and grace of God, from which he fell by his sin, than could not the justice of God be without great iniquity and injustice. (Let him be merciful, that we speak according to the manner of men; that is, according to that reason and understanding which he hath given unto men for the manifestation of his glory and grace) For if God in the infinity of his wisdom, foreseeing that man being created would sin, and yet would create him, and for his sin utterly cast off the whole race of mankind to destruction, neither could any place of mercy be found with him, for which the creature could give him glory, neither could that justice be but with great injustice, inasmuch as they that never were should without any desert be created to eternal punishment, and they that had done the least sins; nay they that had done neither good nor ill, as they that die in their infancy should be shut out to eternal death, aswell as they that all their life time had followed all manner of sin with greediness. So also all the commandments of God tending to the amendment of life, and all his threaten and promises should be invaine. So also all the endeavours of holy and devout men, who through his grace strive to the masterdom of their own wickedness, and all the constancy of them who have suffered for the profession of his truth and service, should be unrewarded. So virtue should have no advantage over vice in the difference of the reward. But all these things are impossible: therefore there is a restoring of man to that favour and grace of God, from which he was separate by his sin. 2. If there were not a restoring of mankind to that estate from which he is fallen, than the sin of man a finite creature should be more powerful to the destruction of the work of God, who made man to everlasting life, than the power & wisdom of God should to the upholding of the creature in that estate wherein he created it. So ill, and sin, things not being should have pre-eminence for mischief, above an infinite power and goodness for glory and happiness. But this is impossible: therefore as by sin there was a general wrack of mankind; so it is necessary that there be a general restoring, powerful and sufficient for the sins of the whole world, available and effectual to all that believe it, and show the fruit of their faith by their strife against sin, and doing such good works as God hath created that we should walk in them. 3. Faith, hope, charity, temperance, and all other Christian and moral virtues are the work of God's Spirit in man, who of himself is not able no not to think a good thought. But it is impossible that the Spirit of God should work in vain, or to no end in the heart of man, to believe the forgiveness of his sins and to hope for everlasting life, etc. or that God should not accept his own work in his creature, which is ever for the good of the creature. Therefore there is a restoring of man to those hopes of happiness which he had lost. 4. The continuance of the world, and the creatures therein by a being of infinite power, wisdom and goodness, must be to an end exceedingly good: therefore there is a restoring of man, that the effect of that goodness may appear in his everlasting life and happiness: for if the continuance of the world be for the multiplication of mankind, only for satisfaction of the divine justice upon mankind for his sin; then should it be necessary that the world were everlasting, that the everlasting justice might receive everlasting satisfaction; but so the greater power of the Creator in the longer continuance of the world should be for the greater affliction and hurt of the creature; so the infinity of his power should be infinitely distant from his mercy and pity, the effect of his goodness toward his creature; so he should have made the creature and the continuance thereof because he hated it, not because he loved it. But all these things are impossible, and against the dignities which we have before proved to be in God one infinite being, Ergo. §. 1. From hence also it will appear that the restoring is to an estate of further happiness, than the continuance of that natural life in which, and unto which Adam was at first created. For if the advantage in the recovery were not greater than the loss was by the sin, than had the sin been permitted to no end; then had the loss been sustained in vain, and all those afflictions which mankind hath ever since endured should be without recompense in the reward. But it is impossible that God should permit sin in man, and the punishment thereof afflictions and death, only to set man in the same state wherein he was before; for that had been to no end at all, it had been in vain to suffer his own justice to be violated, in vain to give his Son to die, only to restore man to that state which he had lost, wherein he might have been kept, and all these inconveniences saved. Therefore the recovery is with a superexcellency of glory and happiness far above that which Adam lost. 2. It is the glory of the wisdom of God, out of the greatest ill to bring the greatest good. The greatest ill which the devil by sin could bring upon man, was the loss of his worldly life and happiness, and to make him liable to the wrath of God, and so to eternal death: therefore the infinite mercy and wisdom prepared so powerful a remedy against this poison of the old Serpent, that the life and happiness in this world was changed to that which is to be in eternity in the heavens with an exceeding weight of glory which no words can utter, neither can it come into the heart of man to conceive. And this with that assurance of the favour and love of God in Christ, from which neither height, nor depth, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come shall ever be able to separate us. Rom. 8.38.39. CHAP. XIX. That the restoring of Man to the favour of God, could not be by any means that was in man, nor by any one that was man alone. WHat hast thou, O man, which thou hast not received? and if thou hast received that which thou hast of grace alone; whereas thou couldst claim nothing of duty, what is that merit of thine, either of condignity, or of congruity for which thou canst challenge either reward or acceptance? is there not a bond of duty and thankfulness to him of whom thou didst receive it? And if man have received of God his whole being, and whatsoever he hath of outward blessings, or inward graces; how can he give any thing to God which is not his own 1 Chron. 29.14.16. So that whatsoever a man can do which may seem pleasing to God; yet when he hath done all, he must acknowledge himself an unprofitable servant, because he hath done only that which he ought Luke 17.10. But being besides in danger of the judgement of God, both for his original and actual sin, shall he bring for his ransom ten thousand rivers of oil, or the fruit of his body for the sin of his soul? Mic. 6.7. Oh madness of merit and satisfaction! where are those works of supererogation, that treasury of the Church, by the peddling and sale of which, that purple whore hath lived in pleasure, and glorified herself? But see the reasons of the conclusion. 1. Every offender against an infinite justice, must in justice either make an infinite satisfaction, or else endure an infinite punishment. But no finite creature either man or Angel, can make an infinite satisfaction: so then there is no return to the favour of God by the mediation either of man or Angel. 2. Where an endless debt is still increased, there no payment can be looked for. But man by his original sin being infinitely indebted doth still increase the debt more and more by his actual transgression. Therefore from man no amends can be looked for. 3. No creation can be without an infinite power (as it hath been proved) therefore much less can the restoring of the creature being fallen from the estate of Grace. For in the Creation there was nothing which hindered the work of the Creator; But in the estate of sin there is an impediment, first in the corruption which is in the understanding, and frowardness of the will turned away from God; Secondly in the concupiscence, whereby man is in thralled to the service of sin, etc. Thirdly, the power of the devil, whereto a man is subjected by his sin. Fourthly, the Just sentence and wrath of God. The soul that sinneth shall die the death. O Man! see what thou dost when thou dost sin. Canst thou flee from thyself? yet the devil will overtake thee. Canst thou escape the devil? yet the vengeance of God will surely lay hold on thee. Therefore there is no Redemption or hope in him that is man alone. 4 No man can pay for another that for which he is indebted himself But every man, and every other Creature doth owe unto God whatsoever it is, or whatsoever it can do. Therefore no man, only man, can supply toward God the want of another man's service much less make satisfaction for his sin, as it is said in the 49. Psal v. 7. None can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him. And if the injury were infinite, and the satisfaction impossible to be made by a finite creature, to which of the Angels shall man turn himself? And there shall he find a further inconvenience. For seeing the offence was made by man, It is necessary that justice seek satisfaction where the offence was made. As an unity in number once broken, cannot be made up by the same parts into which it was broken. Objections. 1. But you will say, a finite Creature cannot do an infinite deed, and therefore cannot commit an infinite sin thereby to deserve an infinite punishment. Answer. The sin is not esteemed according to the littleness of the Sinner; but the infinity of the sin is first in regard of Him against whom the sin was, that is God, whose infinite glory and justice was disesteemed therein. Then in respect of the good of which man deprived himself by his sin, that was life eternal, as the Father saith, factus est dignus malo aeterno, qui in seperimit bonum, quod poterat esse aeternum. Thirdly in respect of the manly nature, despoiled of grace and glory, which nature by the blessing which Adam had received, was multipliable into infinite multitudes of men. In all which respects that sin after a sort may well be said infinite. 2. But good is more powerful and active than ill, seeing ill neither is but in that which is good, nor works but in the power thereof. Therefore if man by one ill deed were able to destroy himself, much more by many good deeds shall he be able to make satisfaction. Answer. Ill is in every want or failing of that which is good: but Good holds all perfections, whether in being, or in working. Therefore man might easily corrupt himself; but being corrupted he cannot possibly repair himself, nor yet do any thing that is good or acceptable, Math. 7.18. & 12.33. 3. But the satisfaction being now made, are we not restored unto as good an estate by the suffering of Christ, as that which Adam lost? so that if Adam for his obedience sake might have lived a natural life eternally; we also for our works sake may be accounted worthy of everlasting bliss. For if we be restored by Christ, and for his sake accepted, our works likewise are for his sake both accepted and rewarded according to their merit. Answer. I say, that our estate is fare better than Adam's in this, that his hope of everlasting life, being set in his own obedience, did instantly fail; but ours, standing in the obedience of Christ, who is made to us righteousness, sanctification, redemption and life, can never fail. For therefore because that precious treasure of eternal life was so carelessly kept by Adam, God who loved the salvation of mankind better than man himself, would in no wise commit the keeping of that jewel to man any more. Therefore though sin have no power to condemn them that are in Christ, yet is it still suffered to dwell in us, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in the living God. For as the Father saith, Multum nobis in hac carne tribueremus, nisi usque ad ejus depositionem sub veniâ viveremus. Aug. de Civ. lib. 10. cap. 22. And although Adam by the grace and favour of his Creator, might have continued in the estate in which he was created, if he had stood in his innocency: yet could he not even then have been said to merit everlasting life. For merit, or hire, comes ever for that which is above duty, which cannot be in the creature towards the Creator. As to a hired servant the wages, merit, or hire, comes for his work; because it was in his power whether he would labour for that master or no, being not bound unto him but for his hire: but in a bondman the possession of his Lord, all his service and labour is his Lords to require, and employ it as it pleaseth him, Luke. 17.8.9. and this is the condition of the whole creature to the Lord and Creator of all. And if Adam in his innocency could not merit, much less can sinful man merit any thing but affliction and death by his sin and service to the devil, to whom he is no way bound but by his sin. And this difference the Apostle maketh, Rom. 6.23. the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life. 4. But are we not commanded to work out our salvation with fear and trembling? Phil. 2.12. and is not the sentence of everlasting life pronounced for the works of charity which were foreseen in us, and for which the kingdom of heaven was prepared for us from the beginning of the world? Math. 25. vers. 34.35.36. Answer. What merit can any man claim for that which another hath principally wrought in him? And if God worketh in us to will, and to do, Phil. 2.13. what is our work, but that we should with joy run after Him that draws us? Cant. 1.4. Therefore although good works are ordained of God that we should walk in them, and that we are created thereunto, Eph. 2.10. and that God who chose us in Christ to be heirs of glory; ordained all the means thereto, and works in us to be ready to every good work: and thereby makes our calling and election sure unto us: yet is not that work solely and entirely ours, but chiefly of the grace and spirit of Christ that dwells in us, and crownes His own good works in us with everlasting life. 1 Cor. 15.10. So then our works must vanish, that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be guilty before God. Rom. 3.19. So that every man notwithstanding his own works, even the chiefest among the Saints, may with job abhor himself, and repent in sackcloth and and ashes, job. 42.6. 5. The natural desires common to all men cannot be in vain, because they come not unto them out of any particular choice or present necessity, but by influence or direction of that common nature which is in all men, which though it cannot effect it, yet hath it shown what is to be wrought for the uttermost good of every particular, by the Lord of Nature. But every man by the inclination of his own will, doth desire the uttermost perfection and happiness of his own being, which he acknowledges to be in being united to that which is the greatest good, and the enjoying thereof in eternal life. Therefore every man by the guidance of nature itself, doth return unto God as the Author and Finisher of his happiness. Answer. No agent can work of itself above the proper strength and power of itself. And eternal life is a thing beyond the limits of natural knowledge and desire, which minds only the well-being and continuance of the whole man according to the present estate of this natural life alone. But because He that wils not the death of a sinner, Ezech. 33.11. would have all men to come to the knowledge of the truth, 1 Tim. 2.4. therefore are all men so fare instructed (or at least if they do not wilfully wink may be so fare instructed) either by the voice of the creature, or by certain inbred notions, or by tradition, or by an influence of grace denied to none: that they may know the eternal power and Godhead, Rom. 1.20. and the immortality of the soul, in a better estate than this life can afford, as hath been said before, in Pref. And this is that universal grace which we may yield to be vouchsafed to all, not only without the visible Church, but much more within the Church, where by the clear light of the Holy Scripture all may and aught to know particularly, whatsoever is meet for their soul's health. And this universal grace, I say further, we ought to yield unto, because without it, neither the pagans and infidels, nor yet the false Christians can be without excuse. But that every one that knows, doth of himself according to this knowledge frame his will constantly, and effectually, to desire whatsoever belongs to eternal life, Pelagius will never be able to demonstrate. For he that wils any thing constantly and effectually, wils also those means constantly and effectually without which that thing cannot be come unto. And because without holiness no man can see the Lord, Heb. 12.14. in whose presence only is the fullness of blessing and joy for evermore, Psal. 16.11. in the narrow path of which holiness because the godless Pagan and lose living Christian cannot nor will not walk, therefore they cannot be said effectually either to will, or to desire everlasting life. But this is that special grace reserved for the vessels of mercy, by which they are not enforced against their will, but of natural men naturally unwilling, are made willing to follow Him that draws them with the cords of love, to love that which is pleasing in his sight, and so to will and desire constantly and effectually to follow that which is for their soul's health. So this desire being wrought in them, by Him that is able to fulfil the desire of them that fear Him, is a pledge unto them that their hope shall never be ashamed. And thus the weakenesle of the assumption, and falsehood of the conclusion, do plainly appear. 6. But he is accounted a cruel creditor that will exact more than his debtor can pay: and he a cruel Lord, that requires of his servant that which he cannot perform. Therefore the most merciful God requires of man no other satisfaction then that which man is able to perform. Answer. It is just that God should require of man that he enabled him to perform. For otherwise His justice should be deficient or wanting towards Himself: and his glory likewise unduly esteemed. And the cruelty of a Creditor is to require more than a man is able to perform, by himself or by his surety. Therefore our most merciful Lord foreseeing the malice of the Devil, and the sin of man thereby, to the glory of His infinite grace, provided us a Saviour before we had sinned: For whose abundant satisfactions sake, we have a door of entrance as wide as the Valley of Anchor set open unto us, that by His merit alone we may come boldly unto the throne of grace, there to find help in the time of need. Of which Mediator we are now to speak in the Articles following. ARTICLE II. ❧ And in jesus Christ His only Son. WE have seen the wretched estate of man to which he is subjected by reason of his sin, whereby he is avoidable liable unto the wrath of God, which he is utterly unable to endure: and from which to escape there is no means in his own power. Now consider with thyself most wretched caitif, that art afraid to die because thou hast no hope but in this life, what it were for thee to stand justly condemned to die, and every minute to expect the execution of thy doom, if any one could be content to die for thee that thou mightest enjoy the usury of this air but for the time of thy natural life, from which thou knowest thou must part at last. But being subject to an infinite wrath, to an endless punishment, the endurance of which but for one hour, hath more misery than the suffering of a thousand untimely deaths: what love canst thou owe to him? what thanks canst thou give unto him, that would free thee from the punishment, and instead of that restore thee to an estate of life and joy eternal? And seeing it hath appeared that this cannot be done by any one that is only man; we are now in this second place to see what are the conditions of our Mediator; who by Himself is able to make satisfaction for our sin. For seeing the just sentence on man was, that for his own sin he should die the death; which because it was the word of an infinite speaker, of an infinite truth: it must of necessity be meant according to the uttermost extension of the truth, and so mean all death of body and soul, temporal, and eternal. And because the Mediator for man could not endure a temporal or bodily death, except he were man: therefore it shall first appear; That the Mediator for the sin of man must be man. And because eternal death is such a thing as no man only man can offer himself unto, with hope or possibility by himself to overcome, therefore it shall appear in the second place; That our most glorious Mediator must be God: who being of infinite life, wisdom, and power, knew how to conquer eternal death; that having in the infinite worthiness of his own person satisfied the infinite justice for the sin of man, He might give eternal life to all them that by true faith should lay hold on His merits; and in thankfulness for that unspeakable mercy live in obedience to his commandments. And that it may appear what the superexcellency of the knowledge of our most holy faith in the religion of Christ is, and that for the worthiness and glory thereof, it fare surpasseth all knowledge of all things which men or angels can come unto: it shall be made plain in the third place, how necessary and agreeing to the wisdom, goodness, and glory of God it was; That God should be incarnate. Great is the mystery of godliness, into which the angels desire to look. And because our most glorious Light and guide, hath in his Holy word made these things so manifest unto us, let us with cheerfulness and joy in the ready service of our best understanding, follow him who in our flesh hath reconciled all things to himself, and in our flesh hath led captivity captive, and triumphed over principalities and all powers of the enemy; that we being delivered, might serve himin holiness and righteousness all the days of our life, and be accepted of Him in life everlasting. CHAP. XX. That the Mediator for the sin of Man must be Man. 1. FIat justitia, & totus mundus ruat. But when man sinned, it could not stand with the justice of God to punish any for that sin but man alone. And whatsoever is against the justice of God, is also against his wisdom, his goodness and power: for we have already proved that all these dignities are in him one most simple and absolute being Chap. 8. And whatsoever is against the power of God, is utterly impossible to be: therefore it must necessarily follow, either that there is no reconciliation of man unto God, contrary to that which hath been proved in the 18. Chap. or else that this reconciliation must be made by a Mediator that is man. Therefore the Father said fitly hereto, Propterea nobis per Mediatorem praestita est gratia, ut polluti carne peccati, carnis peccati similitudine mundaremur. August. de Civitate Dei lib. 10. Cap. 22. 2. God might seem towards man an accepter of persons, and towards the Angels that sinned, severe and merciless, if he should condemn them to the pains of eternal fire, and yet accept man to mercy, when no satisfaction had been made for man's sin in the nature that had sinned. But both these things are utterly impossible, and against the justice of God: therefore the punishment of the sin of man must be borne in the nature of man. 3. The just Law and sentence of the most wise Lawmaker and just judge ought to stand sure and inviolable. But the sentence of death was decreed and pronounced against man, if he sinned Gen. 2.17. Therefore by man is the expiation and satisfaction to be made for sin. 4. Every restoring of any want or corruption in nature must be by that which is of the same kind, as if any flesh in man be rotten, the member is not made whole again but by the supply of sound flesh in stead thereof. If a bone be broken, the breach is not made up with a stick, nor a cut sinew by a catlin; so the nature of man being corrupted by the disobedience of one, could not be restored again but by the obedience of one in whom the nature of man being restored, all that are partakers of his incorruption may also be partakers of his immortality: because man's nature doth not now stand absolutely condemned in God's justice as before. 5. This argument the Apostle urgeth 1. Cor. 15.21. For since by man came death, by man also came the resurrection of the dead. And again Rom. 5.19. As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners; so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. You may yet see more reasons for this conclusion in the Chapter next following. CHAP. XXI. That the Mediator for the sin of man must be God. THat the Angels in glory with such perfections as they had, should sinne maliciously, when there was no tempter, makes their sin without excuse, and them in justice unpardonable: and although the sin of man in comparison of theirs may seem much less and more pardonable, in respect of that low estate of men's creation in comparison of the Angels; that his sin was not malicious; nor without a Tempter: yet when it is well thought on, how hateful a thing to God sin is, how His pure eyes cannot behold ungodliness and wrong, how his infinite justice is violate thereby; and what jealousy so glorious and infinite a being aught to have of his own honour, so set at nought by so base and unworthy a thing as man, who also by that sin of his disordered the whole creature, so fare forth as it was for his use, and made it subject to vanity and corruption: it may well appear of what an infinite difficulty it was to restore man to that favour and grace from which he had fallen. For in beings of which one is finite, the other infinite, there must be an infinite difference; and if they be of contrary conditions, the one pure and righteous, the other sinful and impure, that contrariety must needs likewise be infinite, and an infinite contrariety can no way be accorded or reconciled, but by an infinite concord, which cannot be but in Him which is partaker both of the finite and infinite being. And because it hath before appeared chap. 18. That man was to be restored to the favour of God, and to be reconciled again unto him, it must follow necessarily that this peacemaker must be both God and man. For infinity is with the greatest greatness of being, and contains all the extremities thereof, and such is the Being of God: but the Creature being finite is set at an infinite distance from that which is infinite, and therefore in a lessenesse of being, as having no being at all of itself, but only imparted by that infinite being, from which degree of participation, if it fall, as man did by his sin, it still falls unto a further lessenesse or badness of estate, and so becomes utterly desperate, except it be upheld as man was by that hope, The seed of the woman shall bruise the Serpent's head. And seeing the greatest greatness of being, and the least littleness of being cannot be accorded, but by an equality of being, which cannot be but in that which doth equally participate both of that greatness and that littleness, that is, essentially: therefore it is most necessary that our gracious Mediator be essentially both God and man, which will yet further appear by these reasons that follow. 1. That all mankind by the sin of Adam is deprived of the favour and glory of God, hath been proved in the 17. Chapter, and that there is a restoring of mankind, was showed in the 18. Chap. Now if it be not in the power of man or of any other finite being to restore man being fallen into the favour of God, it follows of necessity that the Mediator or restorer must be God. But the first was abundantly proved in the 19 Chapter, Ergo the second follows of necessity. 2. For every infinite offence an infinite amends must needs be made, or else there is no satisfaction. The sin of man was an infinite offence, See Chap. 19 Answ. to the 1. Object. But an infinite amends could not be made by a finite creature: Ergo the Mediator for the sin of man must be God. And although God cannot suffer at all, yet because the punishment due to man for sin was more than any man was able to bear; it was necessary that the manhood in that conflict should be upheld by the Godhead, that the sin being balanced by the punishment, the worthiness of the person might make the suffering of infinite merit for the sins of of the whole world. 3. No effect can be eternal but by a cause that is eternal: for whatsoever is this or that by accident, must of necessity be made such by that which is such of itself. But the restoring of man is to an estate of life and happiness which is to be eternal (as it will further appear in the Article of Everlasting life) therefore it is necessary that it be wrought by a cause which is also eternal. But it is proved that nothing can be eternal but God alone: therefore the restorer of mankind must be God. 4. The enemy of man's everlasting salvation is the devil, a most powerful enemy, whose power is yet greater against man because he pleads the justice of God against sinners: therefore it was necessary, that the author and finisher of our salvation should be God and man, that he might be able both to satisfy the infinite justice, and by a greater power of his own, to withstand the great power of the devil. 5. Contrary causes must have contrary effects, and so contrary effects must have contrary causes, and one of these is ever known and discerned by the other, so that man by his sin being subject to death, when it appears what man's disease or sin was, the remedy likewise will be manifest: but it is plain that man being not content with his estate would be God, as it appears first by the temptation of the devil, Gen. 3.5. In the day that ye eat thereof, ye shall be as God knowing good and ill. Then by the consent verse 6. And the woman seeing that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the tree and did eat. If then the sickness were this, that man would be God, the only medicine must be this, that God would be man: therefore the mediator would be both God and man. 6. To require satisfaction for the sin of man from God, was to require that which was not due, and that is against justice. To require the satisfaction of man, was more than he could perform, and that is against mercy: therefore that the work both of justice and mercy might be perfect, it was necessary that the Mediator for the sin of man should in one person be both God and man: for as gold is melted in the fire because it hath parts that may be made running, yet by reason of the purity and perfection of those parts it cannot be consumed by the most violent flames; so our Lord because he was truly man did feel and endure the pangs of most bitter death, and was compassed about with the sorrows of hell, Psal. 18.6. yet for the innocence of his manhood, and the glory of his deity, he could not be overcome thereby. 7. It is impossible that a pure creature should have such sufficiency of merit, that in God's justice the sanctification of mankind should be due to those merits, because all holiness that can come to any creature, whether of virtue or of works, must come thereto from God: so no praise or merit can in justice be due to any man for that which God hath wrought by him: therefore the Mediator of mankind must be God. 8. Every particular man being only man, is of much less worth than the whole race of mankind, and so insufficient in justice to make a sufficient satisfaction for the sins of all men: therefore that all mankind might be freed from their sins both original and actual, it was necessary that the Mediator who should make satisfaction for their sins, should be both man, from whom the satisfaction was due, and yet of more worthiness than all mankind, that his merit might make the ransom sufficient for the sins of all men. But nothing is of more worth than all mankind, but God alone: therefore the Mediator for man's sin must be God. For although the Angels be more excellent than man according to the condition of their present being, yet not in respect of the end of their creation. First, in that they are ministering spirits for man's sake, Heb. 1.14. Secondly in regard of their common end, in that both the one and the other are to be blessed in God alone. thirdly, And if any one man cannot be accounted more worthy than any of the whole kinds of beings that were created, as our Lord said, Ye are more worth than may sparrows Luke 12.7. He said not all (for no species in the creature may be missing) and yet the health of one man was prized above the life of 2000 swine Mar. 5.2.13. How can any thing beside the Creator himself be more worthy than all mankind? 9 The greatest benefit which God could bestow upon man must of necessity be by the greatest gift which he could give unto him. The greatest benefit was in this, to save and redeem him when he was utterly lost. The greatest gift which he could give to man was himself: therefore it was necessary that God should become one with man, that in man he might save man that was lost. 10. This is that riddle which the Psalmist takes upon him to open psal. 49. where after he hath showed that no man either by his wealth, or honour, can make any ransom for another, he concludes that it is God which redeems the soul from the power of hell. Therefore the Prophet saith Esay 9.6. To us a child is borne, Ergo he is man. To us a Son is given, not borne but given, ergo he is God, even the mighty God, as S. Paul saith 2. Cor. 5.19. That God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself. To this purpose you shall have many texts of Scripture hereafter Chap. 23. n. 5. CHAP. XXII. That God would be incarnate. Upon that text which is in Psal. 91. v. 11. He shall give his Angels charge over thee to keep thee in all thy ways; some have thought that the sins of the rebellious Angels was, that when God had created man, and arretted the charge of him and his posterity to the Angels, they supposing the state of their creation to be fare more excellent and honourable than the state of man (as doubtless it was, if the hopes reserved and purchased for us, had not been fare beyond those whereto we seemed to be created) refused to perform that service to so mean a creature, for which disobedience being cast off, they have ever since persecuted the woman and her seed. And this opinion seems to have had the original out of the Alkoran, See Wem. a Budowes de fab. Alk. pag. 157. Some other think they were not rejected for any one offence, but for three offences and for four, that is, for continual rebellion they were not spared; and so for many ages before man's creation, they were adjudged to the pains of eternal fire; though the execution of their sentence be prorogued, until the number of the sons of pride be utterly fulfilled. Of this you may see postel. de Nat. Med. ult. It is not fit to determine what is the certain truth in those things which the holy Scripture hath not declared; but because the soul of man is his image who inspired it, and that he our Creator the wisdom of the Father, knows all things exfundamento, as he hath seen with the father: therefore this image of his, will also be enquiring; that although it cannot know what the original of things is, according to all their orders of causes, yet by the effects will it be prying into the causes of them. And if it do this with reverence and modesty, it oftentimes finds strange helps beyond that it hoped for, and if herein it be lawful for others also to propose opinions, it may seem not altogether improbable that the sin of the devil was this. That finding himself in the first order of the creature, he thought that God (who out of his infinite goodness purposed to bring all the understanding creature to the uttermost happiness which it could be capable of, which could not be but in the uniting of the creature unto God: for God in his absolute and infinite being could not be come unto, nor apprehended, much less be enjoyed by a finite creature, except he would be pleased to dwell in a creature that was finite) and therefore (I say) he thought that God should rather dwell in the being of the Angels, and in their nature gather all things unto himself; then dwelling in the tabernacle of the manly being: in which hope seeing himself frustrate, he became an unreconcilable enemy to mankind, whereas the holy Angels esteeming duly of the benefit, and being well content with that means whereby God would be seen of them, 1. Tim. 3.16. expect with patience, and desire the fulfilling of the number of the elect. And thus our Lord having made man's peace through the blood of his cross, hath reconciled all things both in heaven and earth unto God. Col. 1.20. For certainly if the Angels be for man; as it is said, Heb. 1.14. then can they not possibly have the perfection of their blessedness but by man. Let us therefore with reverence and thankfulness come unto that great mystery of our Religion, That God was manifest in the flesh. The incarnation of God, is the dwelling of the Godhead in the manhood in one person, wherein the being of the Godhead and manhood remain together everlastingly, without separation, yet in clear distinction of their several beings; and so without commixtion to cause a third being, but that each continuing truly that which it is in itself, the Godhead according to his eternal decree, without any change of itself, in time took to itself the manhood; that by himself he might reconcile all things to himself, and bring them to that estate of happiness and glory, to which they could never have come, if God had not so manifested himself in the flesh. The internal actions of the eternal Deity are all infinite, eternal, and necessary to be that which they are. But whatsoever God doth work without himself in the creature, it is only according to his own holy pleasure and will. But yet seeing his actions upon the creature are the expressions of those perfections which are in himself, of goodness, of wisdom, of power, of glory, etc. and that to this end, that the creature may be blessed in him, and by him, according to that measure of happiness which he of his goodness hath appointed thereto: therefore those reasons which are drawn from the dignities of God, are of no less force for the truth of God in the creature, than they were for the manifestation of the truth in himself. And therefore as by those dignities which by the authority of his word are due to him, we have approved that truth which the holy Scripture teacheth us to believe of him, both concerning the unity of his being, and the Trinity of the Persons; so let us endeavour in the proof of this great question. And although the great masters in the school have given over these questions as utterly beyond all proof or testimony of humane understanding, See Thom. Aquin. praef. in lib. 4. cont. Gent. yet seeing this is that main point in our most holy faith, whereby it differs most from all infidelity and false worships; seeing it is that one thing wherein the ground of all our future hope and comfort doth consist: if ever the understanding of a Christian held itself bound to do service unto his faith, most of all it is bound to give attendance herein. I may sometimes use the word of necessity in the conclusions following; yet understand me not as if I laid any necessity or constraint upon God to do or to suffer; but the necessity that I mean, is in the consequence of the reason, when the conclusion doth follow necessarily upon the grounds that are laid down before. 1. For although happiness be only in the enjoying of that which is good, and the greater the good is, the greater is the happiness; but if the good be not enjoyed and possessed, it causes no happiness at all; yet an infinite good is no way to be come unto or possessed by that which is finite, except by the voluntary motion and inclination of itself, it do apply and give itself unto that which is finite. And because every good spreads itself according to the power of itself, upon that which is capable of it, the greatest goodness is ever with the greatest communication of itself: therefore the infinite goodness doth also extend itself according to the possibility of the creature to be possessed and enjoyed thereby; which cannot be till it have applied itself to something in the creature, of which the rest of the creatures being partakers, may also thereby be partakers of the infinite goodness. Now if God who only is infinite goodness, had dwelled in the being of the Angels (though that had been made known to man) yet because man doth not communicate with the Angels in nature, or by any merit or service towards them, he had had no benefit thereby, whereas the Angels by the appointment of their ministry to mankind in their continual presence and succour, and that help which the soul hath by them in the delivery thereof out of this prison of the body, and in the conducting of it unto the Divine presence, have in justice a reward for their service sake, and a kind of interest in all that good whereof man by their ministry is made partaker. 2. Moreover when man had sinned, the law of justice required that the satisfaction should be made in that nature that had sinned, so that if the Mediator had taken on him the nature of Angels, the satisfaction therein had not been available for the sin of man. 3. Thirdly, the whole creature hath interest in man, and man in the whole creature; so that God by taking on him the nature of man, hath blessed thereby the whole creature, as you may understand by the answer which is made Cham 17. to the 5 Object. §. 4. But if he had the nature of Angels, neither man, nor the other elemental creatures had had hope of any restoring. See Rom. 8.19. etc. to 23. 4. Lastly if the deliverance of man had been made in the nature of Angels, the restoring had been as unsufficient, so also man had lost of his dignity and honour thereby: for man before his sin was bound and subjected to God alone; but then had he been subjected and bound to the nature of Angels. And although man by his sin, nay even our Lord himself by his suffering for sin, was made somewhat lower than the Angels; yet being raised from the dead, the manly nature is exalted far above all principality, and power, and might, and every name that is named in this world, or in the world which is to come Ephes. 1.20.21. Whence it will follow necessarily that God would dwell in the nature of man, not in the Angels, as you may understand by these Scriptures. Heb. 2.14. Forasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood: he also himself likewise took part of the same. ver. 16. He took not on him the nature of Angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham. And for their attendance is it not said, Heb. 1.14. Are they not all ministering Spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation? Compare herewith Psal. 34.7. and 91.11. and conclude with Saint Paul 1. Cor. 3.23. All things are yours, and ye are Christ's, and Christ is Gods. The questions before are near to this (as all the Articles of our faith are necessary consequents one of another) therefore let us briefly see by that which is already proved, what we can gather to this conclusion. 1. Either the whole race of mankind must be lost and perish being tainted with the sin of Adam, or the infinite justice against which the sin was done, must for ever stand violated and broken, or else a Mediator must be found who was able to satisfy the infinite justice that was offended. The first is against the wisdom, goodness, and love of God to his creature; either to make mankind in vain, that is to destroy it again, or to make it unto eternal punishment. The second is impossible, that an infinite justice infinitely able to avenge itself should endure itself for ever to to remain violate and offended: for so should it prise a thing finite, and wicked, before itself infinite in justice: therefore there behoves to be a Mediator who should fully satisfy the justice offended, and utterly blot out the guilt of sin. Now an infinite justice offended must be satisfied by a punishment answerable, that is infinite: but no finite creature could any way be, or be accounted infinite. Therefore when none was found worthy either in heaven, or in earth, or under the earth; the Lamb slain from the beginning of the world took upon him our flesh, to satisfy for the sin of his creature, and so by his infinite obedience (for by His eternal spirit He offered himself too God. Heb. 9.14. and by the infinite merit of his suffering, for by that spirit the manhood both soul and flesh was enabled to endure those pangs, and that punishment which neither all mankind, nor any other creature could endure) was the infinite justice satisfied. And thus He became mighty to save. Esay 63.1. and having Himself in his own body borne our sins upon the tree, did utterly abolish the whole body of sin, and found for us eternal redemption. 2. The divine goodness hath created all things exceeding good, Gen. 1. so much doth it delight itself in that concordance or agreement which is between the inward and the outward good. But that agreement is the greatest which is in the unity of one person. Therefore it is expedient that there be an incarnation, that so in one person the goodness may be most eminent, and the concord most lovely. 3. Otherwise you may propose it thus. The excellency of the effect appears by that conformity or agreement which it hath with the cause: so than the inward work of the infinite Goodness, and the outward being accorded in the unity of one person; the multiplication of the agreement is so great, that it cannot possibly be greater. Therefore it follows that the Godhead be incarnate: for otherwise the concord in the inward and outward work of the deity, might be greater than it is, but that is impossible. 4. The divine will concerning his works without, doth will and love that especially, wherein the excellency of all his inward dignities doth most appear. But the excellency of all his dignities appears most in this, that God be manifest in the flesh. For thereby we are made partakers of the Divine nature, 2 Pet. 1.4. of his glory, virtue, everlasting life, and happiness: So that now there is but one end of God, and his creature, that is the glory of God, of which and unto which God rejoices over his dreature to bring it, and make it partaker: And the Creature likewise rejoices to be made partaker. And thus the end or perfection of the creature hath rest or accomplishment in the inward perfections of God, and his inward perfections are manifest in his outword works. Therefore God would be incarnate. 5. And seeing that God infinitely blessed and happy in himself needed not the Creature; but made it therefore that it might be blessed in him; and that of his fullness the creature might receive that fullness of happiness which it can possibly enjoy: therefore it is requisite that that fullness of his be imparted unto that creature wherein all the rest of the creature hath interest, which we have already proved to be man, chap. 17. §. 4. ob. 5. Therefore God would dwell in man, that by man the whole creature might be blessed in Him. 6. If God were not incarnate, than the divine dignities should be less Infinite one than another. For the infinite goodness, by the infinite wisdom, seeing that uttermost and perfect happiness that might come unto man by the incarnation; if his power, his will, and love of the creature did not answer thereto; so that he would be pleased to dwell in his creature: then should they be defective, and of less extent than his infinite wisdom. But that is impossible. Therefore it follows that God would be incarnate. See the answer to the objection that may be made from hence, §. 1. on the 39 chapter. n. 4. 7. If there were not an incarnation, than the infinite wisdom should not have the view of that highest excellency which is possible to be in the creature: neither should the infinite power magnify itself by the multiplication of itself in an outward subject; so these dignities should not be glorious by all those means whereby it is possible that they might glorify themselves. But all these things are inconvenient. Therefore it is reasonable to believe the incarnation, lest ignorance, weakness, and defect of glory should be found in the first principle, which must of necessity take away His infinity, proved chapter 3. understand the reason well. For your more ease, I will propose it affirmatively thus. 8. If there be an Incarnation, than the divine understanding may have an outward object wherein it may be infinite both in the inward and outward working. For whereas all created objects are absolutely finite: yet if the Divine being understood, which heretofore we called the Son, chap. 11. take on him our being, our nature by that assumption is deified, and so made infinite with that uttermost infinity, whereof the Creature can any way be capable seeing the deity is neither without the humanity nor the humanity without the deity. And so the divine understanding may be an outward object infinite, as much as it is possible that a creature can be infinite. And so the wisdom also may be infinite in all possibility of infinity both in the inward and outward working. And what I have said of the infinite wisdom of God, must also be understood of all his other perfections, of goodness, of power, of eternity, of life, of glory, etc. But if there be no incarnation, this infinite outward object is taken away, and so the understanding and all the other dignities of God, as concerning their outward working must be in littleness and lower than that possibility whereto they may come. But this is not to be affirmed. Therefore the incarnation followeth reasonably. 9 Every efficient the more noble and excellent it is, the greater and more excellent are the effects which it doth bring forth. But the greatest effects are not brought to pass but by the greatest means. Now there is no efficient more noble or excellent than God, no effect better or greater to the Creature, nor more honourable to the Creator, than the everlasting happiness of his Creature: no means greater or more effectual than that he become one with his creature. Therefore that the creature may be happy in Him, and his honour and praise perfected in the Creature: it was expedient that God should dwell in His Creature even in Man. 10. By how much any efficient is greater in power, by so much more effectually doth it work to magnify the end of his work, and so to set it free from littleness, contempt and unworthiness of himself. From which contempt and unworthiness the creature is set furthest, when it is deified, and God himself is become one with man. So the incarnation is the most glorious work which can be wrought in the creature. To deny then the indwelling of God, in his creature, were to deny the most glorious work of God: to put an infinite emptiness between God and his Creature, wherein no mean should be; and so to exclude the Creature from all access unto the Creator, which were to put the creature in everlasting contempt, and unworthiness of the Creator so infinite and glorious. For the creature being set at an infinite distance from the happiness which is in the Creator, should have no mean whereby it might partake of the infinite glory. For no perfection in the Creature being simply and absolutely finite, can be partaker of that which is infinite without the Mediator God and man, as it is said, joh. 14.6. No man cometh to the Father but by me. 11. It is to be held that God the most wise workemaster of all things should in the creation of the world propose to Himself the most noble and excellent end: which must be concerning Himself, the manifestation of His own dignities and perfections in the Creature: and towards the Creature the greatest perfection which was possible to be therein. But if there be no incarnation, neither of these things could be performed. Not the first, because the divine goodness might have done a better work in his Creature: his infinity a greater; his glory a more excellent, etc. Not the second, for seeing God is that superexcellent Goodness of which every thing according to the measure thereof, desires to be partaker: and by man may be partaker, in as much as man participates with every other thing, and every other thing being with him, if there be no incarnation, this desire of the Creature is vain, the end thereof frustrate, and thereby it is subjected to eternal pain, the hoped end being impossible to be attained unto. But all these things are inconvenient. Therefore it is requisite that God be incarnate. 12. God is infinitely good, chap. 4. and so the most lovely being without comparison. And therefore are we most justly charged, to love Him with all our heart, with all our soul, with all our might, Deut. 6.5. But God would not require to be wholly and perfectly loved by man except He himself did that for man by which He might most of all deserve man's love; For otherwise he might seem to require of man beyond that which were due, and so the perfection of that love should be founded in the goodness and kindness of man toward God, not in the goodness and mercy of God toward man. But this is not so. For we love God because He loved us first, and gave His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. 1 joh. 4.10. If then God have done that for us, by which above all other things He might deserve our Loves, and that nothing can so much deserve our Loves, as if he would be pleased to become one with us: it was expedient that God would be incarnate. 13. That there is an eternal life both in soul and body, will appear hereafter: in the mean time it shall be but a supposition. Now in eternal life it is necessary that the manly being attain to the uttermost perfection both of the soul and body, that as his understanding, so his outward senses be also most pure and perfect. But if there were no incarnation (seeing the divine glory in itself is utterly unapprehensible by our senses, and by our understanding) neither our understanding, nor our senses could have any object wherein to rest and sabbatise, and being created without the enjoying of their uttermost felicity they would be the original of misery and sorrow, when as they should be fit to receive the perfection of all intellectual, and sensible forms from an agent natural and supernatural, as the Mediator is, and yet received it not. So also the divine glory should not cause happiness, nor be enjoyed by all possible means whereby it may cause happiness, and be enjoyed by a mean natural and supernatural. But if there be an incarnation, than the infinite glory dwelling in this mediator, may be apprehended and enjoyed, and make the Creature happy by all means whereby it is possible to be happy. Therefore God would dwell in his Creature. And this argument (I suppose) may stand well with that scripture, Exod. 33.18. and 20. verses; where to that request of Moses, That he might see the glory of God; it was answered, that no man can see it and live. By which it follows that after death when man is utterly separate from sin he may see, and shall be partaker of that promise which is in Matth. 5.8. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God: which blessing is more particularly described. Psal. 36.9.10. They that put their trust under the shadow of his wings shall be abundantly satisfied, made drunk, as some read it, others plenteously moistened with the fatness of thy house, and thou shalt make them drink of the river of thy pleasures, etc. all which the faithful shall see and enjoy to the full in the Mediator God and Man, without whom there is no approaching unto God. And as this argument is good for the soul and understanding, so is it for the outward senses; For if the bodily, senses make for the increase of punishment in them that are damned: so shall they also be for the increase of happiness in them that are saved. If you desire more arguments to this purpose you may consider them in the 21. chapter. The authorities of the holy Scripture may be seen in the end of the chapter following. The objections against this doctrine of the incarnation you may see in Tho. Aquin. count. Gent. lib. 4. ch. 40.49. & 53. & 54. CHAP. XXIII. That the Second Person of the Trinity, the Son of God only, took on Himself our flesh. IS it true that God will dwell with man? Behold the heavens, and the heavens of heavens cannot contain Him, how much less a house of clay whose foundation was in the dust, yet doth wisdom take her solace in the compass of His earth, and her delight is with the Sons of Men, Prou. 8.31. So the Word was made flesh and dwelled in us, joh. 1.14. And though he were in the form of God, and thought it no robbery to be equal to God; yet as man had been made in his likeness and lost it: so would he be made in the likeness of man, and to restore that first image unto man, became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, Phil. 2.6.7.8. O Holy and most blessed teacher of our most glorious faith! what high doctrine? what holy mysteries? what precious promises doth the Christian faith contain? That which is infinite dwells in in that which is finite; the circumference in the centre. The greatest of beings, and the least are one. Two births eternal and temporary, and but one Son. And because the essential proprieties of both natures do still remain, he that is the Father of eternity is become a child, Esay 9.6. And he that is the wisdom of the Father, increases in knowledge, Luk. 2.52. he that no place can contain doth grow in stature, and the Son of an eternal love, doth grow in favour with God and Man. In brief, he that hath all things with God the Father, save this that he is begotten, hath all things with man except his sin. But although there be two generations, and that of divers kinds; eternal, and in time, in which respect almost all things are double in him: yet is not he two sons; because Sonship respects not the diversity of the nature's divine and humane; but only the unity of the Person; so that if there be but one Person of both natures; there can be but one Son. Wherefore seeing the Son of God took on Him not the Person, but the nature of man: yet the whole nature body and soul of the substance of his Mother; And seeing that whole nature subsists in the Person of the eternal Son; He, in both respects, both of his divine and humane generation, is still the only begotten Son of the Father; only begotten (I say) that he may be discerned from us that are adopted; only son, because we are not hereafter to look for any other Saviour. His only Son, not of joseph, or any man according to the flesh. For as according to the law of the eternal life which is in God, He is begotten of the substance of the Father, not without, but in the Person of the Father, yet distinct therefrom: so according to that generation which was in time, was He begotten by the power of the Father, without the Person of the Father, being conceived in the womb of the virgin. For as a thing conceived in the mind of a man is the first word or expression of his understanding, which being spoken or written becomes sensible and to be understood of others; So the Son is in the Father that eternal word understood, conceived, or begotten before the worlds, and in the fullness of time (not ceasing to be eternally begotten as before) He was made manifest in the flesh, even that word or life which was eternally with the Father, was seen with eyes, was looked upon, and was handled with hands, 1 joh. 1.1.2. So that as there is but one Father both in the eternal and timely generation; so is there but one Son; by a most holy, most true, and substantial generation God and Man, the Son of God, and the blessed virgin Mary. Now this one Son, one Christ, one Immanuel, one Mediator, one Person is such, not by mixture, not by confusion, not by composition of the two natures, nor yet by change of one into another: but one by assumption or taking of the humane nature into the divine, wherein the deity is to dwell eternally without separation, but not without distinction. And these two natures so dwell together in the Person of our Saviour, as that for the unity of the Person, the attributes which belong to one nature are given to the other, as joh. 3.13. No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. And again, Acts 20.28. Feed the church of God which He hath purchased with his own blood. And although I said before, chap. 11. that relation properly so called was not in the divine generation but supereminent, because all things here are coessential, ᵃ the subjects no other beings than the terms, that is the Father and the Son; the foundation also coessential, that is the divine and unconceivable generation for the terms sake in the Father active, in the Son passive: And although in the second generation, neither the subjects nor the terms are coessential, the subjects are the Person of the eternal word, and the Virgin Mary; the foundation is the generation whereby the manly being, passively was taken of the Virgin unto the person of the word: yet in respect of this hypostatical union, or joining of the humanity unto the Person of the Eternal Son, Marry the mother of jesus is truly said the mother of God; not that the Godhead took beginning from her, but because she brought out that manly being, which from the time of its first union was never separated from the Godhead; And because the supposition or person wherein both natures are, is one Christ: of which Person she is truly called the mother, though she be mother only according to the flesh, as is said, Math. 1.23. A virgin shall bring forth a Son, and they shall call his name God with us. And again, Rom. 9.5. of the Israelites as concerning the flesh came Christ, who is God blessed above all for evermore, Amen. But although there be one only Son; yet in respect of the two nativities He is truly called the Son of God, and the Son of the virgin, though with this difference, that by the eternal generation he took of the Father both his eternal nature, and his Person, by which he is the son of his Father by a supereminent real relation; but of his mother he took in time the humane nature, but not any humane Person. And therefore this Sonship is only rational, except it be understood with the divine person, in which the humanity subsists, and so he is truly said this man, and the son of the virgin. For as ᵇ he took on him the humanity, soul and body to dwell therein for ever, as the Evangelist speaks, joh. 1.14. The word became flesh, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and made his tabernacle in us: So did he give unto the humane nature to be one Person in him: So that God is now truly one with us, that we hereafter may be one with him, according to that prayer of our eternal mediator. john. 17. I in them, and thou in me, that they may be one, as we are one. So the advantage is only on our side: For the humane nature coming to our Lord in the perfection of the infinite deity, could add nothing to His perfection, only the infinite love of God toward man was perfected thereby, because the humane nature being taken unto the Son of his love, we are assured thereby of his eternal love, that He hath loved us, as He hath loved Him, joh. 17.23. Whereas if our Lord had assumed the person of any man, though therewith he had taken also the common nature of mankind, yet that Person had had perculiar interest in the eternal and infinite love, and we had been unequally subjected one to another: but now the common nature only being raken unto the deity, every person hath equal interest as in the common nature, so in the eternal love. Now let us see the reasons of the proposition. 1. It is necessary that all the actions of God be done according to the perfection of that order which is most fit and agreeable unto those actions. But seeing it stood with the Love of God to dwell in man's being (as it hath been proved) it was most convenient that the Son of God should take our nature on him. For first the Son is the image of God increated, man his created image; and that all perfection of an image might be in the increated image, it was necessary that he should be also the created image of his Father. Secondly, seeing that by the eternal nativity, he is the eternal Son, that the perfection of all Sonship might be in him, it was necessary that he should be that Son that should be borne in time. Thirdly, and because it pleased the Father that all fullness should dwell in him, Colossians 1. verse 19 Seeing he was brought forth by an eternal nativity, he must also perfect that nativity which was in time. Fourthly, and because all things both which are in heaven and in earth were created by him, it was necessary that all things by him should be restored. Fifthly, Man's nature is the daughter of God, therefore being led away captive by sin, was to be rescued by his Son. Sixthly, Man fell from grace by the craft of the devil, therefore by the wisdom of God was he to be brought to favour again. Seventhly, Mankind is the peculiar possession of the Son by the special gift of the Father, Psal. 2.8. john 17.2. therefore being lost, it was to be recovered by his special purchase. And if there be any other personal propriety of the Son, of obedience, or the like, it sorts better with him to be incarnate than either with the Father or the holy Ghost. All the arguments which prove that it was necessary that Christ should die, may be brought hither. See them in the 27. Chapter. 2. Nothing can be admitted in the actions of the Deity which takes away the distinction of their personal proprieties, seeing God is the author of order, not of confusion. But if either the Father or the holy Ghost had been incarnate, than their personal proprieties were thereby in utter confusion: for if the Father had been incarnate, then should he not be eternally a Father, that had in time become a Son, so also neither the perfection of fatherhood should be in the Father, nor of Sonship in the Son. And concerning the holy Ghost, seeing he is that emanation, breath of effluence of the power, wisdom, life, etc. whereby the work of God is perfected: if he should have been incarnate, the same being should be both the worker, and the thing wrought. See Luke 1.35. But all these things are impossible: Therefore the Son of God only took on him our flesh. 3. The greatest excellency which God can love in himself, is the image of himself beheld in himself, that is, the Son of his eternal love. The greatest excellency which God can love without himself, is the image of himself beheld in his creature. Therefore it is necessary that the Son of his eternal love be also incarnate, that the love of God be most perfect toward his Son, with all perfections of love which can be either within or without himself. 4. It was said before Chap. 11. that the goodness, infinity, eternity, wisdom, and power of God, being viewed or objected to the infinite wisdom by the infinite action of his understanding, was the Son. Now if the Son be incarnate, than the actions of all the divine dignities are perfected, and may be infinite both in their internal, and as much as may be, in their external object. But if either the Father or holy Ghost had been incarnate, than the object of those dignities could not be one; and if the object were not one, than could it not be beheld with one action of understanding. But it is impossible, either that there should be two infinite objects, or two infinite actions. Moreover, if the holy Ghost had been incarnate, than the infinite internal action should have become the external object: if the Father, than the fountain of the Deity should become not the objectant, or being which understandeth, but only the object understood. But all these things are impossible: for God is not the author of confusion; therefore it was necessary that the Son should be incarnate. 5. The doctrine concerning the Mediator contained in these four Chapters, is as the substantial ground of the Christian Religion; so is it that foundation on which all the Prophets and Apostles have builded: for as Saint Peter saith, 1. Pet. 1.11. That which the Prophets by the spirit of Christ did search into, was the time when the sufferings of Christ should be reveiled, and the glories that should follow after. The sum then of the whole Scripture being to show the redemption of man by the death of our Saviour, God and man, the authorities are not fare to seek. Many of the texts of the old Testament you shall find most excellently brought together and interpreted by justine Martyr against the jews, in his dialogue of the truth of the Christian Religion, which is entitled Tryphon. Some most evident texts you shall have out of the new Testament, and more hereafter as need is. john 3.16.17. God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish but have everlasting life: for God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world by him might be saved. Gal. 4.4. But when the fullness of time was come, God sent forth his Son made of a woman, made under the Law, that he might redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Phil. 2.6.7. Christ jesus being in the form of God, thought it no robbery to be equal with God; but took on him the form of a servant, and was made like unto man, and was found in shape like a man Colos. 1.13.14. God hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son, in whom we have redemption through his blood Col. 2.9. In Christ dwelleth the fullness of the God head bodily 1. Tim. 3.16. Great is the mystery of Godliness, God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of Angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up to glory. 1. john 4.14. Whosoever shall confess that jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. By which texts it is plain, that the Saviour of mankind must be both man and God dwelling in man; and the second person of the holy Trinity, which we call the Son. Notes. (a) THe subject no other than the terms.] For the understanding of this, see my second part of Logonomia Introduct. Sect. 4. numb. 11. (b) He took on him the humanity.] If it be most true which is said Col. 1.19 that all fullness should dwell in him, yea all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, how can it be but that if Christ dwell in our flesh, all the persons likewise must be incarnate? For all the Persons together make but one infinite fullness of the Deity. And therefore 1. Tim. 3.16. it is spoken without any distinction of Persons, that God was manifest in the flesh. Answer. To become man was a personal propriety of the Son of God; for the incarnation was not of the Godhead, wherein the Persons are one; but of that subsistence according to which the three Persons are distinguished. So that as in the Trinity there be three persons in one nature; so in the mystery of the incarnation there is one person in two natures. Now why the person of the Son and none other could become man, the reasons before do make it plain. And although it be most true, that all the Persons together are but one God in the infinity or fullness of the Deity; yet is it as true that the infinite fullness of the Deity is in all and every person alike, as the fullness, or perfection of mankind is in every man equally. Neither is that in Tim. spoken without distinction of the persons: for it follows immediately, He was justified in the Spirit. What is that? but that the Spirit of God the holy Ghost, did justify his doctrine and Gospel as most true, in causing the hearts of all the faithful to believe it. But it is most manifest, that the witness is neither the thing witnessed, nor the person in whose behalf the witness is given. Neither was this witness of the Holy Ghost only, but also of the Father from heaven 2. Peter 4.17. 1. john 5.9, 10, 11. Compare herewith, if you please, the note (g) on Chap. 24. § 9 Object. 1. In the end of which Chapter you may see other objections fully answered. Our Lord. CHAP. XXIIII. That this Jesus the Son of the Virgin Mary, whom the Christian faith confesseth, is the Saviour of the world. THat reverend and fearful name of God, is a name of glory, but the word Lord importeth the title of that right which he hath in his creature. And how justly this belongs to our Lord Christ may appear by that interest which he hath in us; both by the right of our creation, and of our redemption, and of all the benefits which we hope thereby. What right he hath in us for our creation it hath appeared, in that we are his workmanship Chap. 13. § 9 Now it remaineth that we make it manifest, that he alone is our Mediator, and that besides him there is no other: for if the Saviour of the world must of necessity be man, that he might satisfy the justice of God for the sin of man, as we have proved Chap. 20. and likewise that he must be God, that he may be able to hear, and to save all them that come unto him, as was manifest Chap. 21. and that the Son of God took on him our flesh, that by him the love of God might be manifest to the creature, as it was proved Chap. 23. If there can be but one Son of God, as it was showed Chap. 12. and the note thereto; it must follow of necessity that there can be but one only Saviour of mankind, which Saviour is our Lord jesus the Son of the blessed Virgin Mary, as it is further manifest by these reasons following. 1. It is necessary that all the dignities of God be magnified in the creature, according to the uttermost greatness which they can have therein: But if this jesus whom we confess, be the Saviour of the world, than all the dignities of God are magnified, according to the uttermost extent of greatness which it is possible they should have in the creature, and that without any abatement, or lesning in any one of them: for his mercy is magnified to the uttermost in pardoning the sins of many for the merit of one; his justice and love in this, that he spared not his only Son, but gave him to death for a satisfaction for the sin of mankind; his glory, in that the creature once sinful and mortal, is made partaker of glory and immortality; his wisdom, that out of the greatest ill, the destruction of the creature by the malice of the devil, he hath brought the greatest good, that is the exaltation of the creature beyond that state of happiness wherein it was created, Chap. 18. § 2. and so in the rest. But if this jesus be not the Saviour of the world (as the jews affirm) if when that other Bar-Coziba of theirs shall come, he preach the same doctrine, and do the same glorious miracles which our Lord hath done (though it be impossible that God should suffer the world to be so mocked) then the same most high and glorious truth should be both preached and confirmed by a most false and lying Prophet, who should profess himself the Saviour of the world, and was not; yet nevertheless, seeing our Lord was the author and manifester of that truth, he shall have the honour to be believed, and the falsehood shall dwell with that other to come. But if he shall preach any other doctrine than this which we have received, than neither can the dignities of God be magnified in his greatest and most excellent work in the creature, that is in the salvation of mankind, as was showed before; neither can his Scriptures be of absolute authority, when another manner of Saviour shall come than they have described unto us: but both these things are utterly impossible, and therefore this jesus whom the Christian faith confesseth to be our Lord, is the Saviour of the world, and beside him there is no other. 2. If this jesus whom we acknowledge be the Saviour of the world, than the expectation of the most excellent and virtuous men is quieted, and at rest in the assurance of his heavenly promise. But if this be not he, but that the Saviour is yet to come (for we have already proved that man having sinned should be restored by a Saviour that should be both God and man) then since that time that Christ the Son of God and the virgin Mary came, we that have believed in him, are in the greatest error that may be, and all our hope in God (through the satisfaction of Christ) must be ashamed, all our belief in his word is vain, and all the virtues, the constancy, love and patience of the Martyrs is perished; so that when that pretended Messiah shall come, he shall not be believed, or if he be believed, than Gospel shall be against Gospel, faith against faith, love against love, hope against hope, virtue against virtue, and all this about the same thing, that is the means of everlasting life. So the love of God toward his creature should not be manifest, in that he had not made man to know assuredly that which concerned him most to know. So his justice should find no place to condemn the world of ignorance and misbelief. But all these things are absurd and not to be granted: therefore this jesus the Son of the virgin Mary, is the Saviour of the world. 3. Religion is the band or obligation of the creature unto God to serve him, in hope of the excellency of the reward. So that the most excellent Religion must give hope of the most high reward. Now if this jesus whom we confess be the Saviour of the world, the hope of the faithful is at rest, in the assurance of that hope of everlasting life, in the uttermost perfection of all happiness and joy. But if this be not he who was desired before he came, and believed on since his coming; then that Saviour when he comes must give us assurance of greater hopes, and promises of greater joys than yet we have received. But this is impossible: therefore this jesus in whom we believe is the Saviour of the world. 4. It is necessary that the Saviour of mankind do love mankind with the uttermost perfection of love; so that for that love's sake he offer himself most willingly to the endurance of all those things whereby he may procure the salvation of man, and the uttermost good which may befall him. And if this jesus whom we confess be not the Saviour of the world, than it is requisite that the Saviour which is to come should love mankind more and endure greater things for man than he hath done. But this is impossible joh. 15.13. & joh. 10.15. Therefore this jesus our Lord is the Saviour of the world. 5. It is impossible that the greatest work of God toward his creature, that is the salvation of mankind should be in vain, or that the preaching of the truth thereof should be utterly unbelieved. But if this jesus which the Christian faith confesseth, be not the Saviour of the world, than the preaching of that truth when the pretended Saviour should come, will not be believed: and so the greatest work of God toward mankind will be in vain, that is without glory to God and fruitless to man, that will not receive it: for the Christians know that salvation is in none other but only in this jesus in whom they believe. And although the Mahometans confess many glorious things of Christ, as that he is the power, wisdom, breath, and word of God, borne of Mary a perpetual virgin by a divine inspiring, that he raised the dead, and did all those miracles which we affirm, and that he was the greatest Prophet of all that were before him, as you may read in Cusa Crib. Alcor. lib. 1. Cap. 12. Gul. Postel. de Concord. orbis lib. 2. Mars. Ficin. de Rel. Chr. Cap. 12. and elsewhere. Yet they neither believe that he did or could die, or that it was necessary that he should, neither do they believe that he was the Son of God, which conditions we have before proved to belong necessarily to the Saviour of the world. So that if he that shall come, do come according to these conditions, yet will they not receive him, no more than they receive Christ of whom they speak such honourable things. And concerning the jews; although it be manifest by the word of the Scripture, that the veil shall at last be taken from their hearts, that they may understand, and be turned to our Lord the Saviour of the world, Hos. 3.5. Rom. 11.31. Yet seeing that our Lord in respect of his humility, became unto them a rock of offence, and restored not the temporary kingdom which they expected (for his kingdom was not of this world) If any other shall come in the same estate and condition, they will not believe. And concerning the idolatrous Gentiles, much less will they believe, if they may say that the Christians which believed before in such a Saviour, were not saved by him: therefore the condition stands sure; that if this jesus whom we confess be not the Saviour of the world, than that pretended Saviour when he comes shall not be believed; and so the greatest work of God toward mankind should be in vain. 6. If this jesus in whom we believe be not the Saviour of the world, than the greatest love and thanks which we give unto God therefore, is less lovely and less acceptable; and the greater number of men saved by this faith is less willed of God than that less love, thanks, and number of them which shall hereafter believe the truth: so the greater love shall be despised for the less, and the greater number misprised for the less: but this is not agreeable to the justice of God, and his love to his creature, and therefore not to be admitted: Ergo this jesus in whom we believe is the Saviour of mankind. 7. The superexcellent or rather infinite height of that truth which we profess in the Articles of our faith concerning God the Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier of mankind, and those unspeakable benefits which we hope for in the life to come, is such as no created understanding could have come unto, except God himself by his word and spirit had first manifested the same unto man. And seeing it is the truth of God, the wisdom and goodness of God could not suffer that the full, perfect and most clear manifestation thereof concerning the person by whom, and the time when it was to be fulfilled by his own promise, should be by a false prophet, or that a false Christ should take his honour to himself, for so the most high truth should suffer such discredit thereby, as that it should never be believed. But this is absurd and inconvenient. And therefore this Christ in whom we believe is the true Christ, and the Saviour of the world. 8. The whole time of the world is either for preparation to receive the Saviour when he shall come, or manifestation of him when he is come. But God hath long since ceased to prepare any people to receive him. And therefore the Saviour is already come: for although the jews expect a Messiah, yet have they no country nor form of Religion appointed by God to uphold that expectation: for the use of the ceremonial Law, wherein the Messiah was figured, was commanded only in their own land, out of which they being now banished their ceremonies have no use. See Deut. 12.1. Ios. 5.5.7. Amos 5.25. Hebr. 10. Therefore this jesus is the true Messiah. 9 Neither may that argument be omitted, whereby our Lord justified himself. joh. 7.18. He that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true. Seeing therefore that our Lord sought not his own glory, but came in the greatest humility, to endure the greatest affliction, and most cruel death only for the glory of his Father and the salvation of mankind. And moreover, seeing God did seal unto his words that they were true, by those glorious miracles which he wrought by him, it follows in great probability, that this jesus is the Mediator by whom alone we may come unto God, as he testifieth of himself. No man cometh to the Father but by me, joh. 14.6 and again, john 17.3. This is eternal life to know thee the only true God, and whom thou hast sent jesus Christ. 10 (a) He unto whom all the prophecies of all the Prophets of the Old Testament concerning the Saviour to come do agree, must needs be that true Messiah or Saviour of the world. But all the Prophecies of the Old Testament concerning the Saviour of the world, do most precisely agree unto this jesus whom the Christian faith doth confess, and to none other: therefore this jesus the Son of the virgin Mary is the Saviour of the world. For it cannot stand with the mercy of God to his creature; to give us signs whereby to know that which concerns us most to know, which should not be sure and certain: therefore the proposition is manifest, and the jews the mselues do not gainsay it: the assumption will be manifest, if the Scriptures of the Old Testament be compared with the history of the New. First concerning his being both God and man, Psal. 2.7. Esay 9.6, 7. jer. 33.15, 16. Mich. 5.2. compared with Rom. 1.3, 4. and those other texts which you had before in the end of the 23 Chapter. Then in all the circumstances, first of the forerunner of Christ foretold by Esay Chap. 40. v. 3.4.5. and Malach. 3.1. compared with Mat. 11.10.14. john 1.23. Secondly, of the time, foretold ᵇ Gen. 49.10. ᶜ Dan. 9.24, 25, 26, 27. and ᶜ Hag. 2.9. and Mal. 3.1. compared with Luke 2.25, 26. Matth. 16.3. Luke 12.56. Thirdly of the place of his birth prophesied Michah 5.2. fulfilled Matth. 2.6. Luke 2.4.6. john 7.42. Fourthly, of his mother a virgin, Esay 7.14. jer. 31.22. compared with Matth. 1.23. Luke 1.27.34. Fifthly, of the wisemen of the East that came to worship him, prophesied Psal. 72.9, 10, 11, 15. and fulfilled Matth. 2.11. Sixthly, of his prophetical authority equal to Moses, Deut. 18.15. and 18. Esay 42.1.3, 4. and Esay 61.1, 2, 3. compared with Matth. 12.18.21. and 17.5. Luke 4. from v. 18 to v. 23. john 1.4.5. and 5.46. and 6.14. Acts 6.14. Hebr. 12.26. Seventhly, of his miracles, Esay 35.5, 6. compared with Mat. 11.5. joh. 5.36. and 7.31. and 15.24. Eighthly of his humiliation, which appeared first in his low estate and poverty, Esay 53.2, 3, 4. verified Luke 2.7. Then in his flight to Egypt, Psal. 80.8.15.17. Hos. 11.1. verified Mat. 2.15. Thirdly in the murder of the innocents' of his own age; prophesied, jer. 31.15. fulfilled, Matth. 2.16. 4. by his mean bringing up in Galilee, not in the University at jerusalem; foretold Psal 22.6. Esay 9.1. fulfilled Mat. 2.22, 23. & 13.55. Mar. 6.3. john 7.15. Fifthly by his lowly riding on an ass, Zach. 9.9. Mat. 31.7. joh. 12.14. Sixthly in his reproach and scornful usage before the high Priests and Pilate, where you may remember his meekness and silence, prophesied Psal. 22.22. and 69.21. where the lots, the spear, his own words and his enemies, the vinegar and the sponge of Colocynthis, are not forgotten. Esay 50.6. and 53. all Micah 5.1. fulfilled in all the Gospels. Then in his crucifying with the thiefs prophesied Numb. 21.8.9. Deut. 21.23. Esay 53.12. fulfilled in all the Gospels, and Gal. 3.13. Eighthly in his death Esay 53.8.10. and Matt. 27.50. Lastly in his burial, Esay 53.9. john 19.40. A ninth argument from the prophecies of the Old Testament, That this jesus is the Saviour of the world; is from his exaltation and the glories that should follow his sufferings. As first, his resurrection; prophesied Psal. 16.10. & 68.20. Hos. 6.2. fulfilled Matthew, Mark, Luke, john, Act. 2.24.1. Cor. 15. By virtue of which, they that had slept in his faith, did also rise as it was prophesied, Psal. 68 the 18. and joh. 5.25. fulfilled Matth. 27.52.53. Secondly, his Ascension; prophesied, Psal. 24.9. & 68.18. Mic. 2.13. fulfilled in all the Gospels, and Act. 1.9. Eph. 4.9.10. Thirdly, his sitting at the right hand of God; Psal. 16.11. & 110.1. compared with Mar. 16.19. Act. 2.34. & 7.56. Rom. 8.34. Heb. 1.13. Fourthly, the gifts wherewith he beautified his Church of the fiathfull Believers; prophesied in the text cited before, Psal. 68.18. and joel 2.28. fulfilled Mar. 16.17, 18. Acts 2.4. and ver. 17.18.33. 1. Cor. 12.28. Fifthly, the increase of his Church by the conversion of the Gentiles, prophesied Esay 42 al. 52.13.14. and 54.1. Psal. 2.8. and Psal. 22.27, 28. So commanded by our Lord Matth. 28.19. Mar. 16.8. so performed by his Disciples Acts 8.35. Mar. 16.20. and Act. 10.34. etc. and 13.46, 47. and found true by experience almost these 1600 years. Sixthly, his taking away of the Ceremonial Law, prophesied Esay 66.3. jer. 31.31, 32, 33. Dan. 9.27. Hag. ᶜ 2.6. fulfilled john 4.21.23, 24. Acts. 15. al. Gal. 2.16. and 3.10, 11, 19, 21. Heb. al. especially Chap. 9 & 10. Seventhly, his destroying the works of the devil, 1. john 3. speaking of his insatanized Prophets in Egypt, at Delphi, at Dedone, at Colophon, and in every corner of the earth. This was prophesied Zach. 13.2, 3, 4. & accordingly he rebuked the unclean spirits and suffered them not to speak, Mar. 3.12. So Paul, Acts 16.18. and this the devils themselves confessed, as you may read note ᵇ on the 8 Chapter, number 1. The Hebrew Child, etc. answerable to that of the Poet, juven. Sat. 6. Delphis Oracula cessant. of Plutarch de defectu Oraculorum, and others. A tenth argument from the prophecies of the old Testament, that this jesus our Lord is the Saviour that was promised Gen. 3.15. is from foreign circumstances, and among them, first from the treason of judas prophesied Psal. 41.9. and 53.13. fulfilled Math. 26.15. and 23. and with the hire of his treason, the thirty pieces of silver, take the bestowing of it prophesied in the 11. Chap. v. 12, 13. of Zachariah, Remember the Lord, by equivalence, jeremiah, exalt the Lord, because he ought never to be remembered without his praise, fulfilled Matth. 27.7.10. Then the reward of his treason, Psal. 55.15. and 109.8. with Matth. 27.5. and Acts 1.18. and 20. Secondly, from the chief accessaries in the murder: prophesied concerning Herod and Pontius Pilate, Psal. 2.2. fulfilled Luke 23.12. Acts 1.26, 27. And concerning the Priests and Scribes it was prophesied Gen: 49.6. fulfilled Matth. 26.3. Mar. 15.11. Luke 22.2. Thirdly from his friends forsaking Him, foretold, Psal. 38.11. Zach. 13.7. compared with Matth. 26.56. & 27.55. what can the Infidel, jew or Turk now say for their unbelief? when by all these arguments, and all things else whatsoever were prophesied of Him, our Lord bathe been approved to be that Saviour that was to come into the world? yea so approved by the rule of the Law, Deut. 18.22. and their own expositors, Moimony in jesude hatorah, cap. 10. that even because they believe not, therefore is our Lord jesus that true Prophet that was to come; Because he foretold both their unbelief, and the punishment thereof. Therefore beside other circumstances and proofs in this abundance not necessary to be remembered, take for another argument the unbelief of the jews and the destruction of their city and scattering of that nation, as the punishment of that unbelief. Their hardness of heart and incredulity was prophesied, Ps. 118.22. Es. 6.9.10. etc. 8.14.15. etc. 52.1.2.3. The scattering of the whole nation is prophesied, Leu. 26. vers. 27. to 40. Deut. 28.64. & Hos. 3.4. & 9.17. The destruction of the city and Temple was foretold, Dan. 9.26. and by our Lord himself, Luk. 19.43.44. & ch. 21.20. with the continuance of that desolation, Luk. 21.24. And of this their unbelief, and scattering of the Nation, and desolation of jerusalem, the jews themselves and all the world with them, are witnesses unto this day. If you desire further conferring of the Texts of the old Testament with the new, you may read Tertul. lib. 3. et 4. adversus Marcionem. 11. To the death and sufferings of our Lord whereby we are redeemed unto God the Father, Rev. 5.9. we may also add the death and sufferings of his Saints, as it is written, Psal. 44. vers. 11. to 23. compared with Rom. 8.36. For even from Abel to Isaac and so forward; they that have been borne after the flesh, have persecuted them that have been borne according to the Spirit, Gal. 4.29. And although these persecutions have been more common and grievous at some time than other; as it may appear by the books of the Maccabees, and the ten persecutions of the primitive Church foretold. Reu. 2.10. yet that rule holds, and still shall, till that King do come that shall reign in justice, that all that will live godly in Christ must suffer persecution, 2 Tim. 3.12. For whether it be that God by afflictions and persecutions doth try the constancy and patience of his servants, and exercise their faith in his promises: or whether by trouble and persecution, he will teach them not to look for their portion in this life: or to make them more conformable to the death of his Son, that they may also be partakers of his resurrection: or that the reward of their afflictions may be with an exceeding weight of glory: or that in the life to come they may by comparison enjoy the fullness of their happiness in more thankfulness, and the perfection of love to the author thereof: or that the devil may in justice punish such as forsake his obedience (for by the taint of original sin we all became his vassals) and God is not unjust no not to the devil himself, and therefore suffers him to afflict them, whom he himself will comfort, job 1. Reu. 2.10. or whether the devil to keep his own vassals in firm obedience, doth more eagerly persecute the truth: this is a sure conclusion, that from Abel to this day, the truth of the Religion of Christ, and the obedient and faithful professors thereof, have ever been persecuted, whereas all Idolatry and superstition of how different kinds soever, hath been and is freely exercised. From whence the reason will follow thus. If the Religion of Christ, and the faith in him have only been persecuted by the devil and his Instruments, even from the beginning of the world until now; then the faith in Christ is only the true faith, and He the only Saviour of the world. But the first is true by the testimony of the holy Scripture, and all those histories both ecclesiastical and profane that write any thing concerning this matter; and the practice of the Turks at this day doth approve it. Therefore the Faith in Christ is only the true faith, and He the only Saviour of the world. 12. To this argument of the sufferings for the faith of Christ you may take another from the heresies that have been there about. For as a malicious enemy besieging a Castle impregnable poisons the fountain of which the defenders must needs drink: so the faith of Christ being that only fountain of life, by which we are sustained in our spiritual warfare, hath by the malice of the devil, been troubled ᵍ with all kinds of heresies, which the devil could possibly forge by the wits of his Instruments: whereas in all the false worships that have been in the world, no questions nor dissensions have been, but every man wandered as he was led, in the darkness of his foolish heart. And yet in all these heresies, through the gracious direction of the Spirit of Christ, and the light of his word, the true faith hath prevailed, according to his promise, Math. 16.18. That all the devils that pass in and out at the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. From whence you may reason thus. That faith which only hath been attempted by all manner of heresies to be corrupted thereby, and yet hath stood uncorrupted and unreprovable in the True Faith. But the Christian Faith only is such. Therefore the Christian Faith only is the true Faith, and consequently our Lord jesus is the Saviour of the world; seeing in Him only we look for redemption. 13. And this is that pole of the Loadstone whereto we may be directed by every point within the compass of the holy Scripture. And these pointers that follow are sufficient to show it, Act. 2.36. Let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ, Act. 4. v. 10.11.12. There is no salvation in any other: for there is no name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved, save only the name of jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom God hath raised from the dead, Act. 16.31. Believe on the Lord jesus Christ, and thoushalt be saved and thy whole house, Act. 17.3. Paul opened and proved that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead: and this jesus whom I preach unto you is the Christ, Act. 18.28. He mightily convinced the jews and that publicly showing by the Scriptures that jesus was the Christ. 1 Cor. 3.11. other foundation can no man lay, than that is laid which is jesus Christ, Gal. 1.8.9. Though we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel to you than that you have received, let him be accursed. Notes. (a) HE to whom all the Prophecies.] This argument is the effect of that book which Lud. Crocius entitled Apodixis de Messia, which with some alterations and additions, he might in part take out of Iust. Mart. his defence of the Christians to Antoninus Pius, out of Athanasius orat. de incarnate. verbi, and other of the Fathers, but most of all out of Hieronymus de Sancta Fide printed at Francofurt 1602. by the name of Hebraeomastix. The authorities of the Talmud and other Rabins cited by them, I have of purpose omitted, and with many additions and proofs of the holy Scripture only, have contented myself with this plainness and brevity which you see. But if any man desire to see those jewish authorities, hemay find them there in Ficinus also de Christ. Rel. cap. 27. etc. in Postel. de orbis concord. lib. 1. cap. 3. and in many others. Yet those testimonies fitted Lactautius well against the Gentiles, which you may read if you will Instit. lib. 4. ca 6. The authorities of the * Sibyls also, and such pompous learning I have neglected of purpose because the simplicity of the doctrine of Christ, and the certain truth of this article, can no where be had so plainly, truly and powerfully, as in the holy Scripture itself. And therefore having furnished you with reason against the Atheist and Infidel, I leave it to your own diligence to compare these Scriptures together as they are cited: they in the old testament showing what was to befulfilled in Christ: the other showing the accomplishment of the same. * The jews acknowledge the authority of the old testament: See the difference of their sects. in the 13 chapter of M. Breerwoods' Inquiries. and although they do not believe the new, yet none of their most shameless Rabbis durst ever go about to refute it, or show the least untruth to be therein. And although it were written in those times and amongst those people which did most violently fight against the truth thereof; yet was it so strongly confirmed by miracles, by the innocency of the witnesses, by the power of the holy Ghost, by the constant sufferings of the professors thereof, and by the self conscience of the persecutors, that all the power of the adversary could not discredit it. And although the Atheists ever have questioned the authority and certainty of the holy Scriptures, as you may read in the great controversies thereabouts on both sides: yet the word of the Lord, and the truth thereof endures for ever, 1 Pet. 1.25. The answers to their chief objections against the old Testament you shall find most brief and plain in Hen. Ainsw. additions to the annotations on the law, and the defence of the new in Mars. Fie. de Christ. Rel. cap. penult. And for your ease you shall find the most necessary questions hereabout handled in chap. 34. following. (b) Gen. 49.10. The Sceptre shall not departed from juda, nor a Lawgiver from between his feet until Shiloh come; and unto Him shall the gathering of the people be.] It is strange to see what wretched shifts the wicked jews have to wrest the true meaning of this place rather than they will acknowledge the truth that they might be saved. Some will have this Shiloh to be Saul, others jeroboam, some Nebnchadnezer, as you may read in Pet. Galat. lib. 3 cap. 4. But being convinced by other prophecies and the authority of their own doctors: they confess that this Shiloh must be the Christ, and that he is already come, but that he shall not be manifested till the time come that they shall be restored to their own land again, which though it be true in a sort, as I shown Reason 5. yet to us it is sufficient to mark the circumstances of the text, and thereby to remove all scruple and doubt. First the word Shiloh is interpreted, Her Son, because he was to be the Son of a virgin without the company of any man. Then the other circumstance to whom the gathering or obedience of the people both jews and Gentiles should be, cannot agree to any of the aforesaid persons. For before the days of Saul, judah had no government more than any other tribe, and having never had any preeminence, it could not be said to joose it by saul's being preferred to the kingdom. And although jeroboam took ten tribes from the house of David, yet the kingdom of juda did still continue a Kingdom. And although Nebuchadnezer ruled over many people, yet he subdued them by force, they gathered not unto him, as the word here signifieth, a willing obedience, and is therefore by jerom translated, expectation, or waiting for: So that none of these could be that Shiloh. Therefore their wisest doctors, and both their paraphrasts translate it, until Messiah, or Christ come, the text is so plain. But yet it may be here questioned, how this Sceptre or dominion continued in juda in the time of the captivity in Babylon; and likewise in the time of the Maccabees who were Priests of Levi, and yet ruled as Kings somewhat more than 160. years before Christ came. For certain it is, that after janna Hircanus the grandfather of Levi, who was the great grandfather of the blessed Virgin, Luk. 3.24. none of the Stock of David bore any rule as Prince, but the tribe of Levi swayed all, until the time of Herod the great. To this it is answered, that by the marriages of the Priests with the tribe of juda and the family of David, as it is manifest in jehoiada, 2 King. 11. and others, the rule might be said to remain in juda. But descents in Israel, were accounted by the male-side only, who is therefore called Zacar of a word that signifies to record. And therefore in our Lord's descent, though Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth are remembered for our comfort of the Gentiles; and to show the constancy of God's promise, His whole genealogy by his mother is reckoned up by S Luke in the seventy seventh generation: yet is the account by joseph his supposed Father called the Son of Heli, though he were only his Son in Law. And therefore the Rabbins affirm that in the time of the captivity the great council of the seventy elders instituted by God, numb. 11.25. did ever continue. And certain it is, that the prince of the house of juda, Zorobabel of the line of David, was he under whom they did return from captivity. But yet that either the one or the other had any authority or rule over their fellow captives in a foreign country, stauds not with any practice or policy now in use; no nor after their return from thence, as it appears, Neh. 9.37. And although Daniel were a chief Prince in the Court, yet he procured the business of the king only, as Lord Treasurer, Dan. cap. 6.2. or Chancellor, Dan. cap. 2.48.49. as Nehemiah and Mordecai by extraordinary favour only procured the wealth of their people without any authority over them, but by special commission. But you will say, that the right of government remained still to the tribe: yea but jacob speaks of an actual Shebet that should still remain. Therefore others answer, that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shebeer signifies either a staff, a truncheon, or Sceptre, the ensign of authority, as used by leaders and commanders in war who are therefore called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and so by a metonymia it may signify authority: or else it signifies a tribe, and in this sense the tribe, or distinction of a tribe never departed from Inda till our Lord came, whereas the ten tribes carried away by Salmanasar in the days of Hezekiah, were ever after utterly left out of all remembrance in the holy records, see further in the 27. chap. R. 2. But concerning the cunning Scribe or lawyer (for so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies) brought up between his feet, as Paul at the feet of Gamaliel, it is most certain that such a Prince never failed from juda till the time of Herod the great, who not being able to win the jews, either by his most sumptuous building of the Temple, or by his Largesse in their famine, or by all the favours that he could do them, to acknowledge his right to the kingdom by the gift of the Romans, because they daily expected him that was to come of David; murdered their Sanbedrim and all the males that he could find of the house of David; so that he spared not his own Son that was descended thence by his mother; burnt also the books of the genealogy of their Kings, and afflicted them with other calamities, till they after thirty year's reign of his, were compelled to acknowledge him their lawful king, and then according to the promise was our Lord incarnate, that true Shiloh, her only Son. But you say Shiloh may be interpreted his Son. I answer. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shiloh by the consonants or substantial letters signifies her Son, but by the vowel or spirit above it may signify his Son: but because the va●● is wanting, it shall signify his son that is invisible, and therefore our Saviour is both God and man. So there is no letter present, no letter wanting in the holy word without a deep mystery, higher than heaven. c Dan. 9 v. 24. Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, & upon thy holy City; to restrain transgression, to seal up sin, to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness; to seal the vision and Prophecy, and to anoint the Holy of holies &c. to the end of the chapter. The more evident and plain any text of Scripture is for the clearing of the truth of Christ, the more hath the devil laboured to darken it, and to pervert the truth thereof. And though by other texts of Scripture it be plain enough to us, that this jesus is the Christ; yet seeing no Scripture is so direct and punctual as this for the certain designment of the time, the devil hath the more earnestly laboured to bewitch men's understanding, so that they have taken more pains to make the time uncertain, nay some make it nothing at all belonging to Christ our Lord. The errors of the jews you may read in Pet. Galatinus lib. 4. cap. 14. to the 19 the contradictions of the Christians against the truth, and against one another you may find in D. Willet his most diligent come. on Dan. Among the jews one Porphyry, because he saw the text was so plain for the truth of Christ, suffering at the time appointed by this prophecy; said that there was no reckoning to be made of this text of Daniel, because he was no prophet, contrary to the consent of all other jews, and the manifest authority of the Scriptures, as you may read, Eze. 14.14.20. & 28.3. Math. 24.15. where his innocency, wisdom, & gift of prophecy are testified: others among them do wrest the time concerning the end thereof. For the true Messiah not coming as they looked for Him, in pomp and worldly glory; they still looking for him that should come, according to their fancy, have made these weeks to mean, some 700 years, some 7. jubilees; others 7. ten. And because many in Scripture are styled by the title of Messiah, as you may read Psal. 105.19. Esay. 41.1. and elsewhere, therefore some of them will have Cyrus to be meant hereby, some Zorobabel, others jehoshua, some Nehemiah: but because neither the time nor circumstances accord, others will needs refer it to Agrippa, who was King when the City and Temple were destroyed by Titus. And I would the faithless jews had wandered thus alone, and that no Christian by his lifeless interpretation had sided with them. But the circumstances of the text do easily overthrow them. For this Messiah must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Messiah Naghid the Prince or chief Messiah: or of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Messiah that was to be manifested, that Messiah that was to be anointed with the oil of gladness above all his partners, Psal. 45.7. because He received not the Spirit by measure, joh. 3.34. Moreover who is he that can be that Holy of Holies but only Christ our Lord, both God and man? who is he that can restrain men from transgression? that can seal up sin? that can cover iniquity? that can bring in eternal righteousnesses but Christ our Lord, in whom all the nations of the earth should be blessed? Therefore the text by these circumstances is tied only to the promised seed, Gen. 3.15. which should utterly destroy the works of the devil. But the errors and disagreements of the Christians have been a great cause to withhold the jews from the acknowledgement of the truth. For they have been more different in their opinions hereabout than the jews, who held constantly, that the beginning of the time, was according to the word of the Angel, in the first year of Cyrus, when they had liberty to return, and to build the City, and Temple. But the Christians make questions whether from the going forth of the word from God to the Angel, or from the Angel to Daniel, or from the king who gave the commission to the jews, Gordonii. Chronol. cap. 15. pag. 237. And here again out of Ezra, because it is said, chap. 6.14. that the house was sininished by the commandment of Cyrus, and Darius, and Arteshaste king of Persia; question arises whether these seventy weeks begin in the first year of Cyrus, or of Darius Hystaspis, or of Artaxerxes Longhand; and whether in his seventh or in his twentieth year. And here while every man is rich in his own opinion, and prizes at an high rate his own reading, and praises his Authors, and despises, as deceived or counterfeit, such as make against him; men have so puzzled themselves by profane stories, and the reckoning by the olympiads; that they cannot find, as not where to begin, so not where to end the account: whether at Pompey's taking of jerusalem, or at the birth of our Lord, or at his death, or with the destruction of jerusalem, or in the days of Adrian, when the jews were banished out of Palestina. And whether these sevens of years (for on that the Christians agree) be moone-yeeres, or Sun-yeeres; for such fine subtleties they are driven unto, who apply their wits and studies to make good their profane authorities. How much more necessary were it to hold constantly the limits appointed by the sacred Scripture, thereby to examine and reject the falsehoods of profane histories, according to the counsel of S. Peter 2.1.19. And although M. Lively Pers. mon. pag. 188. etc. to 193. have sufficiently refuted this fancy of moone-yeres; yet while he sticks so close to the mudwall of these heathen stories, he is compelled to make this Messiah the Prince, to be another thing than that Holy of holies anointed. v. 24. Pers. mon. p. 175. & 200. and so for a full end of the controversy turns this prophecy quite from Christ; because he cannot see how it can stand with the just Chronology of the times, as indeed by his account it cannot. For whereas it is manifest by Ezr. 3. v. 8. etc. that the foundation of the house of the Lord was laid in the 2. year after their return from Babylon, in the second of Cyrus, which he makes to be in the 2. year of the 55. olympiad, and was finished in the sixth of Darius, Ez. 6.15. with him Darius Nothus, in the second of the 90. olympiad, and yet were not the gates of the palace set up till the 20. of Artaxerxes, of him surnamed Memor, in the fourth year of the 98. olympiad, the jews must be very ignorant of their own story, who said, joh. 2.20. Six and forty years was this Temple a building, who by his account should have said 140. or rather 174. years: by which reckoning also Zorobabel must be 150. or rather 199. years old, when the building of the Temple went forward by the help of the prophets Haggai and Zach. though he were but 15 years old when he brought the people out of Babylon, see Zach. 4.9. So with him Christ is made to suffer in the fift year of the 65. weeks directly contrary to the grammar sense of the 24 verse: and the 70 weeks of Daniel are ended, by his reckoning, not in any remarkable event; but in the 37 year after Christ's passion, three years before jerusalem, and the Temple were destroyed. Let them limp that list with their Olympians, let them stumble and fall that so blend their profane learning with the holy Scripture, as that they make it void of that which is the chief end thereof, that is the manifestation of Christ in the fullness of time, according to the promises. But see this goodly reckoning by the Olympiads, and how sure it is. Erasm. Schmide proleg. in Pind. puts the first author of them Hercules the Idxan, one of the five Corybantes, that going from Crete to Elis, did there set up these games in the honour of jupiter hisnursling; which was not likely to be less than a thousand years before Iphitus, seeing his father Saturn was the Son of him who first brought inhabitants thither after the flood: after which Hercules being intermitted, they were again set up by Jupiter himself, for his conquest over the Titans. But what meant these Cretians to appoint their triumphs in Peloponnesus? After jupiter six renewers of these gamebales are accounted before Hercules the Son of Amphitruo, and after him, and Oxylus, and 400 year's intermission, they were again set up by Iphitus the King of Elis, and a solemn Mart or Far for all strangers appointed, and the Olympiads changed from the fifth to every fourth year. And after this (forsooth) all accounts were exactly kept. Came such perfection so on the sudden? But if it were so exact for ever after, as that we must examine the times of the Scripture thereby; how is it, that the most eminent city of the world knows not her original better? which some put in the first year of the sixth Olympiad, other in the last; Mr. lively in the first of the seventh, but Mr. Lydiat from Fabius Pict. Varro, and others proves the first foundation of Rome by Romulus to have been in the first of the eighth Olympiad. Now if a man should ask whether the Grecian account by the Olympiads, or the Roman, ab urbe condita, were the surer; I think no man that hath heard, O vos Graeci semper pueri estis, but would take the latter: for as the reckoning by the Olympiads was uncertain, so was it in no use till a little before the beginning of the Greek Empire, Lydy. A. M. 3229. and therefore must the Roman account be more sure, because it was not in common use before julius Caesar, when learning began to spread, and men could not so easily range from the truth uncontrolled, A.m. 3258. Nay, such base or rather no account was there of this leaden ruler of the Olympiads, that the author that described almost all the reckon used among the Greeks' from Caecrops, about 700 years before Iphitus, and his Olympics, though he remember Cyrus, and Croesus, and Marathon, and the iron mine found in Crete, and the coinage of money in Aegina, and forgets not any wake, or horse-race, or poet, or fiddler of note, and continues his account to Seleucus Callinicus, within 180 years of the uttermost end of the Grecian Monarchy, above 530 years after these Olympiads, though he were a neighbour thereto, and takes the Isthmians in his way, yet is there in him not one word of this goodly reckoning, that now is grown so bold, and dares to lie so loud, as to silence the voice of the holy Scripture, See Marm. Arundel. pag. 6. etc. Beside this, these Olympiads are discredited in themselves, Mr. lively gives their beginning 775 years before the birth of Christ, that is, in the year of the world 3154. Suidas in the reign of Solomon, about the year 3010. Calvisius in the year 3174. others in 3187. Mr. Lydiat put them to the year 3229. Moreover, Iphitus they say, was not the only restorer of them, but with him Lycurgus the Lawmaker of Lacedaemon; yet authorities there be that make Lycurgus 108. years elder than the first olympiad of Iphitus, Lydiat but 97. A. M. 1772: other that make him more than 80. years after. Moreover in this time of Daniel, here made uncertain by these olympiads, that deadly Peloponnesian war continued twenty seven years between the Lacedæmonians and Athenians: now ask any merchant what Mart he would hold in that place which was the thorough fare between them both: yet to make all times agreeable to these olympiads, the overthrow of Babylon must be in the fifty five olympiad in the first year of Cyrus, after which he reigned thirty years as M. Lively accounts, pag. 47, etc. But M. Lydyat, and with him others of better account, puts the taking of Babylon by Cyrus to the 24. year of his reign in Persia, and but seven years before his death, De emend. temp. ad Annum. Mund. 3469. as others 3472. from all which uncertainties, and oppositions, I have only to conclude thus much. Let God be true, and every man a liar. For why should these Gibeonites the profane storiers trouble the congregation of Israel? Let them draw water for the service of the Tabernacle: but let them not appoint the services. And if God did choose the Fathers, the high Saints till Abraham, and of Abraham, Isaac (for in him should the seed be called) and of him jacob, and made his seed to be a peculiar people to himself, only for his sake who was to come of juda: and for the manifestation of the truth of his promise to Adam, recorded most precisely the times from Adam to the promise made to Abraham by the ages of the Father's 2078. years when Abraham by faith forsook his country, Heb. 11.8. Vr of the Chaldees, Act. 7. v. 2.3.4. aged 70. years, yet some men begin this account five years after at the death of Terah, not well interpreting the word, Gen. 12.1. said, for had said, though it be not unlikely that God called him a second time out of Charran into Chanaan, See john Speed Cloud of witnesses, Chap. 4. and .5. and from the promise unto the Law four hundred thirty years, Exod. 12.40. Gal. 3.17. then from the Law to the Temple built by Solomon four hundred eighty years, 1 King. 6.1. and from this fourth year of Solomon wherein the Temple began to be built, by the exact record of the reign of the kings of juda and Israel, four hundred eight years till Nabuchadnezzar, who in the first year of his reign, and in the end of the third of jehoiakim, besieged jerusalem, and took it in the fourth of the said jehoiakim, when the seventy years of the captivity began, jere. 25.1.18. Dan. 1.1. compared with Dan. 2.1. If the times (I say) were exactly accounted so fare; shall be so wicked as to think, that the Spirit of God began there in the end of the time to forget, or neglect that which had been so long expected; that for which only the record of the times had been hitherto so exactly kept? that which was the sure stay and anchor-hold of all the faithful? For if this Christ be not He, in whom all the Scriptures are fulfilled aswell for the time, as for all other circumstances, we are yet with the jews to look for one that is to come. But shall we to uphold the authority of heathenish records, disagreeing between themselves from 130. years to 329. in the Persian monarchy only, disannul or question the authority of the holy Scripture? Therefore that the links of that golden chain which all the gods can neither break nor weaken the hands of him that holds it, [Illi. Þgr;.] be rightly fastened one in another: to that period of the seventy year's beginning with the first of Nebuchadnezer, and ending with the Chaldean Monarchy: put those seventy weeks, or seven of years, and so these four hundred and ninety years having a certain beginning in the first year of Cyrus in Babylon, according to that which Esay prophesied of him (not Histaspis, not Longimanus, much less of Nothus, or Mnemon) above an hundred years before he was borne, chap. 44.28. and jer. 29.10. they shall likewise receive a certain ending according to the message of the Angel, at the death of our Lord. The exactness of which account may appear first by the Subdivision of the whole time, vers. 25. first into seven weeks, a troublous time of fortle nine years to build the city, the Temple, and the wall, as you may read at large in Ezra and Nehemiah: then into sixty two weeks a more troublous time, not only in respect of the perpetual wars between Syria and Egypt, Palestina being the thoroughfare to both, and in particular of the cruelty of Epiphanes, that compelled them to idolatry; but also of the often and great changes of their state. First their Princes of the family of David failing, than they of the Maccabees, after that they were conquered of the Romans, and lastly enforced to acknowledge subjection to Herode and his posterity. Of which most heavy and troublous times you may read Dan. 11. the books also of the Maccabees, Philo, josephus, and of late writers the briefest (and therefore I think the best) Eberus. The last part of this division of the sevens of Daniel is in the twenty seven verse, one week; in the end of which last week, he should cause the Ceremonial Law to cease, & confirm the covenant to the Many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rabim. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Romans. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Babylonians. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 javans or Grecians. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Medes and Persians, for in every one of these chief Empires the expectation of the eternal kingdom was proposed, Dan. 2.44. and 6.26. and whosoever had faith in the promise of God was accepted of him. A second argument for the preciseness of daniel's account, is from the form of the words, seventy weeks is cut out, a word plural is joined with a singular; showing an agreement of the whole in every part thereof. A third argument may be from the observation of the time of the evening sacrifice (for here is no word empty or in vain) which as it was answerable to the time of Adam's fall, to the institution of the Passeover; so should Christ by that offering of himself once, make satisfaction for the one, and finish the other, that the lifting up of his hands on the Cross might be as the perpetual evening sacrifice, Matth. 27.46. From whence I gather, that from the last day of the seventy year's captivity, the first of the going forth of the commandment from Cyrus, from the evening of that same day, these weeks were to receive their uttermost date, in the suffering of Christ, that the truth of the promise of God might be according to all his works, in number, weight, and measure, as it is said, Exod. 12.41. and 51. At the end of the four hundred and thirty years, in the self same day, God brought out the children of Israel out of Egypt. Fourthly, and if this time of our Lord had not been thus defined and certain by this prophecy, for the time of his suffering, upon what ground did our Lord preach, Mark 1, 15. The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Upon what ground could Saint Paul say, Gal. 4.4. But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son? If there were no time in all the Scripture limited which was to be fulfilled? and if there be any other fixed for the death of Christ, let it appear; how also was his reprehension of the blindness of the Scribes and Sadduces just, that they could not discern the times of the Son of man? Matth. 16.3. Luke 12.56. But by this account, from the deliverance out of Babylon, they might precisely know the time of his suffering, as Rabbi Nehumiah the Son of Hacana said, that he wanted but fifty years, to the days of Messiah, as Galatinus writes out of the Talmud lib. 1. Cap. 3. So simeon, surnamed the Just, understanding the text of Daniel aright, for his hopes sake found that favour from God, that he should not see death till he had seen the Lord, Luke. 2.26. I, but Nehemiah had commission to build the wall of jerusalem in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes, otherwise called Darius Longhand, Nehem. 2. And it is plain by the words of the Angel, Dan. 9.25. that the account of the seventy weeks must begin from the commission to build the wall, and so foreign histories will accord with the Angel: a shrewd block whereat many have stumbled; but the building of the wall, is no limit of the time, but a thing to be done in those troublous times, ver. 25. Beside this, foreign histories will not so accord to the death of Christ from thence, neither by Moone-yeeres, nor Sun-yeeres, nor with exclusiuè or inclusiuè, Pers. Mon. pag. 183, etc. But suppose that by some beggarly shift, some likely agreement were made, yet from the end of the seventy year's captivity to this twenty of Artaxerxes are forty nine years at the shortest reckoning: now would I ask, with what faithfulness the Angel discharged his message, if being sent to give Daniel skill and understanding of the time (for that only was the thing whereof the Prophet was ignorant) he should by four hundred ninety, give him to understand five hundred thirty nine, or as some will have it five hundred ninety two, or any other number; and neither in the whole nor in the parts give him the least iuckling of any such reckoning? Gordon. Chronol. Cap. 19 thinks that here is obscurity sought out of purpose; and that Daniel was still ignorant of the time. I say that this answer is clean contrary to the profession of the Angel in the 22. & 23. v. Was his coming to give him skill and understanding, and would he blind him in obscurity, bind his understanding unto falsehood, by giving him one number for another? he durst not do it, it was against his nature; neither dare I believe the jesuite. Beside, where Daniel is ignorant, he professes it, as chap. 12.8. but here is not a word to that purpose. But I answer, that the strength of this objection depends only upon the ill interpretation of the text: for the words in 25. verse From the going forth of the Commandment to restore and build again jerusalem, as the old Latin hath it, iterum aedificetur jerusalem, that jerusalem may be built again, were in our former bibles (much better) to bring again as Montanus, ad faciendum reverti, to cause the people to return: for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to return in the neuter signification, in the conjugation here used is active, to make to return. Now who were to be made to return, but they that had gone from thence? But take it at the hardest, to restore and to build, or to build again, should not they build, that should enjoy it and dwell there? so that of force these words must have reference to that word from Cyrus, who gave the liberty to the people to return and to build their Temple and the city. And all the commissions in the favour of the jews which were after Cyrus, were only to strengthen and make good that first grant of Cyrus, as it is manifest Ezech. 6. and 7. and Nehem. 2.8. For the freedom of the people was the main and first thing, and for their convenience the building of the city; first their own houses for necessity Ezech. 3.7. Hag. 1.4. than the house of God for his service, Ezech. 4.3. and lastly the wall of the city for their security, Neh. 1.3. the freedom & liberty of all this was granted by Cyrus as it appears Ezech. 44.28. and 45.13. 1 Chron. 26.22. Ezech. 1.2. and accordingly about five thousand of the people returned: and the foundation of the Temple was laid in the second year after their return, and by the malice of their enemies hindered, till by the encouragement of the Prophets Haggai and Zacharie the building of the Temple went forward in the second year of Darius (most likely) Hystaspis, as josephus, Mr. Calvin, Lydyat, Pererius, Gordon, and others affirm. But especially Ezra observeth precisely the difference between Darius under whom the Temple was finished, and Artaxerxes in whose seventh year he came to jerusalem with a certain Caravan of the jews, about 1600 Ezech. 7. And in the twentieth year of the same Artaxerxes, Nehemiah had a further commission to build the walls, and brought none of the captivity with him, but was compelled to desire a Convoy of the King; neither did he build any thing besides the walls: for as for timber for any houses, he had not a stick, only by special grace he had out of the king's Park timber for the gates of the city, for his own house, and for the gates of the palace or court of the Temple. Nehem. 2.7, 8. And from the foundation to this time were forty six years john 2.20. fully complete, though the body of the house had been finished fourteen years before, Ezech. 6.15. Therefore I say, first, that seeing the Temple was already finished, and the city wanted not houses, but inhabitants, Nehe. 11.1.2. it may appear easily how far this one act of building the wall was from that which was spoken of Cyrus, both by Esay and the Angel. Secondly, and because the jews were already returned from Babylon, and that none returned with Nehemiah. And thirdly because the wall was the last thing performed in the end of these troublous times of the first seven Sevennits, or 49 years of which the Angel spoke, it is impossible, and contrary to the very record of the holy Scripture, that these four hundred ninety years should take their beginning in the twentieth of Artaxerxes or at any time either after or before, but only at that time when Zorobabel fanned Babel, and brought out the people thence. He that will see more to this question may read Dr. Willet whom I cited before, and joh. Speed Cloud of witnesses, Chap. 5. (d) Haggai 2.9. The glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the former, saith the Lord of hosts, and in this place will I give peace. What the stateliness and magnificence of Solomon's Temple was, himself exceeding all the Kings of his days both in riches and honour; the Temple among the most sumptuous buildings being the most excellent, and about which he took most care; his father David a Prophet, as himself having described the pattern to represent that Temple not made with hands wherein the king of Glory would dwell, may easily be thought to be such, as the wisest, richest, and most glorious king of the whole world could make it. But lest we should not conceive sufficiently thereof, the books of the Kings, and Chronicles do enlarge our understandings by the employment of almost two hundred thousand men for seven years and an half; by the descriptions of the materials and their preparation; the roof being set with precious stones, the walls overlaid, yea the very pavement and hinges of the doors being of pure gold; so that no history remembers the like building both for cost and workmanship. Now what this second Temple built by a small band of poor captives in all but forty two thousand three hundred sixty, beside their servants a wretched number of seven thousand three hundred thirty seven, and that in a desolate country, amidst so many enemies that hindered their building, was like to be in comparison of salomon's, every man may easily conjecture. And therefore this Prophet saith, Chap. 2, 3. That this new built house in comparison of the former was nothing, as you may further see, Ez. 2.12, 13. Was this house then more excellent in respect of the ornament or privileges? God promises by his prophet Chap. 1. v. 8. that he would take pleasure in it, and that he would be glorified. Where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ecabd by the want of the letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in number signifieth five, and in sense would be translated, I will glorify it; is supposed by the Rabins to intent the want of five things in this latter Temple which were in the former, First the Ark with the covering and Cherubims, secondly, the fire from heaven, thirdly, Shecinah, or the Divine presence manifested in the oracle, Levit. 16.2. Numb. 7.89. 1. King. 6.5. Fourthly, the holy Ghost, which spoke not by any Prophet after this Darius in whose days the Temple was built, fifthly the Vrim and Thummim. And this many of our learned do embrace, as you may read every where: but Pet. Galat. lib. 4. Chap. 9 citys the book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yoma, or of day's interpreting the five things to be. First the Ark as before: secondly, the pot of Manna: thirdly, the oil of anointing: fourthly, the rod of Aaron: fifthly, the box with the offering of the Phlistines, by the side of the Ark. But the author of that book was too careless, as it is apparent, 1 King. 8.9. 2 Chron. 5.10. where it is directly affirmed, that nothing was in the Ark but only the two tables of the Law. And is it likely, that the offering of the heathen should be brought into the most holy place, before Christ had entered thereinto? But howsoever, seeing by all confession it appeareth that this house was not to be compared with that of Solomon, either in outward beauty, or in riches, or in outward holiness, being so often and grievously profaned by Heliodorus, the agent of Seleucus, then by his brother Epiphanes, who set the image of jupiter in the Temple of God, and enforced the jews to forsake their Religion; after by Pompey, by Crassus and others, or in the other high and heavenly ornaments and priveleges, the glory thereof must needs consist in this, that the Lord of glory, the Messiah and Saviour of the world would glorify that Temple with his presence, and in that Temple preach peace with God, by his own satisfaction for the sins of the world. You may read hereto, joh. 8.12. to the end, and chap. 10.23. to 40. and 18.20. And thus the substance being more excellent than the shadows, and Christ by his suffering having finished the ceremonial Law in the time while this house did stand, according to this prophecy, it is necessary that this jesus be the promised Messiah, seeing this house stood but forty years, the time of repentance and no more, after the death of our Lord. (e) Haggai 2.7.8. Yet one little while and I will shake the heavens and the earth; the Sea and the dry land. And I will move all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come, and I will fill this house with glory, saith the Lord of hosts. Marsilius Ficinus de Rel. Christ. cap. 27. interprets this place too slackly according to the letter only, understanding by the shaking of the heavens, that Star which conducted the wisemen at the birth of Christ, and a supposed Eclipse at his death. The Evangelists tell us of a darkness over all that land, but no author of sufficient credit avows any Eclipse of the Sun in the full Moon when * See praef. jac. Christ. in Cat. Palaest. pag. 21. the Passeover was kept: by the shaking of the earth he understands that earthquake at the suffering of Christ, and another mentioned by josephus. Hitherto also he brings the taxing of all the Roman provinces by Augustus Luke 2. and the rebellion of judas of Galilee, mentioned Acts 5.37. By the moving of the Sea, he means the miracle spoken of, Mar. 4.35. and john 6.16. to 22. when by his word our Lord commanded the winds and seas, and they obeyed him. And if this interpretation had rested with Ficinus by profession a Physician, by sect a Platonic, I had said nothing; but seeing other professed Divines, and they not of the least account, do follow him herein, as Crocius aforesaid, I thought it fit to clear this text rather by that interpretation which the Apostle makes hereof, Heb. 12.26, 27. which is directly to this purpose for which I cite it, where by the shaking is signified the removing of those things that are shaken, that they which are not shaken may remain. Now the whole drift of that Epistle is to prove that the Law had but the shadows of things to come, but the body was Christ. Therefore by the heaven understand the Ecclesiastical estate of the jews as it was ordered under the Law, and at Christ's suffering utterly finished: for the Law made nothing perfect, but was only the bringing in of a better hope, Heb. 7.19. and Chap 8. all. By the earth understand the civil policy, which was likewise so shaken by the Romans, that they had not power to put any man to death, john 18.31. And after by Adrian were they utterly scattered from being a people. These things then being thus shaken, and by the shaking removed; the sacrifice of Christ and his kingdom must remain, that he may be yesterday, and to day, and the same for ever, Heb. 13.8. that is, before the Law, and under the Law, and after the Law; the only Mediator between God and man. And as it was with the jews, so likewise the inhabitants of the Islands of the Sea, and of the main land, were to be shaken, that they might forsake their service of dumb idols, to serve the living God, Acts 14.15. 1. Cor. 12.2. that so our Lord might be the desire and joy of all nations, and the Scripture fulfilled, which saith, Rejoice thou barren that bearest not, break forth in joy thou that travelest not; for the desolate Church of the Gentiles, hath many more children than she, the Synagogue of the jews that had the husband. Esay 54.1. For he came unto his own, but his own received him not, john 1.11. And therefore was he made a light unto the Gentiles, unto the uttermost ends of the earth, Esay 49.6. Acts 13.46.47. that is to us, even to us of this Island, utterly removed from all the world beside. Glory be to thee, O Lord most high. (f) Gen. 49.5, 6. Simeon and Levi brethren, their swords are the instruments of violence, Into their secret let not my soul enter, Let not my glory be united to their assembly: for in their rage they slew the man, and in their selfe will they houghed the ox. The interpreters differ in the translation of this text, first about the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mecherotheikem which some bring from the root 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chur a furnace or crucible, but translate it, in their habitations, as if it descended of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ghur to so journey or dwell as a stranger, others derive it of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 machar which among other things signifies a sword; and may well be the thea me of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 machaera in Greek a sword; by which word Arius Montanus doth translate it most fitly to the sense, and without any understanding of the word (in). Another difference is about the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shor, which being pronounced shur, signifies a wall, and for the authority of the Chald aean Paraphrast is by many interpreted, they pulled or digged down the wall. In which sense though it agree well to that purpose for which I cite it; that the high Priests of Levi, and the Scribes of Simeon, through their malice and violence against our Saviour caused him to die, & so in their selfe will pulled down the wall of partition between the jews and Gentiles: yet the word being pronounced shor, as it is pointed in this place, doth every where signify an ox, and so with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to pull out by the roots or to cut a sinew, as it is used 2 Sam. 8.4. and 1 Chron. 18.4. He houghed their chariot horses, is by the Greek and some other good interpreters here turned as you see 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they houghed the ox; neither is there at all any mention of digging down a wall, Gen. 34. where this deed of the sons of jacob is recorded, but that they made spoil of all their cattles. And although the other sons of jacob were actors in this business; yet was it by the instigation of Simeon and Levi, as the whole multitude before Pilate were persuaded by the Priests and Scribes to ask Barrabas, and to kill the Lord of glory. Now concerning their scattering among the other triber; of Levi you may read joshua 21. of Simeons scattering in the cities of juda, of Dan, in mount Seir also, and the country of Amalek, you may read Ios. 19 and 1 Chron. 4. from verse 24. to the end. And as the Levites though dispersed, yet for their zeal in avenging the idolatry of the Israelites, Exod. 33.26.7, 8. had this honour from God, to teach Jacob his judgements, Deut. 33.9, 10 so the Simeonites likewise took this honour to themselves to be teachers of the law in the Synagogues of jacob, as the Levites in the schools of Israel, as the Thargum of jerusalem hath recorded, and by these was that fulfilled which jacob here prophesies concerning the man of men slain by them, and that ox the great sacrifice for the sin of the whole world, sinew-cut or deprived of all strength or life as concerning his flesh, which fact of theirs the Patriarch doth so detest, as that neither his tongue nor thought should give consent thereto. For although the ignorant multitude thought that the Messiah should come in worldly glory; yet the Prophets knew that his kingdom was spiritual, and that by his death they were to be freed from death, and him that had the power of death, to whom they were subject because of sin. And therefore was it that David's heart smote him when he had cut off the lap of saul's garment (for Saul was a figure of Christ) lest by that fact he were likewise a pattern of them, and so in some sort partaker with them of whom he prophesied, Psal. 22.18. They parted my garments among them. But you say the Scripture is not to be strained, for by that means every thing may be made of any thing: but there is one only sense of the Scripture, and that according to the letter. I Answer: Our Lord saith, That Moses writ of him. Can you show it by the letter? he said indeed, A Prophet shall the Lord raise up unto you from among your brethren like unto me, him shall ye hear. So he raised up David, Solomon, Esay and the rest, and they did hear and believe them; but him whom the Fat her sent they believed not, john 5.38. Therefore this was not he of whom Moses wrote. Is this your literal understanding? He saith also, that jonas was a sign of his burial, and yet there is not a letter of it in all the book of jonas. Adam said, This is now bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh, and therefore shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined to his wife. Saint Paul from hence Eph. 5.32. and Heb. 2.14. concludes that seeing the children were partakers of flesh and blood; therefore the Mediator also must be incarnate. But he could not prove it by the letter, and therefore he calls it a great mystery. So then there is a mystical sense of the Scripture, as well as a literal. And the mystical is rather to be taken in this place; because the Patriarch himself in the first verse of this Chapter, promises to tell them what shall befall them in the last days. Now it is manifest, that of the three estates of the Church: First, under the law of nature: Secondly, of the ceremonies: thirdly, and of grace; that of grace only could be called the last days. For the estate of the Church under the law of nature was the first, and not utterly finished, till the tables made of the unknown matter were broken, Ex. 32.16.19. and then began the law of the ceremonies when the same words were again written in the tables of stone which Moses hewed, Exod. 34.1. which middle estate also lasted until the Gospel of repentance was preached by john the Baptist, and was utterly finished in the Consummatum est, john 19.30. and then began this last estate of grace, called the last days, as it is manifest, joel 2.28. compared with Acts 2.17. and Hebr. 1.1. and 1 john 2.18. So that this prophecy of jacob, though it were in some sort fulfilled as concerning their dispersion in the second state of the Church, as I shown; yet the uttermost accomplishment of their foul offence in slaying that man, figured by their cruelty toward the Sychemites, could not be till the last days when Christ was manifest in the flesh. Compare herewith (if you will) jacobi Brocardi Mist. cap 1.49. and note (b) on Chapter 13. number 7. And he that follows that rule of one only literal sense, as he makes no difference between the historical books of the Old Testament, and any other true history, so doth be deprive himself of that hope and comfort which he might receive by them concerning Christ, and makes them frustrate of their chiefest end, and directly gainesayes that of the Apostle, Heb. 1.1. After sundry sorts God spoke in times passed to the Fathers. See jacobi Brocardi praefat. in interpretat. Bib. fol. 25, 26, etc. if their do and sufferings were not predictions of the sufferings of Christ, and of the glories that should follow. How much better was that saying of the father? The new Testament is hidden in the old, and the Old is manifest in the New. But you say, by these allegorical and mystical senses of Agar and Sinai, and the like, any foreign sense may be concluded. I Answer, The Scriptures being to give us hope and comfort in Christ, there is one rule for their interpretation, which out of Saint Peter I remembered even now, that the interpretation be to manifest the sufferings of Christ, and thereby our deliverance from the punishment of our sin: or the glory of Christ, and therewith the hopes that are laid up for us in heaven. And what allegorical, mystical, or anagogical sense soever is brought in beside this rule, the rule of our holy faith, is as easily thrust out, as it is brought in. And this is the true Cabala of the Scripture both old and new. Troubled with all kind of heresies] The heresies or errors abont this truth of our Lord Christ incarnate are in brief of three kinds. The first, concerning the person, who was this Christ: the second concerning His nature and being: the third concerning the attributes or proprieties of his being. The most ancient heresy concerning the person of the Messiah was that of the Herodians, of whom you read in the Gospel, Matth. 22.16. Mark 3.6. These, as Epiphanius remembers Panarii lib. 1. held that Herod the son of Antipater the Idumean was the true Christ promised to the Fathers, because the sceptre did utterly cease from juda in his time: but the gathering of the nations was not to Herod, as jacob prophesied, so their heresy vanished. Hitherto you may bring all those false glosses of the jews who turn the prophecies fulfilled in Christ, to other persons, as to Ezechiah, to Zorobabel, to Nehemiah, to jehoshua, and to others, as they think fittest to mock of the holy oracles from the true Messiah, as you may read in Pet. Galat. lib. 4. cap. 17. and in the note (b) above. But their greatest mistaking was in their counterfeit Messiah, who from Numb. 24.17. called himself Barchochab, that is, the son of the Star, of whom they were foretold by our Lord himself, john 5.43. If another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. But it cost them the destruction of their city by Titus, and so many miseries as ensued thereon. Such another Barchoziba they had in the days of Adrian, by whom after the slaughter of innumerable * persons, They cite the author of the book Iuch●sia for twice so many as went out of Egypt. Postel. de orbe cond. writes 600000. of both these you may read Galatin. lib. 4. Cap. 21. they were utterly chased out of their country, and not so much as the name of their city, from his own name called Aelia, left unto them; and thus have they lived in banishment ever since. But the lewdness and folly of other succeeding heretics did equal this of the jews. And first that of Simon the Witch, who gave out himself to be the Christ, which though Augustine affirm in so many words; yet Tertullian, and Epiphanius have only so much in effect, that he was that virtue and great power of God as you read, Acts 8.10. How great then was his scholar Menander? who to all the falsehood of his Master added this, that he was greater than Simon, Epiphanius in Pan. The heretics called the Sethians, held that Christ which was borne of the Virgin Mary, was no other than Seth, named Gen. 4. the son of Adam. The Ophites held that the Serpent which deceived Eve, was Christ, as Augustine saith: but neither Irenaeus, Tertullian, nor Epiphanius affirm it. But Augustine's authority alone is sufficient to make us think that the Manichees held that the Serpent which taught Eve knowledge, and came in the last days to save the souls of men, must needs be Christ. But these sotteries were so senseless, as that they neither lasted long, nor spread fare. But the enemy of mankind would not suffer the fountain of life, the sincere doctrine of Christ to be untroubled, and therefore beside these heresies concerning the person, who was that Christ promised to the Fathers, he brought into this faith, which we hold concerning Christ the son of the Virgin Mary, such confusion of opinions concerning his nature and properties (for his offices are in question now) that Mahumed, Alcoran Cap. 20. rejoiced in himself that he was delivered from the opinions of the Christians, so monstrous in themselves, so contrary one to another, that the very enemies of these heresies were in confusion thereabout, and as here and there contrary one to another, so sometime to themselves. You may read if you will, the stories of the heretics in the Fathers, Irenaeus, Epiphanius, Theodoret, Isidore, Eusebius, Ruffinus, and other historians of the Church, and in brief, he that gathered from them all, the commentator on Aug. de haer. I, for avoiding of confusion, will remember as occasion is, the heresies under the name or names of the most famoused authors or defenders thereof, and that without respect either of the time wherein they lived, or other opinions which they held beside: for I writ not the history of the wars, but the triumph only of the Christian faith. 1. The Monophysitae or heretics which held but one only nature in Christ, were of divers families: for Eutiches, while he went about to refute Nestorius, who held as two natures, so two persons in Christ, confessed that Christ was of two natures God and man before the uniting of them both; but after the union of them, they became as one person, so one nature: because the manly being was utterly swallowed up of the Divine, and changed thereinto, as a drop of vinegar in the Sea doth utterly lose both the taste and being of vinegar. This the Armenians and jacobites heretofore have held, but now they are returned to the true faith. Mr. brerewood's Enquirie pag. 154. and page 173. Euagrius hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 4. Cap. 9, 10, 11. charges Anthimus Bishop of Constant. Theod sius Bishop of Alexandria, and Severus, to have taught one only nature in Christ; but what or how, he shows not. But you may find in Theodotus the Reader Collect. lib. 2. that their heresy was one with this of Eutyches. 2. Apollinaris as others, Apollinarius contrarily upon that text of john 1.14. The word became flesh, held that in Christ the flesh and the word were consubstantiate, or made one substance, so that somewhat of the word was turned into flesh, not remembering the interpretation which follows in the same place, that the word made his tabernacle or dwelling in us. 3. The Timotheans said, That of the two natures thus united in Christ, a third thing must result, which is neither very God nor very man, but a confused effect of both natures. And this third being the Theodosians held to be mortal; but the Armenians bold it to be immortal, and no way subject to any suffering. The Cophti in Egypt hold but one nature in Christ, not by commixture to cause a third being of both, but interpret their meaning according to the true faith, Brerewood Enquirie. Cap 22. 4. But on the other side, Ebion, Carpocrates and Theodotion affirmed that Christ was pure and only man, begotten by joseph of his wife Mary, as other children, and that God was in him, as in Peter or Paul, or any other man, and by a greater progress in virtue, he came to be more righteous than other, because he received a more noble soul than other men, by which he knew and reveiled heavenly truths, and by an assisting power of God, he wrought miracles, as Moses or other of the Prophets had done before. This heresy the Socinians, as Wentz. à Budowecks doth charge them, have renewed of late; yet after by him it seems, they are come to yield unto Christ as much as Arius. 5. Artemou, Theodotus of Byzant. or Constantinople, Paulus of Samosata, and Photinus held that Christ had no being before he took beginning of his mother, and so was only man by nature, but that God, which Epiphanius expounds the Word, descended into him: which error Athanasius Epistola de incarnate. contra Paulum Samosat. holds to be all one with that of Carpocrates. 6. Cerinthus to that progress in virtue of Ebion and Carpocrates, added this, That Christ, which he interpreted the holy Ghost, descended into jesus the son of Mary, when he was baptised in jordan, and made known unto him the Father, whom he knew not before; and hence it came to pass that jesus afterward did such great miracles, because Christ was in him. Thus of one he made two Mediators, one jesus wherein Christ was, and another jesus without Christ: for he added that jesus suffered and died, but that Christ without any suffering flew bacl to heaven; as Colarbasus also after him did teach. This Cerinthus is that heretic as saith Epiphanius, that troubled the Church in the Apostles time, affirming that the Gentiles ought to be circumcised, and keep the Law, which heresy of his the Council of jerusalem determined, Acts 15. 7. The heretics called Alogiani, because they denied Christ to be God the Word, hold in effect as much as the former concerning his nature, but yet deny not, but that for his great grace and virtue he was made the Mediator for other men. But the writings of Saint john they utterly deny; because, say they, the other Evangelists do not where call Christ the Word. Answer. But they call him, and prove him to be God, as Matth. 1 23. God with us, from whence is the gift of pophecie, and power to cast out devils, Matth. 7.22. so Mark 1.24. The devils confess his power, and him to be the Holy one of God. And Luk. 1.34.35. The Angel professes that holy thing which was to be borne of the Virgin, to be the Son of God. All his glorious miracles prove as much, which were neither wrought by the power of Baalzebub, as the old jews, nor yet by magic, or by the means of the Cabala, as the later jews affirmed, but only by the power of God, as our Lordhimselfe proves by an unanswerable argument, Luk. 11. vers. 14. to 23. And these are the most famoused heresies of them who held but one nature in Christ; divine as Eutyches, who changed the humane nature into the divine: or humane; as Apollinarius, who thought the divine nature was changed into the humane: or one mixed nature of both these, as the Timotheans believed: or purely humane, as Ebion, Cerinthus, Photinus and the Alogians: wherein it will not be unfit that we briefly consider their reasons, and see what answers are, or may be made thereto. §. 1. And first concerning the heresy of Eutyches, you may by this see how dangerous it is. For if it be put, that after the union of both natures, the humane nature was utterly swallowed up of the divine; so that the divine nature only remained, than it must follow of necessity, either that we are still in the state of damnation, or that God must suffer and die for us, in the divine nature: which as it is impossible; so yet should we be still in the state of condemnation. For if our redemption be not wrought for us in our own nature, the divine justice is still unsatisfied: so we are still in our sin. And therefore the Council of Chalcedon, held by six hundred and thirty Fathers to condemn these errors of his, viz. that the natures were apart before the union, as if the humanity had had any being before it was taken to the Godhead; or that the beings in themselves, or their proprieties were either confused, or changed, confessed him, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. that is, one and the same Son in the two natures (but remember the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the nature together with the proprieties thereof) neither by mixture, nor change of natures; but as one individual being consisting of both natures inseparably. But some of the later Eutichians minced the mattier, and said, that unity of nature was not till after His resurrection. But that, both against the authority of the Scripture, and reason itself. For He received power of the Father to raise the dead, to give eternal life, to execute the judgement as he is the Son of man, joh. 5. v. 25.26.27. all these things not yet performed. And how can the heavens contain Him, Act. 3.21. if he be only God, whom the heaven, and the heaven of heavens cannot contain? Kings 8 27. or what hope can we have of being made like unto Him, if He be only God? yet have we assurance, that as we have borne the image of the earthly; so shall we also bear the image of the heavenly, 1 Cor. 15.49. The words of our Lord himself are yet more clear, Luk. 24.39. Handle me and see me: for a Spirit hath not flesh and bones; as ye see me have. The truth of his bodily being after his resurrection is there argued by his eating and many other infallible proofs, during the time of 40. days Act. 1.3. And in the last two chapters of Saint john's Gospel all to this purpose, that we may believe that he that descended into the grave, is even the same that ascended in the perfection of His manly being to appear for us before the Father, till the day of our redemption, when he shall present us unblameable in his sight, as it is said, Heb. 2.3. Behold me, and the children which thou hast given me, see joh. 6.39. But see the reason of this heresy of Eutyches, delivered by that second Synod of Ephesus, called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which murdered the virtuous and faithful Flavian, and blasted with their stinking curs all them that should affirm that there were two natures in Christ, forsooth, because he is the only Son of God, not two Sons, not two Persons, but one Son, one Person, Euagrius Hist. Eccles lib. 2. cap. 18. And yet our Lord saith of himself, whom do men say that I the Son of man am? Math. 16.3. And as often is he called in the Scripture the Son of man, the Son of David, the Son of the virgin, of the carpenter, etc. as the Son of God: and yet but one Son, and yet but one person of both nature's divine and humane, as I shown before in the beginning of the 23. chapter. I refer you thither. But the answer of that wise Prince of the Saracens Alamundarus was sufficient to stop the croaking of those foul birds of the Ephisine cage of whom some coming to taint him with that bane, he told them that he had received letters that Michael the Archangel was lately dead: when they answered that it was impossible that an Angel should suffer either sickness or death, he replied: And if Christ have not two natures aswell the manly as the divine, how could he endure the pains and death of the Cross? For if an Angel cannot die, much less he that is only God, Theod. Collect. loc. cit. And this may be sufficient for all the rabble rout of Eutyches. But if you desire more reasons against his opinion, you may find them in Tho. Aq. cont. Gent. lib. 4. cap. 35. And although this heresy be imputed unto Eutyches (as I have showed) yet it is plain that it was an heresy before Eutyches was borne. For Saint Athanasius in his sixth Sermon hath most wittily and plainly refuted it. §. 2. The heresy of Apollinaris is as wide from the truth on the other side, and as it favours of the heresy of the Theopaschites (which you shall hear anon) so it favours that sottery of the Manichees that made the Godhead divisible into parts, as you have heard before, chap. 8. note 6. §. 3. or rather yet worse than so, if any thing can be worse than that which is worst, or more false than that which is most false. 1. For if any part of God became man, than God in part of Himself must cease to be God, and God must suffer detriment or loss, when part of His being is either taken away or changed to the worse. 2. So God also should be subject to composition and accidents, contrary to that which hath been proved, chap. 9 numb. 3.5.6.] 3. Whereupon it would also follow, that seeing his being is most simple and pure, if any of his divine being were coessential to his humanity, than also the whole. 4. And moreover it would follow that God were neither infinire, nor eternal. For whatsoever is changed into another ceases to be that which it was before. But this is contrary to that which hath been showed c. 2. & 3. so then all these things are impossible. And therefore the Scripture concludes against this opinion, that God is eternally one and the same, as S. james also saith c. 1.17. that in Him there is neither variableness, nor shadow of Change. 1. But see their arguments. First, The Word became flesh, joh. 1.14. Therefore the Word was changed into flesh, bones, sinews, hair, etc. Answer. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was, became, or was made, hath diverssignifications, because a thing may be said to be, to become, or to be made this or that by any property or accident that is therein, as a man at 20. years old is made or becomes able to guide a Ship. Cicero became or was made more learned by reading the books of Plato. But thus the Word was not made flesh when he took our nature on him, for so should we make God subject to accidents: so also our mediator after the union of both natures: should not be essentially both God and man, which must of necessity fall into one of these two Gulfs, either that the manly being in Christ was but fantastical and in show only, as the Manichees and some other heretics held; or else that He may cease to be a mediator, between God and the Creature, which were to take away our hope of everlasting happiness. Again a thing may be said to be, to become, or to be made this or that substantially, as when the food is changed into the substance of that which is nourished, thereby than it is made or become that which it doth nourish. But thus the Word could not become flesh, but rather flesh should have been made the Word. For in all manner of working to the change of one thing into another, the more noble and powerful agent must have the preeminence. But this is neither affirmed in the Scripture, nor possible to be true. Thirdly a thing may be said to become or to be made this or that essentially, as every particular matter and form under every species become, or are made one individual; as the body and soul in Plato, essentially become the proper person which we call Plato. But thus the deity and humanity became not essentially one individual, under any common species or kind. For the deity came not to the humanity, as the form thereof, which had the full and perfect proper form, the humane soul and understanding. Moreover all forms are ordained for their matiers, and all matiers have in them a natural appetite to those forms whereof they are capable. But nothing of this was in that above-wonderfull generation. For neither could the humanity when it was not, the sire that the deity should dwell therein: neither was the deity ordained for any such end, as to dwell in man: but of his own only holy will, and love to man, was he pleased so to bless the creature. Therefore the Word was made flesh only by the * This word (was made) signifies an union, not a Conversion. Athana. Serm. 6. uniting or taking of the manhood unto himself, whereby both the divine and humane nature became in Him one subsistence, one Mediator, one Person, one Immanuel, to which union in natures, nothing in nature can be equal or like. For this is that wonder of wonders which passes the understanding of men and Angels to conceive, for which his wondrous conception by the Holy Ghost, his wonderful birth of a virgin were, by which his glorious miracles, his wonderful resurrection, and ascension, and the wonderful happiness and eternity of his creature are wrought. And although as the two natures, so their proprieties are different in Him: so that we may truly say of Him according to the several natures, that he was dead, and yet could not die, that He suffered, and yet could not suffer, or the like: yet must all these contradictions of necessity be understood of the distinct natures in the unity of that one Person indistinct; so that the difference be in the natures, not in the Person. And thus the Scripture hath taught us to speak as it is said, joh. 1.10. He was in the world, and the world was made by him: which clauses though they may receive distinction by the differences of his being; yet in the unity of his Person, none at all. For the same Person hath made the world, and yet was in the world as another man. For to respect the Son according to the perfection of his deity, although nothing be essential unto him, but that he be eternally begotten of the substance of the Father: yet since he was pleased to take on him the office of our Mediator, it was necessary, that he should take also our being wherein alone the satisfaction for us should be wrought. For as it was necessary that our Mediator should be God, that he might be able to save and to support the manhood enduring that punishment which might satisfy the infinite justice, and raise it up again to life; lest being swallowed up of those torments He should not be able to give life to them for whom He suffered (for the State of the members cannot be better than of the head.) So was it necessary that he should be made flesh, that is, become truly and essentially man, that the punishment being borne in the nature that had offended, that nature might be restored to the favour which it had lost. Necessary, I say; but I mean not by any absolute necessity on the behalf of God: for He is Debtor to no man, nor on him can any necessity be laid toward the creature without which he is infinite in glory and perfection; but yet necessary with that necessity of supposition; that seeing God, for the praise of his Grace, would by Himself restore His Creature that had sinned, it was necessary that he should take on him the nature and being of that creature; at least in part, if He would restore it but in part: but because the creature had sinned in the whole; not in soul alone, nor in body alone, nor in the one without the other; it was necessary that He should become whole and entire man, not to take on Him the soul of man only, but to become also flesh, that he might redeem both soul and body. 2. But they object that out of Saint john chap. 1.14. wherein it is said, that He dwelled in us as in a tabernacle, and again it is said by Saint Paul. Rom. 8.3. and Phil. 2.7. that He was made in the likeness of man. By which texts it may be gathered that he was made man in respect of some property or accident only. For he that dwells in an house is not said to be one thing with his house, and may go out of it when he list, and he that is like another can no way possible be the same. For nothing is said to be like to, but to be itself. I answ. that neither by the one speech nor by the other is it meant but that he was truly and very man, of soul and body as we are: but seeing the humane nature hath a certain show or resemblance of clothing to the deity, because the Godhead is not seen or apprehensible of the creature in his own being, but only as He is man: Therefore by that Metaphor of his dwelling in us as in a tabernacle, are we called to the meaning and true understanding of the Mosaical tabernacle whereby his manhood was figured and the promises after a sort made visible to the Fathers, as by those texts of S. Paul we are brought to remember, that as Adam was created in the likeness of God and lost it; so the Mediator that second Adam, to restore that first image, was made true man in the likeness of the first Adam. For this is one immortal hope, that as he is truly and indeed partaker of our nature, and one with us; so shall we be truly partakers of the divine nature, 1 Pet. 1.4. and one with Him, joh. 17.21.22.23. 3. A fourth being cannot come into the Trinity, but if that being which was taken of the virgin do still continue a manly being, so that neither the Godhead be changed into the flesh, nor that into the Godhead, it must needs follow, that a fourth being is taken into the Trinity: and so we are bound to worship a Quaternity for a Trinity. Answer. This seemed no inconvenience to the ancient Fathers, as it appeareth by Athan. epist. de Incar. dom. nost. je. Chri. contra Apollinar. For to this objection he answers, that the humane body of Christ is the body of the increated word, and therefore is adored lawfully. And the first council of Ephesus against Nestorius, see can. 7.8. & 13. do not suffer the use of the word Coadoration or Conglorification of the body of Christ, lest they should seem to make two Sons, or two Persons, or any way to admit any kind of division between the divine and humane nature, as Nestorius taught, but that with one adoration we ought to worship Immanuel. For the two natures therein make not two Persons, but one Mediator in one Person, in which person we adore the deity in the holy Temple of his humanity, according to the commandment, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only thou shalt serve. For neither is His humanity a person, nor yet possible to be separate from His deity. And seeing his humanity from the very instant of his conception never had any being but with the deity, to part one of these from the other, were to destroy the present being of his Mediatorship, and to put Him in that state in which He was before his incarnation, and that were to make void his sufferings and the glories which have hitherto followed thereon. If you desire to entangle yourself further in this question, you may read, Athanas. serm. 6. epist. ad Epict. and epist. de incarnatione Dom. contra Apollinar. and Epiph. advers. Dimaeritas. §. 3. Now concerning that confusion or mingling of the two natures in Christ into one, which the Timotheans imagined: if neither the beings, nor the proprieties of the beings divine and humane be changed: neither the Divine into the Humane, as Eutyches imagined, nor the divine into the humane, as Apollinarius supposed: it cannot be inferred by any reason, that any such confusion is or aught to be yielded unto. It is true which the Timotheans supposed, that if any such mixture were, the thing that did arise from that mixture must needs be a third thing differing from them both. For true mixture is the union of bodily parts changed by the mixture from their former being, so that neither the being, nor accidents of the things mingled is saved or kept entire in the mixture, but (at least in part) corrupted, as in the mingling of wine and water, of black and white colour, neither the one nor the other remain in their perfection. And to admit this mixture in the union of the divine and humane natures in Christ, as it is impossible in respect of the divine being, which hath not any bodily parts: So were it utterly to make void the coming of Christ, which upon this mixture should have suffered in such a third being as had never sinned. And if this foundation of the mixture of the two natures in Christ be taken away, all the Cage-worke of the Theodosians, that the Mediator is mortal, and of the Armenians, that he could not suffer, must needs be rotten and unable to stand. Therefore let us consent to that Anthem of the Church. Mirabile mysterium! Deus homo factus est, id quod erat permansit: id quod non erat assumpsit: nec commixtionem passus neque confusionem. O wonderful mystery! God was made man: He continued that which he was: He took to Himself that which He was not, neither suffering commixtion to make a third being of them both, nor confusion to change the one being into the other. §. 4. 5. 6. 7. Now it remains to show what were the holdfast of Ebion, Cerinthus, Photinus, and the rest of that ging. For you may perceive how that although they had their private differences in their opinions; yet like thiefs, they all conspired in this, to rob the Lord of glory, of the Robe of His Divinity. The reasons of their opinions after the long and wearisome reading of the Fathers which recite and answer them sometimes heavily and with much ado, you shall find most briefly laid down by Saint Thomas, contra gent. lib. 4. cap 4.9. & 28. which in effect stand only in the misinterpreting of certain texts of the holy Scripture. For the better understanding of which, let me remember you of these two rules. First, to hold steadfastly that the terms or attributes which are given unto Christ in the Scripture concerning His divine being, belong unto him essentially and properly, whereas the same terms attributed to the Saints, belong unto them only by grace and appropriatly. And by this difference you shall answer their cavils when being urged with such texts as this, Heb 1.5. Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee: they answer, the angels are also called the Sons of God, job. 1.6. & 2.1. and magistrates, Psal. 82.6. yea all the Saints are called the Sons of God, Phil. 2.15. and 1 joh. 3.1. and this is only by a grace appropriate, and imparted unto us; whereas Christ is the Son of God according to his essence and true being, as it is said, joh. 10.30. I and the Father are one, not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one Person, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one thing, one being, as Saint Paul interprets it. Phil. 2.6. That he was in the form of God: that is, in the most in ward or essential being, God (for he hath no matter) equal to God; that every tongue may confess that jesus Christ is jehova, for so the word is there to be understood, because the Greeks' every where in the old Testament interpret jehovah by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord. The second rule is, that the proprieties of one nature in Christ, do not destroy or deny the other nature, as where it is said that He was hungry, that he wept; that he slept, that He was ignorant of the judgement day, and of the grave of Lazarus; that his soul was heavy, etc. which belonged properly unto Him as man, and prove that he was truly man, in body and soul; yet do they not at all take away the being of his Godhead, but that with his manly being we ought to confess that he is God blessed above all for ever and ever, Amen. Rom. 9.5. And by this difference well observed you may give a true answer to those texts which they falsely urge to their conclusion; as where it is said, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth, Matth. 28.18. And again, Philippians. 2.9. That God hath exalted him. So where Saint Peter saith, Acts 2.36. That God hath made the same jesus which was crucified, both Lord and Christ. By which texts and the like, they would conclude that he is not God by nature, but for his merit and greater graces only called God, as it was said to Moses, Exod. 7.1. Behold, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh. For, (say they) He that receives of another to be exalted, to be made a Lord, is not such of himself. But this conclusion follows not, but rather that which S. Paul affirms, Rom. 1.3. & 4. That Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, was powerfully declared to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead, when he in is humane being received all power: and was exalted above every name, and manifestly declared to be both Lord and Christ, both God and man. The power therefore and glory was in him, being God essential and eternal: and in him being made man, manifested by his resurrection, to dwell in that manhood eternally. And as that which these heretics clatter, is directly against the authority of the holy Scripture, so is it utterly against all sense and reason: For if our Saviour were only man, than our comfort which we should have by him, as being able to save, because he is God, were utterly destroyed; as a Father saith, I would not believe in him, if he were not God. And this according to the Word of God, jer. 17.5. Cursed be the man that trusteth in man. Moreover, if Christ were only man, excelling others only by his progress in virtue; so that for his greater grace above others he might be made a Mediator for others, than many mediators might be possible to be, seeing Noah, Daniel, joh, and Moses, exceeded others in virtue, and by special grace many others might exceed them; but so our Lord should not be the only Son, the only Mediator, contrary to that which the Scripture witnesseth, as you heard in the end of the Chapter. n. 10. Therefore concerning the Mediator, what he ought to be, let the followers of Ebion and Photinus hear Saint Paul, Heb. 4.14. Seeing then that we have a great High Priest, that is passed into the heavens, josus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. And again, Verse 15. let the Eutychian hear, and be ashamed, for, We have not an High Priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. Therefore Jesus our Mediator is both God and Man. Here you may remember, if you will, that which you read before, Chap. 20, 21, & 22. More you may read to this purpose in Iust. Martyr his Dialog. Triphon; in Irenaeus also, lib. 3. Cap. from 21. to 31. Tertul. de Carne Christi, Epiphan. hares. 28. & 30. And especially in Tertul● de Trinit. if that book be his. Thus we have seen the falsehood of the Monophysites: now it remains that we also take a view of their opinions, that hold more natures than one in Christ, and among them to see the heresies of Nestorius' 1. and Arius 2. and then the late opinion of Postellus 3. §. 8. Concerning the position of Nestorius, it may seem that all authors agreed not, what it was. For he that made that addition of the Timothean, Nestorian and Eutychian heresy unto Saint Augustine, makes the heresy of Nestorius' nothing else but a mingle-mangle of the Photinian and Timothean heresy. That Christ was man only, not conceived of the Holy Ghost, but that afterward God was mixed with that man. Again, Socrates, Hist. Eccles. lib. 7. cap. 32. writes, that many supposed that Nestorius sought to bring in the Heresy of Photinus, whereas (saith he) it is plain by the writings of Nestorius, that he only avoided this, that the virgin should be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the Mother of God. But Tho. Aquin. contragent. lib. 4. cap. 38. citys Damascen to this purpose; We affirm, that there is a perfect union of the two natures, not according to the Person, as the enemy of God Nesterius affirmed, but also according to the Hypostasis. From whence Tho. concludes, that this was the position of Nestorius, to confess one person in Christ, and two Hypostases. If by Hypostases he meant the Divine and humane natures united in the one Person of our Mediator, neither Damascen, nor Thomas can blame him for it. But if by the manly Hypostasis consisting of body and soul, he must mean a humane person, as Thomas in the same place out of Boetius, determines, you may see how they made a quarrel more than needed. For though Nestorius had been mad, yet would he never have held one Person of both natures, and also two persons. But it is clear by the later Historians of the Church, that this among other, was the heresy of Nestorius, that as in Christ there were two natures, so there were also two persons: which opinion might easily take the original from Gerinthus, Photinus, and such as stunk of that Pump. For if God the Word, came to dwell in Jesus the son of Mary, being a perfect humane person of body and soul, (whether at his Baptism, as Cerinthus taught, or from the very instant of his conception, as the Nestorians of this time affirm, the position of Nestorius must follow of necessity, that there be in him, as two natures, so two persons. For the God head destroyed nothing of the humane perfection which it found: So that if it came not to the humane nature, but in the subsistence of a manly person, than that humane nature must remain in the perfection of a person, as it was before. Whence that follows also not unfitly, which he further affirmed, that the things of infirmity which were in Christ, as to eat, to drink, to sleep, to grow in wisdom, etc. belonged to the son of Mary, without the Son of God; and all the glorious miracles which Christ did work, were done by the Son of God, without the son of Mary. But the supposition of Nestorius, that the deity came into the humanity, when the humanity had perfect subsistence in soul and body, that is in the perfection of a personal being, is most false: For the Word taking flesh of the Virgin, caused it to become one person with himself; so that the body assumed was the proper, and peculiar body of God, and the humane soul, the soul of God, not of any other Person, but the body and soul of the Son of God; and this not only while the soul dwelled in the body, according to the natural life, but also while he was yet under the burden of our sins, his body in the grave, his soul in Hell, as the Apostle citys the Scripture, Act. 2.27. Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hell, neither wilt thou give thy Holy one to see corruption: So than the body in the grave was the Holy One of God, for nothing else of him was subject to corruption: and though it were for a time forsaken of the soul, yet not of the Godhead, which thing the words of the Angel do confirm, Matth. 28.6. Come see the place where the Lord lay: So that our Saviour on the Cross, yea, even in the bands of death (as concerning his body) was still the Lord and God of glory, 1 Cor. 2.8. And if it be most true, that God is more inward, and more near unto every thing, than can be expressed by any words of being, of essence, of nature, substance, moties, form, propriety, or the like: because he is the foundation unto all these, and in him all things consist: How much more shall he be inward and fundamental unto that body, soul, and Spirit of jesus, which he was pleased to make his own, that by that body and blood of his, he might redeem his Church, as it is said, Acts 20.28. That God purchased his Church with his own blood, that is, with the life and blood of that body, which was proper and peculiar unto himself. Thus than the word was made flesh, not by any transmutation or change of the one, or the other from their true and natural being; but because that by a secret and unspeakable conjunction the Word was made one with the flesh, and the flesh with the Word. So then the Son of GOD took the humanity, not that it might be another person beside himself; but being in himself perfect God, he would also in himself be perfect man, taking flesh of the Virgin. (The differences of union you may see (if you will) in the principles of N. Byfield Chap. 16.) This union of the Godhead and Manhood, is manifest by divers Texts of the holy Scripture. For evidence of which we will first put this infallible axiom; That of two different persons one cannot possibly be affirmed of the other, as to say, that Peter, is john, or john is Peter neither yet that the proprieties of the one, can belong to the other, as to say that the Gospel of Saint john is the Epistle of Saint Peter. Now it is said joh. 16.28. I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world, which belongs to Him, as to the Son of God, as john expounds it, 1 Epist. 4.9. and then it follows, Again I leave the world and go to the Father, which is peculiar to him as man, as it is said, Act. 3.21. Therefore jesus the Son of God and the Son of the virgin is one and the same person, so Col. 1.16. that same He by whom all things were made v. 18. is the head of the Church, and the first borne from the dead; and Rom. 9.5. He who is of the Father's concerning the flesh, is God blessed above all. This our Lord affirmed of himself, Math. 26.63.64. to be the Son of God, and the Son of man, and again, joh. 3.13. He that came down from heaven is the Son of man, and again joh. 3.13. He that came down from heaven is the Son of man, which is in heaven: For he that ascended is even He that descended, Eph. 4.9. Moreover it is said, Heb. 9.14. That Christ by his eternal spirit offered himself without spot unto God. But if the humanity of Christ be another person beside the deity, than he offered not himself, but that other person of the humanity by whose death our reconciliation was wrought, and so not by his own blood, but by the blood of another person, should he have entered into the holy place. So God should not have sent his own Son into the world, that the world by him might be saved, contrary to that which is, Heb. 9.12. & joh. 3.16.17. But he that is mighty to save, even jehovah our king hath saved us, Esay 33.22. and that not with foreign blood; but by his own offering of himself hath he purchased for us eternal redemption. This then being the great mystery of our salvation, that God was manifest in the flesh, 1 Tim. 3.16. That God is one with us, Matth. 1.23. That that holy thing which was borne of the virgin is the Son of God, Luk. 1.35. it may appear how detestable that heresy of Photinus and his predecessors was, who made our Mediator the Son of man by nature, and the Son of God by adoption only, and how dangerous this consequence of Nestorius is, who of that one Mediator between God and man. 1 Tim. 2.5. would make two persons. If you desire to know the growth of this heresy, and the other positions of the Nestorians, you may read M. Breerewoods' inquiries, chap. 19 §. 9 Arius and his followers held that Christ was truly man, so that be might truly be called the Son of the virgin Mary, borne in time as concerning his manly body; and the Son of God, as being the first begotten of every creature, and so the most excellent creature created by the will of God the Father before all times and ages, but not coeternal with him because, there was a continuance when he was not, and therefore was he not say they, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or coessential with the Father, because he was created of that which was not, from which Error these Arians were also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This poisonous fountain overflowed afterward into divers streams. For the half Arians of whom Acatius was chief, held that Christ was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or of the like being withthe Father by nature: but others said that this likeness was not in nature, but only in will and powerful working. Whereupon Asterius is by some affirmed to have said that Christ was the virtue only or a creature endued with the power of God, other heretics again, as Aetius and his scholar Eunomius, said that Christ was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or of another manner of being, unlike to the Father both in nature, and will, and hence arose the error of the Dultians, who thought him only the servant of God in the work of the creature, and so of the Bonosians, who held him to be the Son of God only by adoption. And although this Hydra might seem to have been nipped in the head by the writings of Athanasius, and other learned men of former times, and especially by the first Council of Nice Anno 327. and other that followed afterward; yet never was there any heresy in the primitive Church, that went on with that violence and strength, or that caused more trouble and persecution, as being confirmed by divers Counsels, and set forward by the authority of sundry Emperors. And for the continuance thereof, it hath been such, as that unto this day not only among the Turks, but ever in the Church of Christ (if at least they may be said to be of his Church, who falsely deny unto him the truth, and excellency of his being) some have been found from time to time even since the clearer light of the truth hath shined, that have maintained this heresy of Arius in whole or in part, as Socinus, Gittichius, David the Hollander, Servetus Neuserus, and with us, Legate, Mannering, and others. In Polonia also and Transylvania they swarm, as you may read in Wents. à Bud. pag. 229, etc. But (say you) is it possible that an heresy so foul as this is taken to be, should continue so long, and be upheld by Counsels, and maintained by Emperors, and justified by learned men, except there were both reason and authority of Scripture for it? For as no man is wilfully ill but by the error of his judgement between good and bad; so no man doth err wilfully, but only by mistaking of falsehood for the truth. Answer. Saint Paul saith that there must be heresies, and this I suppose should come to pass because men would not be content to learn the doctrine of Christ and his truth according to the simplicity of the truth, as he had taught it in the holy Scriptures, whereunto if men would take heed, and try the truth as they ought, the things of God by the word of God, matiers of Religion by the rule of Religion, that is, the holy Scripture alone, so many heresies had not sprung up. For man's understanding so long as it doth follow the true guide thereof, the revealed truth of God, it cannot deceive nor be deceived. But if it will presume to be guide and make the truth of the Scriptures to follow it, it is impossible not to stray; and so by the just judgement of God men also grow hard and obstinate in their own errors, not only to resist the truth, but also to persecute it, as these Arians did very grievously at several times. But see their reasons and their authorities. 1. The Godhead is in the Father wholly, or else he cannot be perfect God; and if the Deity be wholly in the Father, then can it not be in the Son, nor in the holy Ghost. Answer. The word wholly is equivocal, or of doubtful meaning: for wholly may signify as much as with all the parts; but this cannot belong to that which is infinite, or wholly may signify only, and so the proposition is false; or it may mean as much as perfectly, and so the proposition is true, but the consequence is false: for the Deity is wholly and perfectly in all the persons alike. 2. He only is the true God, that is prayed unto by the Mediator: But God the Father only is so prayed unto; therefore God the Father only is the true God. I answer. If we worship the Godhead in the nature, or being of God, we worship one only being in the three Persons. But if we worship the persons, we worship them in the unity of the Godhead, that is, acknowledging every person to be God. And this is that Father, that one God whom we pray unto by that one Mediator of God and man, the man jesus Christ, 1 Tim. 2.5. who having himself in his own body borne our sins upon the tree, 1 Pet. 2.24. is set at the right hand of God, and makes intercession for us Rom. 8.34. and hath commanded all them to come unto him that travail and are heavy laden, that he may refresh them, Mat. 11.28. 3. When the Son was begotten and the holy Ghost proceeded, either he was, or he was not: If he were before he was begotten, then was he not begotten: if he were not, then there was a continuance when he was not: and therefore of necessity he must be created. Answer. Eternity hath no respect of time, of before, or after, because it is one continual perpetuity, and whatsoever ever being or action is once therein, it is eternal. Therefore that difference of was and was not, hath no place in eternity, seeing the generation is eternal, ever one and the same, as you may see further in the treatise at the end of the book. 4. Whatsoever is begotten, receives the nature which it hath from that which doth beget, as a man from man, fire from fire, and in all other univocal generations, in which though the natures be of one kind, yet must they needs be different in number, as in Isaak and jacob. But this cannot be in the divine generation, for so there should be more Gods than one, or if the nature of the Son be in number the same with that of the Father, then doth the Son receive that nature either in part, which is impossible, because a most simple and pure being cannot be divided into parts; or entire and whole; and so the Father should cease to be. Neither is the generation as of a river out of a fountain, because the Divine nature is neither divisible, nor possible to be increased. Therefore jesus is not the Son of God by generation, but by creation only. Answ. The being of God is not material, which only is subject to division into parts, and that totality which is made of parts: but his being is intellectual; and because it is infinite, and apprehended by an infinite understanding, it is necessary that the divine being or understanding be wholly in the word or being understood. I mean with that totality of perfection which is in the unity of being spoken of in the first objection. 5. Either the Father begat the Son with his will, or against his will; not against his will: for so it had been impossible that ever he should have been begotten; if with his will, than his will must be before, and so the Son cannot be eternal. Epiphanius rejects this reason, because all the kinds of begetting are not reckoned up: for in God (saith he) is no deliberation for the inclining of his will: therefore the Deity is that nature according to which the Father did beget the Son, neither ever ceases to beget him eternally. But this is to beget the Son with his will, seeing the will of God is his being, according to which he works eternally, as you may further understand Chap. 11. note (d) Many such arguments as these are, and many be brought to this purpose of Arius, all which, as these that you have seen, must take their grounds from inferior truths in the creature, which are utterly unfit for that generation which is eternal and Divine: for to whom shall we liken the highest, or who shall declare his generation? and therefore Athanasius Epist. contra Arianos, cujus initium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said rightly, that the Divine generation was not to be measured by the generation of man, as those Arians used to deceive women and children. And therefore the Scripture in expressing of the Divine generation, calls the Son the Wisdom of the Father, Prov. 8. The Word, john 1. The brightness of his glory, and the express image of his Person, Heb. 1. That the mind herein may be utterly withdrawn from sensible and natural things. The Fathers also in the Nicen Council to that question of Phaedo the patron of Arius, how the Son was begotten of the Father? answered, that this question is not to be asked: for seeing the creatures were not ever, they could not make answer concerning his original that was eternal. And therefore as none knows the Father but the Son; so none knows the Son but the Father. And as I shown you Log. Cap. 15. n. 6. and note thereunto. That the certain knowledge of every thing must be had from the rules that are proper and peculiar thereto; so remember here, that sigh the creature can have no knowledge of the Creator but by that revelation which he maketh of himself, you may ever repair to his own holy word, to be instructed in his holy truth. 6. But from hence also Arius armed his heresy: for because Wisdom saith of herself, Pro. 8.22. The Lord possessed me the beginning of his ways; where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being translated in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he created me: Arius from thence caused much perplexity unto the Fathers in this business, and although Athanasins in his oration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proves by divers arguments that the Son, as concerning his Godhead cannot be created: yet when he comes to give answer to this text, he interprets it thus. The Father hath appointed me a body, and creating me among men, hath ordained me the Saviour of mankind: which though it be true; yet is it not a fit interpretation for that text, if ye consider the circumstances before and after. The Fathers also of the Nicene council being urged with this text answered from that addition, the beginning of his ways, that the world was created for man: so that man the reasonable or discursive wisdom of God, as concerning the intent and purpose of God, was first created, although last in the order of actual being. Epiphan. haeres. 69. in answer hereto, holds the distinction of wisdom created and increated: but seeing no place of the Scripture expounds this place of Christ, therefore (saith he) it is not necessary to interpret it of the Son of God: but if you take the other circumstances, it can belong to no other. Then if it must needs be referred to Christ, yet shall it be verified of his humane, not of his divine nature. At last he gives the true meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kanah he possessed or of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kanan he hatched as a Chicken, and reasons, that as every chicken is of the same nature with the dam; so the word also must have the same being with the Father; and therefore be begotten before all time eternally: you shall find the true reason of the difference of the translation in the tenth section following. In the mean while it is not unreasonable to think that this Error came by some interpreter that was an enemy to the Christian faith. And yet among them Aquila translates it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he possessed me as other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same theme, which might easily be written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he created. Let the students of the holy mysteries give all diligence to read the holy Scriptures in their proper language, For there this treason of Arius and all other heretics is easily discovered. 7. He that denies himself to be good, cannot be God. But Christ saith of himself, Math. 19.27. why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, even God. Answ. Good is either absolute and perfect, which is God alone, or else imparted, the image of that Good: and so every thing created was very good, Gen. 1. Goodness is likewise in the virtue and disposition of the mind, as Barnabas was a good man, Act. 11.24. or manifest in the works, and thus Dorcas was full of good works, Act. 9.36. and our Lord wrought many good works among the jews joh. 10.32. In these three kinds our Lord was good as man supereminently, above all the orders of created things. In the first kind he was good as God, which absolute goodness he denied not to himself, no more than He denied himself to be God, at that confession of Thomas, My Lord and my God, but rather taught that young man (if he had had wit) to follow that perfection which he prescribed. For being by the young man's own confession good, it must follow of necessity by that rule of perfection Fellow me, that he was God and aught to be followed and obeyed, Eph. 5.1.1. Cor. 11.1. 8. Like unto this are those other arguments which they bring, as where it is said, joh. 6.57. Like as the living Father sent me; and I live by the Father: So he &c. If he live not by himself he cannot be God. I answer. that this life which the Son receives of the Father is not accidental, not of grace, not of foresight or purpose: but substantial and eternal, seeing the generation is according to the immutable being and eternal working of the Father, and his spiritual perfection only. So they object from Heb. 3.2. That he was faithful to him that made him, and joh. 14.28. My father is greater than I, so 1 Cor. 15.28. when all things are subdued unto Him, than also shall the Son himself be subject unto him, that did put all things under him; and many other which you may find cited and answered by Athanasius, and especially by Epiphmius in the places quoted before. Wherein observe diligently the differences between those terms, which signify his nature, and those which have reference to the office of his Mediatorship, as in the first place of Heb. 3. Consider what he was made. It is plain by the verses before, he was made the Apostle and high Priest of our profession, in which office he was faithful to him that made him, or appointed him thereunto; so in the second place, to that, The Father is greater than I; note the difference between the Divine and humane nature: for the Son is inferior to the Father, by nature, as man; and so as he is the Mediator in the dispensation of his offices, as with us he makes up the body of his Church: nay, even in the Divine nature the Father is that eternal fountain whence the Son hath his eternal original, although the honour of sending takes not away the equality of power, nor the excellency of nature from him that is sent; so the greatness there spoken of, is with respect of the office of the Son sent into the world, that the world by him might be saved. In the third place of delivering the kingdom to God the Father, note the communication of idioms or proprieties of speech according to the rules of Theodoret. That the words proper to either nature, become common and indifferent to the Person, as the God of glory was crucified, 1 Cor. 2.8. that is, that Person which is the God of glory, was crucified concerning his humane nature. Secondly, that the community of names makes no confusion in natures: now the word Son belongs to Christ indifferently, either as he is the Son of God, and so shall he reign with the Father, and the holy Ghost eternally, and of his kingdom there shall be no end, Dan. 6.36. Luk. 1.33. And seeing that he as the Son of man, hath received all power, Mat. 28.18. John 3.35. and 13 3. as to govern his Church Psal. 45. so to raise the dead, and to execute judgement, john 5.26, 27. Acts 17.31. He shall reign till all things be subdued unto him, and that he hath utterly destroyed all the works of the devil, sin, ignorance and death, john 1.3.8. that as God the Father doth now reign by him; so he having performed all things which belong to him as the Mediator, may thereafter as God reign with the Father eternally, our everlasting king of glory, when God shall be all in all his children, as he is in him. I am the more brief in this argument; because their arguments are answered in part before. § 4. And because this question is near to that which follows immediately, and again because it is the principal subject of that trearise by me so often mentioned: therefore for conclusion, first consider the danger of this venom which at once poisons all our hopes of that full satisfaction which is made unto the justice of God by the death of Christ: for if he be a creature only, then can he not be infinite, and if not infinite, then cannot the infinite justice that is offended by our sins, receive a full and sufficient satisfaction by him, as you might see it proved in the 21 Chapter before. And beside these reasons you may take with you these remembrances against all Arians, Turks, jews, Socinians, and other heretics whatsoever, and give honour and glory unto jesus our Lord and God. Esay 9.6. Unto us a child is borne, unto us a Son is given, and his name shall be called, The Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the prince of peace. jer. 33.15, 16. In those days the branch of righteousness shall grow up unto David, and jerusalem shall dwell safely; and he that shall call her. See Mat. 11.28. is jehovah our righteousness. Micah 5.2. Out of Bethlehem shall he come forth unto me that shall be ruler in Israel, whose go forth are from everlasting. Rom. 9.5. Christ is over all, God blessed for ever and ever, Amen. and 1 john 5.20. We are in him that is true, even in his Son jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life. §. 10. Thus than our Lord jesus being declared mightily to be Son of God, by the testimony of the Father from heaven, by his own profession of himself, confirmed by his glorious miracles, john 5.36.37. by his resurrection from the dead, Rom. 1.4. by the consent of the Apostles and Prophets, and by the testimony of the holy Ghost in the hearts of all his Children, and being truly man by the testimony of his very enemies; the only question remaining concerning his being is, that seeing all fullness must dwell in him, Col. 1.19. whether he be not also that first created being, in and by whom all other things were created and are governed and preserved. This Postellus in his book De nativitate Mediatoris, doth firmly hold: And although it be plain by Athanasius, Epist 1. contra Arianos, that Arius held one Word in the Father, as we speak of the Trinity, and another Word created, which he held to be Christ: and in his Thaleia, mentioned Epist. 2. contra Arianos, affirms to the same purpose, a Wisdom increated, and a Wisdom created: and although Arius affirmed as Postellus, That Christ was a creature, but not as one of the creatures; made, but not as one of other things that were made, etc. and therefore concluded that he held the same faith with the Church, and detracted nothing from the glory of Christ, when he called him the first and chief creature, Epiph. haeres. 69. yet Postellus, whether he were indeed ignorant of it, or whether he dissembled his knowledge, makes no mention thereof, lest the name Arius might discredit the position, although the difference between Arius and Postellus, be as much as from the East to the West. For though Arius held the increated Wisdom or Word to be in the Trinity, yet he could not yield to this, that that Wisdom took flesh, and became that Saviour to whom we confess. And this was the business between him and the right meaning Fathers. But Postellus held that the created Wisdom, that first borne of every creature, which in the fullness of time took flesh of the Virgin Mary, and in that flesh made satisfaction for the sins of the world, was he in whom all the fullness of the Godhead did dwell. Now by the rule of our faith both the extremities are yielded unto, that Christ is God, blessed above all; and that he is man, as hath been proved. But this is now to be examined, whether it be necessary, to the being of our mediator, that he be that first creature of God, created before all times and ages of the world, by whom all other things were afterwards made in their due times, and are governed, as Postellus affirmed. The Authorities which Postellus brings, are either foreign, or else out of the holy Scripture; you shall first see them of the first kind, with their exceptions, than his reasons with their answers, and lastly those enforcements which are by him, and may beside be brought from the Word of truth. 1. First, he saith he is urged to the declaration of this truth by the Spirit of Christ, pag. 1, 3, 7, etc. but I say, these enthusiasms and revelations are a common claim, not only to them that speak the truth from God, as the holy Prophets say, Thus saith the Lord; but also to them that vent their own fantasies and heresies, in stead of the truth. The second authority is that of the Abisine Church, which commonly they call of Presbyter john, out of whose Creed he citys for his purpose thus much, Pag. 24. & 25. We believe in the name of the holy Trimty, the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost, who is one Lord: three names, one Deity; three Faces, one Similitude: the conjunction of the three persons is equal in their Godhead; one Kingdom, one Throne, one judge, one Love, one Word, one Spirit. But there is a Word of the Father, a Word of the Son, and a Word of the Holy Ghost: and the Son is the same Word: And the Word was with God, and with the Holy Ghost, and with himself, without any defect or division; the Son of the Father, the Son of himself, and the beginning of himself. Where in the first Article (you see) that Church acknowledges the Trinity of Persons, in the unity of the Deity, according to that faith which we believe. The second Article, But there is a Word of the Father, etc. is altogether a declaration of this created Word, of Son of God, by whom all the holy Scriptures were given, and inspired, as Postel speaks. But concerning that Church, though Postel to make the authority thereof without exception, say, it was never troubled with any heresy; yet it is not unlikely to have nursed that arch-heretick Arius, whom all writers account to be a Lybian. Besides, it is manifest, that they are all Monothelites, and so fare forth Iacobites or Eutychians, that they condemn the fourth general Council of Chalcedon, for determining two natures to be in Christ. Moreover, what their learning is like to be, you may judge by this; that their inferior Church Ministers and Monks must live by their labour, having no other maintenance, nor being suffered to crave alms; see Mr brerewood's Enquiry, Chap. 23. & 21. a state of the Ministry, whereto our sacrilegious patrons, and detainers of those live, rightly called Impropriations, because they belong most improperly to them that unjustly withhold them from the Church, would bring our Church unto. But see whereto this want of maintenance hath brought that Church, which in the time of the Nicene Council was of so great regard, that their Patriarch had the seventh place in all general Counsels; yet now (as I have read) have they of late years been compelled to send to Rome to beg a religion, and teachers from them. And this is the Authority of that Church. But you will say, their Creed is ancient, and of authority: I say, though it be as ancient as Arius, yet what wit or judgement was in this, to put such a point into their Creed, which they themselves by Postels own confession, do not understand? If it were necessary to believe it, other Churches would not have omitted it, if not necessary, why was it brought into their Creed? But the ancient Paraphrasts, Anchelus and jonathan are without exception, and where the Text is, And the Lord spoke unto Moses, they explain it thus, And the Lord spoke unto Moses by his word; which all the old Interpreters, and especially Rambam understand to be spoken of the created Word of God; that Word of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, or the Divinity which is appliable to the created beings. Pag. 24. The Cabalists also concur with this interpretation, and therefore call him the inferior Wisdom, the Throne of Glory, the house of the Sanctuary, the heaven of heavens united to eternity; the superior habitation, in which God dwells for ever, as his body is the inferior habitation, after he was incarnate; the great Steward of the house of God, who, according to the eternal decree, brings forth every thing in due time. And these, as I remember, are all the authorities which Postellus citys except you will add this, that whereas he writes to the Council of Trent, they of the Council being called for other purposes, did not at all pass any censure of the book, or this position, which is the main point therein. You may add to these authorities many other, and first out of jesus the Son of Sirach, Chap. 1. vers. 4, 5. Wisdom hath been created before all things, and the understanding of Prudence from everlasting. The Word of God most high is the fountain of wisdom, etc. which agrees with that in the Creed before, that he is the Word of the Son, and the beginning of himself. And again, verse 9 The Lord created her, and saw her, and numbered her: And Chap. 24.8, 9 He that made me caused me to rest: he created me from the beginning before the world, and I shall never fail. And this authority may seem to stand well with the fourth reason for the world's eternity, brought in Chap. 13. if by the world you understand the created wisdom, spoken of by these Authors. The Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ben, a son of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 banah, to build according to the Idea, or representation which is in the mind, may bring some proof hereto: but especially the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bar, of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bara, to create: wherefore the Chaldean Paraphrast, in Psal. 2. vers. 7. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yelidticha, I have begotten thee; hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 berichach, I have created thee. And Prov. 8.22. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Kananis, he possessed me, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 barani, He created me. Where the Greeks translated, some according to the paraphrase, some according to the Text. Among the Fathers also some consented to this opinion, as Theophilus Bishop of Antioch, about the year 180. ad Antolicum lib. 2. God, saith he, having eternally the Word in himself, as it is said, john 1.1. The Word was with God; did then at last bring him forth, the first begotten of every creature, when he determined to make the world, as it is written, Psal. 2.7. This day have I begotten thee: But Origen is slandered to have spoken more meanly of Christ, as of a small thing in comparison of the Father, as that he was indeed of the essence of the Father, but created; see Suidas, and Epip. haeres. 64. But can these things stand together, that He should be of one being with the Father and yet created? Or can it stick to Origen who writ according to the right faith, as you may read In Exod. Hom. 8. But Lactantius without wavering consented to Theophilus, Inst. lib. 2. cap. 8. & lib. 4. cap. 6. The Nativitarii also though Augustine lib. 15. de Trin. cap. 20. make Enomius a follower of Arius their Author held this same opinion with Theophilus, and Lactantius. Aug. de haeres. cap. 80. But that place of Ps. 2. doth not prove that Christ was not brought forth till then that the world should be created. For the word this day hath not any respect to time, but to the perennity or continuance of the action. For Christ is no otherwise brought out this day, than he was eternally, as it is said john 17.5. and Hebr. 13.8. jesus Christ yesterday, and to day, and the same for ever. Some of the latter Presbyters of learning also consent to this conclusion. See Leo Hebr. Dial. 3. pag. 510. So Raimund Lul Artis Magnae parte. 9 cap. 8. hath this. By this means man's understanding knows, that there is one great created being, which is greater than all the creature beside; which I dare neither name nor declare in this place, because this Art is general. Also john Picus makes it the first of his conclusions, according to the Chaldees. That the first order of separate or created beings, is that of the fountain, which by the means of vision is superexalted above all the rest: as I even now explained the superior Shekinah, or habitation of the Cabalists. But this conclusion of Picus, is after the later interpreters of the Chaldaean Theology. For if you look unto the oracle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. You shall see that both Plethon and Psellus interpret it thus. That the being of the Father is utterly imcomprehensible, and beyond the understanding not only of men and Angels, but also of the Son himself: and this not out of any envy, but only by the impossibility of the thing: that that which is infinite should be apprehended by a finite and created being. The Arians follow this, but Psellus rejects it, as contrary toour Christian doctrine. Also * See Aug. de Civ. lib. 10. cap. 2 Plotinus, jamblicus, Porphyry, Proclus, and their scholars, (though they no Christian yet hold that for truth, which Picus from the Chaldeans hath delivered. And although Steuchus De perenni philosophia lib. 1. & 2. hath cited many authorities from them, as meeting with that truth which we defend concerning the Trinity; yet if you examine them well, you shall find that most of them agree with this conclusion of Postellus. For if they allow all the conclusions of the Chaldeans entire, as Psellus in summa affirms; they must of necessity hold the created being of this second wisdom, with Postellus. And although Plato holds but what he likes of these conclusions, yet in this point (as his commentator Ficinus gathers out of his Timaeus and Epinomis) he is directly for this created divinity. See the argument on the sixth Epistle. But to all these authorities, first and last, I answer thus much, that although it be plain, that these authors were of this mind: yet that binds not, that the truth doth stand with them. Only it seems that seeing a famous Christian Church, and so many great Doctors, and expositors beside (though the Chaldaean and Platonics be set at naught) were of this judgement, seeing no Synod either ecumenical or national (forought that I know) did ever condemn it, it may be held as an opinion not utterly heretical; especially seeing the book of Ecclesiasticus, both by the warrant of some fathers, and other Churches, and especially of our own, hath been commended as profitable to the advancement of Christian virtue, though not for the establishment of doctrine Art. 6. And many choice Chapters from thence appointed to be read in our public Liturgy, even that twenty fourth, where this point both of the eternal v. 18. and succeeding generation. v. 8.9. is plainly taught. See November 7. Morning prayer. 1. But Postellus to ascertain this matter to the understanding, brings these reasons following. First, God is altogether unmoveable, as in place, because he fills all; so likewise in wisdom and in will, because he is every way infinite. And therefore it was necessary in the creation (which was not but with a most particular dispensation or providence, by which all causes and effects are ordered) that there should be an agent which gave to every thing a being, and that a several, and distinct individual being, which cannot be, but by those specifical forms or proprieties by which every thing doth work according to kind; which could not be but by such an agent as hath both an infinite activity of being, by which he is one with God, and likewise an infinite possibility of working, or not working, according to the particular possibilities in nature, by which he must of necessity communicate with the Creature. And this is that Wisdom created and increate, without which nothing was made. This both the Creator and the Creature, that form of forms, in whom, by whom, and for whom are all things: pag. 21. 103, etc. I answer. That if it must of necessity be put, that God cannot work without Himself, because. He is infinite, and therefore ; then for the same reason it must follow, that no such great created being can at all be, except you will say that he created himself, and so was when He was nor, or that he had his creation from some other original than God, which must likewise be infinite, in being able to create so excellent a being, and yet finite, that he might move or not move himself thereto when he would. But first this progress would be infinite, and beside that impossible. For if neither God could move because He is infinite, nor much less the creature when it was not, how was it possible that any thing at all should be created? Secondly, Moreover it would follow hereupon, that that were possible to the second cause, which was not possible to the first: but it is manifest, that all second causes work only by the activity of the first, so that if the first cause cease to work, much more the second. Thirdly, beside this, the power of God should not be infinite, if it could not work according to his pleasure in things without. But you say, as Himself, so His action is infinite, and it is impossible that a finite being should be the subject of an infinite action. I say though Samson were able to break a Cable, yet might he strain one hair of Dalilah to straightness, not to lengthen it; to lengthen it, not to break it. This is true (say you) because he was as every creature, partaker of being, and not being; of act or perfection, and of possibilities, or imperfection, whereby he might move, or not move at his pleasure. But God is not so; but always actually, whatsoever He may be. But (say I) it is one thing to speak of the infinite action of God in himself; and another, of his action in the creature, limited according to his Wisdom and His Will in respect of the outward object, as I have showed at large in answer to the objections for the world's eternity chap. 13. note (b) ob. 2.3.4. Neither is the will of God without an infinite Wisdom to dispose of all things in their times, nor yet without an infinite power, to cause every thing to be actually according to His Wisdom and His will, and the application of his will, wisdom and power, is sufficient to move all inferior causes to give all manner of being to the Creature. 2. But seeing the matter, and form of all things, are after a sort contrary; and that the bodily composition likewise of things below is of elements contrary in their qualities: it is impossible that these repugnances should be brought together into one, nat. Med. pag. 21. Answ. The Philosophers tell us of a certain quintessence in which the different qualities of all the elements are brought to agreement, and give us reason to believe it: by which quintessence dwelling in every thing, the contrarieties of the elements are accorded in every compound, Raim. Lulli. and joh. de Ruposc. de 5. essentia lib. 1. cap. 2. But seeing they keep the experiment with themselves, neither their reason, nor their authority shall be of any force with us. But this is without all doubt, that he that had power to create all things, had likewise power out of that created mass, fruitful with the seed of all things, to bring out every thing in due time according to the kinds that were by him foreseen and determined. And because we have hitherto maintained that God alone by his eternal wisdom, Our Lord jesus Christ was the Creator, it must follow of necessity, that the creature was also ordered and guided by Him. For that infinite power which could do the more, and cause that to be which was not, might also do the less, and order it at his will. So that for this objection we are not compelled to acknowledge any such created being, the Creator and disposer of all the rest. And concerning that supposed repugnancy between the matter and form of every thing, it is but the begging of the question, for all forms are produced out of possibilities of their matter, excepting only the soul of man, and the divine endowments thereof, as I shown at large, chap. 17. §. 4. n. 2. 3. The third argument of Postellus pag. 28. as not much unlike the former, drawn from the perpetual change of things, subject to generation and corruption. For nature brings out nothing violently or in an instant: therefore as the things that are; began by little and little to be, by the power of the Spirit of God, which moved upon the waters: so by the power of the same Spirit, are they still preserved in their order of being, and by it they are changed from state to state. And this spirit of God is that first created being, that Mediator between God and the creature: the spirit of the Universe actually movable, and applying itself to every thing, and working in every thing by the power of the Trinity which dwelleth in Him. For nothing which proceeds from the power of the matter, is able to move itself, no more than the matter was, no not the soul of man, but only by His strength and activity by whose power it is. Answer. Concerning the progress of things natural, from the evening of their beginning, to the morning of their perfection, I have spoken before. But for answer to this, I say that it is not necessary to put any such spirit of the universe, such an appliable divinity, as the Platonics call Animam Mundi, because things are changed from one state of being to another; seeing the Holy Scripture tells us. Psal. 148.5. that all the armies of the creature were made, because God commanded. And for their changes in corruption and generation it is plain, it must be according to that degree which they cannot pass, vers. 6. which is the law of nature. And moreover concerning the providence of God on every particular thing, our Lord hath taught us, Math. 10.29. that not a Sparrow falls to the ground without the will of our heavenly Father; except Postellus will here except that that heavenly Father must signify that first begotten of the creature, which he doth mean. Which interpretation would directly cross that text, Act. 15.18. That all the works of God were known to Him from everlasting. And nothing can be in the second cause which was not in the first. Therefore seeing the infinite power of God is that by which every thing is powerful, to work unto that end, whereto it was destinate: we must needs confess, that He by His power works what He will both in Heaven and in earth; and yet because all the orders of causes are appointed by him, we may safely say as our Lord hath taught us, Mark. 4.28. That the earth of her own accord bringeth forth fruit, and as the Prophet, Hos. 1.21.22. I will hear the heavens, and the heavens shall hear the earth, and the earth shall hear the corn and the wine; and the corn and the wine shall hear Israel. Which order of causes being put, we shall not need to apply the immediate power of that appliable divinity of the Mediator to every effect, as Postellus holds it necessary. For the whole creature by the power of that blessing which it received at the creation is able to work according to the end appointed. And if it were necessary to put any common agent in the Creature, by which every inferior Agent were to be moved, which we cannot do except we hold that Gods decree the law of nature is too weak, or may be broken; yet I think that the dominion of the heavens set in the earth, job. 38.33. or that same anima mundi here below mentioned may better stand with the Scripture, than the perpetual employment of this supposed mediator. That I say nothing of those particular intelligences which some Philosophers, & Postel himself pag. 63. have appropriated to every thing, beside the specifical virtue of the seed. Neither is it clear that this spirit which moved upon the waters, Gen. 1.2. was any such being as Postellus supposes, a created divinity, or the mediator between God and his creature; but rather that vigour, life, or heat concreated with the Chaos that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nephesh, anima mundi, or spirit whereby every thing is enlivened or made able to work to the destinate end, which ever dwells in the watery part of the compound, as the soul in the blood, or if this interpretation be not admitted, yet that of Saint Ambrose may stand, Hexam. lib. 2. that Moses in these words, In the beginning God created heaven and earth, having made mention of the Father, and the Son, doth rightly add that clause, And the spirit of God moved upon the waters, that he might show, that the creation of the world was the work of the whole Trinity, yet may you not hereby suppose, that that Spirit of God which fills the whole world, sap. 1. was carried upon the waters by any local position, but rather as an artificer whose will and understanding is busied in his work, so the holy Spirit disposed the whole creature, to natural action according to his will and power, Rab. Maur. Enar. in Gen. If you love to confer opinions, you may read, joh. Pici Heptaplum, D. Willet and other expositors. 4. To these reasons of Postellus you may add a fourth, every action is limited by the object, so the eternal and infinite action of God the Father understanding himself, doth thereby produce the eternal Son as hath been further said chap. 11. But because the Father doth also view all the possibilities of being in the creature, and that the creature must needs stand in clear distinction from the Creator, therefore as the eternal Son is the image of the Father, so that idea or image of the creature must needs be a different being from that image of the Father, which we call the eternal Son, and so of necessity must come into the reckoning of the creature. For the true image of every thing, must be like to that whose image it is. Answer. If the image of the things created, were represented to the divine understanding from any thing which is without himself, the reason were of force But seeing that God knows all things, only in and by his own being, by which being of his only, as the cause of all things, all things have their possibility of being; so that his being is the foundation of all beings; it follows that the representation of the divine being, which we call the Son, is also the similitude or representation of all those possibilities of being which are in him, so that the creature is in God the Father as the first cause of all equivalently; sigh his being is equivalent to all being, and the possibilities thereof. In the Son, the idea of all being it is as represented or characterized eminently, or visibly, to the divine understanding, and by Him all natural causes and possibilities are ordered, to the bringing of all things into their actual being. And therefore as Christ our Lord, Heb. 1.3. is called the express image of the Person of the Father, so likewise, Col. 1.15. is he the first begotten of every creature. For seeing the understanding of God is not by discourse, nor habitual, as gotten by experience, but that it is His own very being unto the perfection whereof all the terms of Action must of necessity concur, that is, both of Him that understands, and of the object understood, and of the action of understanding, as was showed, chapter 11. Rea. 8. it is not possible, but that seeing they are all infinite, they must also be coessential and one; and if one, than the action of understanding whereby God vieweth himself, must also be that whereby he vieweth the creature, for otherwise it were not infinite, if it comprehended not all beings at once. So then in this action of God's understanding, there cannot be a priority of an infinite being understood, that is, God the Son, and a posteriority of a finite, that is, the creature. By this means (you say) I make the Creature to be coessential with God, in which inconvenience, the strength of the former objection doth stand. Answ. If you mean the Creature, according to the actual being, I put it naturally in the precedent causes, and possibilities of nature; but as concerning the first and prime cause, it is so fare from any inconvenience: that it is most necessary, that God, and the first cause of all being beside Himself, be terms convertible essentially: And thus the Creature is in God as in the cause. But seeing nothing can be in another, but according to the manner of that being wherein it is; and seeing the being of God is his most Pure understanding, the Creature is no otherwise in him, but as understood or foreseen, and willed eternally. And if you will stay to see, you may in the Persons of the holy Trinity view a wonderful presentation of the perfections of the Creature. The Father is the foundation that sustains all: The Son or Mediator that power or efficacy which perfecteth all. The Holy Ghost that infinite activity in the strength of which every thing doth work. The number three, supposes two: and because neither to work outwardly, nor to will within, can be where there is not a power thereto; therefore our Lord saith john 15.5. Without me ye can do nothing. And secondly supposes, first so, that power cannot be without a being wherein it dwells. And thus you see the Father the foundation of all being, is more inward to every thing than the matter thereof, the Son more essential than the form, and the holy Ghost more proper than any working: for of his activity it is, that we will or do, Philip. 2.13. and thus is that Scripture verified which is in Acts 17. In him, first we are, secondly live, thirdly move. 5. A fifth reason of Postellus which I set over of purpose is pag. 74. and this it is. Seeing that God in his infinity is utterly incomprehensible of the creature, if such a created Mediator were not, in whom the infinite Majesty dwelling might be apprehended, the Angels had been created in vain: for neither had they enjoyed happiness, when they could have no sight of God in whom alone blessedness is; nor yet God had perfected his praise in them, when they could not see and praise the Divine Majesty. And again to the same purpose pag. 118. Seeing man's understanding above all other things desires and searches the knowledge of the truth; and that not only in things below during this life, but most of all being separate in the eternal and infinite goodness, wisdom, and other dignities of God, wherein above all other things it takes most joy: it is necessary that it may come unto the knowledge of that truth by such a mean as is proportionable and fit thereto: for otherwise the desire were in vain if it could never be brought to effect. Therefore seeing our understanding cannot behold the infinite being itself, it is necessary that it behold it in the Mediator, a created being, and proportionable to our understanding, and this may seem to be that which our Lord saith of himself, john 14.6. No man cometh to the Father but by me, See john 1.18. and again Luke 10.22. No man knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him. For answer to this doubt, you must remember that which was said to the last objection concerning the being of things equivalently, and eminently; for your easier understanding I will clear it further. Things, be they natural or artificial, are either actually in that being which they have, whether it be substantial or accidental, as Plato to be a man, to be a Philosopher; this sword to be of Steel, well tempered, two foot and nine inches long; or else potentially, and so they are in their proper principles and causes, before they come to actual being: and these causes are either next, as the Steel out of which the sword was forged, the Smith that made it, the fire that softened it, the hammer, the grindstone, and such like instruments; or else the causes are further and further off from the effect; as iron which was fined to steel, the stone out of which the iron was melted, the quicksilver and Sulphur which were congealed into that stone, the earth and water of which they had their beginning. Postel put things potentially in the Angels, but ill; for they can be but in the order of efficients at most. Thirdly, things are said to be in their ideas or separate forms eminently, as the model of a house in the mind of the builder; or as the form of the sword was in the mind or understanding of the Smith, when he first purposed to make it. Fourthly, things are equivalently in that common cause wherein all other things of the same kind may be, as in an Organ or Virginal, all manner of tunes, all concord's, and discords are, which are possible to be made or conceived by any Musician; so in the mind of the Smith, all the objects of Smithery, locks, guns, swords, and the like are equivalently, though as yet he hath not thought or purposed any one in particular. Now from these common things enlarge your understanding to those respects that are fit to be between things sensible and the unsearchable Trinity. All things are in God the Father equivalently, because in that infinite being of his all the possibility of being is founded: of all things (I say) that have been or shall be eternally. But because his being is actual, with all the dignities of being actually: for other wise it were not infinite; if it might be more excellent than it is: therefore doth he in his glorious Son understand both himself in his actual being, and actually all things that are by his being possible to be; so that the ideas or forms of all things are actually present with him eternally, and actually understood, as it is said, Psal. 139.16. In thy book all my members were written, when as yet there was none of them. Wherefore it must follow that that Word which is the character or express image of the Father, be also the image of all other things whatsoever; so that all the ideas of all things possible to be, must be in the Son eminently, that is, according to their ideas or particular forms understood, and determined, as the idea or imagination of the sword is in the mind of the Smith actually, assoon as the Smith hath resolved to make it thus, although the sword itself be not actually till it be made. And as these ideas are the first causes of things; so by reason of the concurrence of the will with the understanding, are they the most powerful for the bringing of those things whose Ideas they are, into effect: for from that idea of the sword in the Smith it is, that he kindles the fire, softens his steel, forges it, grinds it, forbushes it, and makes it at last a perfect sword. And therefore though it be true, That the Son doth nothing of himself, saving what he hath seen with the Father. john 5 19 Yet because the ideas of all things are actually in him, it is as true that in him, through him, for him, and by him, are all things; and in him all things consist. See Chap. 13. § 9 eminently, or in the clear distinction of their several forms: for otherwise the wisdom were not infinite, if the forms were in confusion, and not eminent and apparent in their most clear differences and determinations of the times, and limits, when, and how, the things themselves whose forms they are, should actually be. If then the ideas of all things be in the Son actually; what necessity is there of any created Mediator, when the Son of God might by any of these Ideas which are actually in him, manifest himself either to Angels, or to men? was not then that image of the manly being in him, in which he did delight to dwell with the sons of men, Prov. 8.31. according to which he created Adam? in which he manifested himself to the Fathers, to Abraham, to Moses, to the Prophets? And although for sundry purposes known to his wisdom, he manifested himself in other forms: of a smoking furace, when he entered into covenant with Abraham his friend, Gen. 15.17. of a living fire that consumed not the bush, to Moses, Ex. 3.2.6. of a still soft voice to Eliah, 1 King. 19.12. or the like: yet none of these forms were uncouth, or foreign to him. So that in what form soever he vouchsafed to show himself to the Angels, in that might they behold the invisible God, and be abundantly blessed thereby; but since the time that the faithful have beheld him with that Crown, wherewith his mother crowned him in the day of his espousals, the day of the joy and gladness of his heart, Cant. 3.11. He is to be seen both of Angels and men eternally, and only in the Tabernacle of our flesh; and the glory of God is manifest only in the face of jesus Christ. And as this (I think) is a full answer to the argument of Postellus; so had you need to remember it, because it may help to the understanding of some places of Scripture, which may seem to make for this conclusion. 6. But if such a created Mediator be, as had power to execute the eternal decree, and to create therest of the creature, the Angels, and man, and all this visible world from him; it may stand well with the justice and honour of God, and the love of that Mediator toward man, to offer himself for man when he had sinned: whereas otherwise if no such created Mediator be, than God the party offended, must first seek the atonement: and seeing man was not able, must likewise make satisfaction to himself, for the sin of another against himself: But this stands neither with the honour of God, nor the rule of justice. Answ. Entire affection hates all nicety: And so God loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that the world through him might be saved. And if the only begotten Son, be only that second person of the Trinity, what Son is that created Mediator? And so fare is it from dishonour to God to seek and save that which was lost, as that without his mercy and pity on man in his misery, the work of God in the creature had been in vain. But concerning that satisfaction which was made for sin, although it had appeared that it was utterly impossible to be made by one that was only man, Chap. 19 yet was the satisfaction made only in the manhood of our Saviour, dignified and sustained by his divinity, unto the endurance of all that punishment which was due to our sin, as it is manifest by the Prophet Esay, chap. 53. Col. 1.22. 1 Pet. 2.24. and yet for all that, is our Saviour the Lamb slain from the beginning of the world, Re. 13.8. yet is the blood of his sacrifice upon the Cross, called the blood of the everlasting Testament, Heb. 13.20. because that by the eternal spirit, he offered himself for us unto God, Heb. 9.14. That he in his manhood might present his Church unto himself, God blessed for ever, holy and without blemish, Eph. 5.27. So that the redemption of man is the work of the whole Trinity, the Son by the holy Spirit offering himself unto the Father, accepting this obedience a ransom for the world. And because the Son offered himself by the eternal Spirit; therefore is not our Saviour a created Mediator, as Postellus supposed, for no creature can be eternal. And malgre all the power of hell, it was an eternal Gospel, Revel. 14.6. Written in the Volume of the Book of the eternal Decree, Psal. 40.7. Heb. 10.7. to the everlasting comfort of the faithful; That the sacrifice for sin was appointed before there was a sinner. 7. Now before I come to those Texts of Scripture which Postel urges directly hereto; it will not be unfit to let you see how he favours his own opinion, by those Scriptures which he interprets unfaithfully; as where it is said, Deut. 32.39. There is no God with me; as Esay interprets it, I am God, and there is none else; he makes the sense, pag. 104. he is the created wisdom, before which there was no other God created: for he is worthily called God (saith he) for his union with the Deity. And again, pag. 115. for that which is Prov. 8.23. I was set up from everlasting; he will have it, that this divine wisdom was created not from everlasting, for than it could not be a creature; but before any ages were numbered by men. So to that of Saint john, Cap. 1. The Word was with God; he adds as it follows, in the Abisine Creed, and with the Holy Ghost, and with himself, & argues that whosoever is with another, must be different therfrom, & (for the most part) inferior indignity. I have answered concerning the authority of that Church, the collection of inferiority in dignity follows not; neither doth this text prove the unity of any such creature with the Creator, as he infers, but rather the difference of persons in the unity of the Godhead: for so it follows in the Text; And that Word was God. I say nothing of other Texts which by allegorical and foreign interpretations he would bring to his purpose, such as that, pag. 93. where by the firmament, Gen. 1.6. he will understand this Mediator, who parted the hidden waters of the Deity, from the manifest waters of the creature: whereby it would follow, that the Chaos or waters, the light and darkness, were created before this Mediator, see Gen. 1.13. His argument from that Spirit which moved upon the waters, Gen. 1. brought pag. 29. is answered before, Reason 3. I impute it no fault to him, that he pag. 62. confounds those Texts of john, 12.28. and chap. 17.5. Charity sees no mistake, where they make not against the truth. But his collection is ill from that text, Glorify me with that glory which I had with thee before the world was; to conclude, either that the creatures were distinct in him whom he calls God man, meaning the created Mediator, or for any other to suppose that the glory of God the Son was any whit lessened by the taking of our flesh; only it was shadowed for a time under the Cloud of his humanity, except that at some times a glimpse thereof appeared in his glorious miracles. For first, if that eminent being of the creatures in the distinction of their several beings, were not in God the Son, that second Person of the Trinity, but in this created Mediator; it would follow, that the wisdom of God were not infinite, nor yet essential unto him, when the knowledge of the creature in that manner of being, must come unto him by a creature, contrary to that which hath been proved (Chap. 5. & 8. And therefore to avoid this inconvenience, he is compelled to say, pag. 74. that that second being of all things (taking the equivalent being which they have in the Father, for the first) is not only in the eternal wisdom, but also in the wisdom created. Whence it follows, that the Creature by the same manner of being, shall be both in the Creator, and in the created Mediator. But the reason: for otherwise the Angels could not see God. The position is false, the reason insufficient, and answered before; then to think that the Son had lost or abated any thing of his infinite glory, because he prays, that he may be glorified as before the world was, stands neither with the truth. For so neither had the glory been infinite, if once ended, nor he coessential with the Father: neither yet accords it with the circumstance of the Text. Therefore understand it according to the truth: That Christ the Son of God in his manly being having glorified the Father on earth, and finished that work which he had given him to do, Verse 4. prayeth vers. 5. that the infinite glory, which was darkened under the form of a servant, Phil. 2.27. might be manifest in the manhood, that he in that manly being might be glorified, with the glory which is infinitely sufficient to glorify him the head, and all the members of his mystical body, as it is manifest in that 17. chap. of john, vers. 22, 23, 24. 8. Mal. 3.1. Christ is called the Angel or Messenger of the Covenant; therefore he is a creature, so united to the Divinity, that God cannot work without him, for that reason which is the first before. The reason is not of force to the authority. I answer. The first covenant or promise which God made to mankind was that in Paradise, Gen. 3. The seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the Serpent. This seed of the woman is Christ our Lord, which according to the Prophet should come in that Temple, which was built by the jews after their return from Babylon: So the Son of God in our flesh, is that Angel of the Covenant of our deliverance from the power of the Devil, which came according to the time appointed. So he hath the name of an Angel from his office, not from his nature. 9 The holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the highest shall overshadow thee, Luk. 1 35. This holy Ghost is that created Spirit of the Trinity, locally moving from place to place, which actually performed all those things which hitherto have been ignorantly attributed to the third Person of the Trinity: who being infinite, and filling all places, cannot be moved from place to place, no more than the Father or the Son. But this created Spirit might take on him the shape of a Dove, Luke 3.22. of a Voice Luke 9.35. and may also change places, as he saith, john 3.13. No man ascended up into heaven, but the Son of man which is in heaven, pag, 75.75 113, 116, etc. Answ. I have given the meaning of that text, john 3.13. before in the 23. chapter: And as the infinite wisdom of God foresaw, what diversity of opinions would come into men's minds, (for he understands their thoughts long before Psal. 139.2) so hath he left us the rule of his holy word whereby to guide us in the truth. Now the writings of Saint john do so clear this question, as if they had been written in opposition to these opinions of Arius Postellus, and those that are like minded. I cite some few texts out of his first Epistle chap. 4. v. 10. God hath loved us, and sent his Son to be a reconciliation. But the question is, whether a created Son or no? Saint john tells us not, not a created Son, but his only begotten Son hath he sent into the world, that we might be saved by him vers. 9 That Son or Word, who is one with the Father and the Holy Ghost, chap. 5. vers. 7. That Son to whom the Father Himself bore witness, verse 9.10 11. See 2 Peter 1.16.17. That Son who is very God and eternal life, vers. 20. what can be more plain, or particularly described, or more fully proved? If He be begotten, then coessential with the Father, Ergo, not created. If begotten, then eternal (for the actions of God in Himself are infinite and eternal) See chapter 10. Ergo, not created. If one with the Father, than also infinite. Ergo, not created. If very God, Ergo, not a Creature. But this spirit of the Trinity, which took flesh of the Virgin, and so became our Mediator, moved from place to place, which no Person of the Trinity could do, because they are infinite, and fill all places. Had this eye of the Sorbon L. Dan: in Haer. Aug. cap. 85. which knew so well that God is in all places repletiuè (as they speak) never read that Moses saith, Deut. 33.26. That God rides on the Heavens for the help of Israel, and on the Clouds in his glory? And although David knew that God did continually, beset him round about, and that there was no place either in Heaven or in hell, in the earth, or Sea: where he was not Psal. 139. from v. 5. to 11. yet as a stag embossed takes the soil, so did his heart in his flight from Saul thirst for God; saying, when shall I come and appear before God. Psal. 42.2. Therefore although God fill heaven and earth, yet is he said to be in any place more particularly where he gives more evident proof of his presence, as at Bethel, Gen. 28.16. in the Tabernacle by the Oracle and those manifest signs which I remembered above note (d) Thus God descended on Mount Sinai, when the Mountain did smoke and tremble, and thus the holy Ghost is said to have come upon the Virgin Mary, when by that wonderful work of his in her body, that seed of mankind was taken of her, that it might become a tabernacle for the King of glory to dwell in eternally: Thus also our Lord saith of himself joh. 6.38. I came down from Heaven, not to do mine own will, but, etc. not but that he was still in heaven c. 3.13. but because his presence in earth was now manifest in the flesh, as it had not been before. 10. And these reasons are, if not all, yet the most, I am sure the best, which Postellus brings for his position. It may seem fit moreover in this place to give answer to those texts which beside these already cited, may be brought for this opinion. And first to that which is Gen. 3.2, etc. Yea, hath God said ye shall not eat of every tree of the Garden, etc. ye shall not die the death. But God doth know that In the day ye eat thereof your Eyes shall be opened. The word Elohim, God, here used, is of the plural number, but God is one. And beside it may be thought that the devil durst not have spoken thus of Christ his creator, if Hae had been God blessed above all. Answ. The reason why Christ is every where in the Scripture called Elohim is, because that being eternally the Son of God He also received of the Father power over all things, and was appointed to be that man by whom the world should be redeemed and judged. So the word Elohim though sometimes given to Angels, sometime to men, yet it abates nothing of the excellency of his being. To the reason I answer, that the devil never persuades a man to sin, but first he corrupts his opinion concerning God. For he that hath true and beseeming thoughts of God, is not easily drawn to a wilful sin. Therefore the devil doth here first persuade the woman to distrust the truth and goodness of God, as being an enemy to him and his creature, man, as was said before. chap. 22. But if the devil had in so many words affirmed that which Postellus doth, yet we know he is a liar from the beginning and abode not in the truth. 11. Gen 19.24. it is said that the Lord rained upon Sodom fire and brimstone from the Lord: by which place though it may appear that the Son is coessential with the Father, for both are named by the name of jehova; yet the Father hath the excellency of honour before Him, and that he executes no judgement in the creature but by his father's behest: which is yet more evident by that which is Zach. 3.2. And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee O Satan; whereby it may seem, either that there is not an equality of power in the Persons of the Trinity, or else that there is a created Mediator, in whom the second Person of the Trinity doth dwell. Ans. If the dignities of the deity be essential as was proved, then if there be one nature of the Father and the Son, it follows that their power and all other dignities are coequal. Only the Father hath the prerogative of original in this, that the Son is of the Father, but the Father is not of the Son, though he never were without the Son. And therefore those professions of our Lord, all power is given unto me both in heaven and in earth, Math. 28 18. And the Father hath committed all judgement to the Son joh. 5.22. are first and above all to bear witness to the truth, joh. 18.37. For if he received his being originally from the Father then of necessity that power also which is essential unto him. Secondly, that as a Son he might honour His Father in the dispensation of that power, and execution of his Mediatorship. And thus he destroyed Sodom by the power of the Father, and thus he prays that Satan may be rebuked, and the faith of his disciples confirmed, Luk. 22.32. Thirdly. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as joying in the glory and excellency of the Father, as Ignatius speaks Epist. ad Smyr●enses. Fourthly, that we may know that we have one and the same gracious Mediator, which did evermore save and defend his church both before and after his incarnation. 12. But it is written, Exod 23.20. etc. Behold I send an Angel before thee, beware of him and obey his voice: provoke him not, for be will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him. That this Speaker was Christ who had brought the Israelites out of Egypt it is manifest, 1 Cor. 10.9 That this Angel may mean Moses, it sorts not with some circumstances, especially that He will not pardon your transgressions. Therefore some Rabbins understand by this Angel, Michael, the Prince or Angel that standeth for the nation of the jews, Dan. 10.13.21 but neither can an Angel forgive sins. Therefore being compared with, Exod. 33. v. 2.3 I will send an Angel before thee, but I will not go up with thee, lest I consume thee in the way: it must follow of necessity, that this Angel is not the second Person in the Trinity, but that created Mediator the Son of man, who had power in earth to forgive sins, Math. 9.6. Answer. That being granted which is joh. 10.38. & joh. 14.10. That Christ is in the Father, and the Father in Him, these words being spoken in the Person of the Father, will prove that Christ is the worker of all deliverances for his Church, both temporal, and eternal, and that he hath power to forgive sins, and that the name or being of God is truly in Him. So by this Angel no created Mediator can be understood, for every sin is a breach of the law of God against an infinite justice, which God alone and no creature can forgive. And therefore that son of man which had power on earth to forgive sin, must of necessity be God and not a created Mediator. And although Israel were here threatened, that God would departed from them for their Calf; yet it is manifest. vers. 17. that God at the prayer of Moses pardoned their sin, and brought them into Canaan. But to take the objection as it may make most for this opinion, that God doth threaten to send a created Angel, yet these words My name is in him, cannot prove him to be this created Mediator, but rather that the Angel to be sent, should have a power delegate, whereby to punish the rebellions of the people without sparing, and that power was the power or name of God in him. 13. I, but Psal. 45.6. after the Prophet had confessed unto Christ, Thy throne O God is for ever and ever, thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity: he adds. verse. 7. Therefore God even thy God hath anointed thee. By which it may seem, that Christ though God, yethath a God, and is God by grace and a created mediator, as Hermes Trismeg. in Asclep. calls the Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Creator of this God. Answer. Christ though God eternal, yet as man, a created Mediator, hath a God, as he saith, joh. 20.17. I ascend to my God, and your God, and in this sense God is his God, which hath anointed Him with the oil of gladness, above all that are partakers with him of flesh and blood. For he received not the spirit by measure, but of his fullness have we received grace. 14. Esay saith, Chap. 43. v. 10. Before me was no God form, neither shall there be after me. Therefore the Mediator that spoke there must be a created Mediator. Answer. It follows Esay 44.6. I am the first, and I am the last, and beside me there is no God: therefore he is not a created Mediator, but the Creator of all things. But that text of 43.10. (it seems) did somewhat trouble the Greek interpreters, who with one consent translated the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was form, by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was, to this sense, there was no God before me, though some of them left out the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God, and some kept it according to the Hebrew: but this text proves nothing to that purpose for which it is cited, but rather as it followeth on the verse before, thus much. That if none of the Gods of the natione could bring forth their witnesses that they had promised and performed; then the jews might witness with him, and especially his chosen servant jesus, in whom all his promises are yea and Amen, that he was before all their form Gods, and should be after them. So that if he were before and after all their form Gods, whom yet they did confess to be immortal (for no man takes him for a god that must die (joh. 12.34.) therefore against themselves they must witness that he was the true God. 15. It is said, Rom. 8.26. That the Spirit maketh intercession for us with groan that cannot be uttered: which cannot be but with earnestness of desire, and pain: but neither of these can befall unto God, yet is our Mediator one, yesterday, and to day, and the same for ever. Therefore the Mediator is a created being, which continually hath made, and doth make intercession for the Saints, according to the will of God. vers. 27. Answer. Though Christ be our eternal Mediator, as was said above, Object. 6. one, as the Son of God eternal, one Son of the Virgin, eternally ordained in the counsel of God; yet this Spirit here meant is that Spirit of the humanity of Christ, as it appears by the circumstance of the text, For he that searcheth the hearts, knoweth the meaning of the Spirit; so it is the Spirit of the heart of Christ our Mediator, whereby he entreats for the Saints. For although our Lord jesus be glorified in body; yet is he the same body that he was before, and his heart is touched with the feeling of our infirmities, and even now sorrows with us for our sorrows, as when he wept john 11.35. For as Postel truly saith pag. 33. The beginning of his sufferings was in the body, and though his bodily sorrow was ended in his death, yet his sufferings in his soul and Spirit are not ended, till that which is remaining to the sufferings of Christ be likewise fulfilled in the bodies of his Saints, as it is plain Acts 9.4. Col. 1.24. And therefore it is said of this Saviour or Angel of his presence, in all their troubles he was troubled, Esay 63.9. Heb 2.17. & 4.15. 16. But Saint Paul Colos. 2.2.3. saith, That all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hid in that mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ. Where the Father by a manifest distinction from God, and from Christ, must mean this mean being or created Mediator which took flesh of the Virgin. Answer. Not so; for although the eternal power and Godhead were manifest to all men by the creature, that wicked men might be without excuse, Psal. 19 and Rom 1.20. Yet none of the Princes of this world did understand that mystery of the Gospel of Christ. 1. Cor. 2.8. For that had been kept secret since the world began, but was now manifest in the last times, Rom. 16.25. Col. 1.26. Therefore these treasures of knowledge are first to know God one infinite and eternal being; then to know him the Father, that is, to confess in the unity of the Deity the three persons: 1. the Father eternal, which cannot be without an eternal 2. Son; neither can an eternal Son be without an 3. eternal procession or generation. Now to know this one God, and him the Father, and that one Mediator between God and man, the eternal Son dwelling in the man jesus, the Son of the Virgin, is the height and perfection of all knowledge whereto man by all his search could never attain. Then so to acknowledge this truth, as to live in holiness as they ought that know it, is that perfection of wisdom, that whole duty of man whereto he is called: and this answer may serve for the like objection out of Ephes. 1.3. 17. So Saint Paul also Heb. 1.3. seems not to give unto Christ equal glory with the Father: for he saith of him, that he is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the beam which is of one nature with the fountain of the light: nor yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the shine of that beam; but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a glimpse, brightness, or shine by reflection from that glory, whereby it follows, that he is not consubstantial with the Father, and so of necessity a created mediator. Answer. It is said, 1 Tim. 6.16. that God dwelleth in the light which no man can approach unto, that is, that central or incommunicable light of the deity, which no man hath seen, or can see, for the creature cannot comprehend what God is, except it be united unto him: but yet because the creature cannot be blessed but in God, therefore is that light spread abroad, or dilated from the centre into the infinite circumference of the divine dignity, by the infinite object of that light, the Son our Lord jesus, by whom that light is participate unto men, and Angels, in that blessed vision whereby they are blessed in him, and this is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or brightness of Saint Paul: the same glory of God made communicable unto us by our Mediator, not any shine or reflection of light in a foreign object, as the wisdom of God in the creature, or the light of the Son reflected in the Moon, or stars; in which the light is made other than it was, as the objection mistakes it. 18. Revelation. 3.14. Christ is called the beginning of the creation of God therefore He was the first creature. Answer. If he be the beginning of the creation, therefore he cannot be a creature: for so should He be the beginning of himself: so should He be, when he was not; so should he be a cause, and yet not be: but these are impossibilities. Compare herewith, Colos. 1.15. And see the reason of the speech in answer to the fourth objection. §. 11. The heresies concerning the proprieties of the Mediator, are principally three, of the 1. Acephali, the 2. Agnoetae, and the 3. Monothelites. The Acephali or headless, because they had neither bishops, nor priests, nor set times, nor order for the service of God; though that as the two natures in Christ were confused (for from the Timotheans they descended) so also the proprieties of these natures. But if the first befalls, as was showed, §. 1.2, 3. before, than their confusion, is also confounded. The author of this heresy was one Severus a bishop of Antioch, who daily cursed the Council of Chalcedon, for that by their decree which you heard before, §. 1. they had forestalled this heresy. But his blasphemous tongue cut out, and he banished from his chair, were worthy rewards of such a Bishop, Euag. lib. 4. c. 4. 2. From that heresy of Apollinarius, came that of the Agnoetae; that the divine nature of Christ was ignorant of many things, as the day of judgement, the grave of Lazarus etc. For if the Godhead were changed into flesh, as Apollinarius held; Themistius might well conclude, that both the being and also the proprieties of the Godhead must suffer loss thereby; and so falsely ascribe unto the Godhead, that which was proper unto the manhood. But if the foundation were unsure, as it appeared. §. 2. their building must needs fall to the ground. 3. And because the opinion of Eutyches concerning the only divine nature in Christ, began to be hated: therefore Cyrus by shop of Alexandria upheld it by the opinion of one will in Christ, for (said he) the humane will of Christ either is none, or not at all moved as the will of man, but only by God. But to take away those proprieties which do necessarily follow the nature and being of any thing, is to destroy the thing itself: so that to deny either the divine, or humane will of Christ, were to make him an unsufficient mediator; and is directly contrary to that scripture which is Luke. 22.42. Father, not my will, but thine be done. 4. From whence jordanus Brunus a Neapolitan in my time in Oxford, would enforce a more wicked conclusion, That Christ was a sinner, because His will was not in every respect answerable to the will of God. And because that which comes into the wicked imagination of one, may prove a stumbling block to another: I will by the way remove this out of the way. Therefore I answer. That because man knows not, nor may presume to know what the secret will of God is, he may in the freedom of his own Will, will, desire, pray for, and endeavour any thing which is not contrary to the revealed will of God, and that without sin, especially in such things as stand with the natural desire of all the creature in the preservation of itself in the present being which it hath. As a sick man without sin may use diet, medicine, and prayer for recovery; although God in His secret will have determined he shall die. David's purpose to build the Temple, though against the purpose of God, was so well accepted of God; as that he thereupon received the promise of a perpetual succession, even till Christ the eternal king to come of his seed, 2 Sam. 7.11. to 16. Nay, when Hezekiah had heard the sentence of death from God Himself, by the voice of his Prophet, Esay 38. was his prayer, and his tears accounted finnefull, which God did so far accept, as that he confirmed his petition by a miracle? And although our Saviour knew himself to have come into the world, that He should die for the sins of the world: yet might he without sin pray unto His Father to save Him from that hour John 17.17. especially divers figures affording that hope? was not Isaak in the very stroke of death rescued by the voice from heaven, when the Ram was offered up in his stead? Gen. 22. was not the scape goat Leu. 16.21.22. on which all the iniquities and sins of the sons of Israel were put, sent away alive into the wilderness? But wherein was this repugnancy of his will to the will of God? Not my will, but thine be done. He denied his own will, he laid down not only his life, but even the desire of life, that he might perform the will of his Father; so that the true conclusions which arise from hence or the like places are these; first, seeing all men naturally desire to live, and would not be unclothed, that is, would not die 2 Cor. 5.4. but rather that our mortality might be swallowed up of life, as it shall be with them who are found alive at the coming of the Lord 1 Cor. 15.51. and 1 Thes. 4.15, 16, 17. Christ our Saviour was truly man both in the nature, and all the natural properties of a man, contrary to the heresy of Eutyches, and the Monothelites, of which you may read further (if you will) in Thom. Aquinas contra Gent. lib. 4. Cap. 36. Secondly, and because every pure and merely natural property is concreated with the thing whose property it is, and that the desire of life, is naturally in every thing which hath life, and that without sin, lest he that put this desire in the creature should be supposed a cause of fin: it was no sin in our Saviour to desire life upon that condition; contrary to the folly, and falsehood of Brunus. Thirdly, seeing that God the Father so loved the world, as that he refused to accept the prayer of his own beloved Son, when he besought him with strong crying and tears for life; but would give him to that most bitter death for us: what confidence and assurance of life may we have, when the price of our redemption is paid, and he our Redeemer restored unto life? for if while we were enemies, we were reconciled unto God by the death of his Son: how much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life? Rom. 5.10. ARTICLE III. ❧ Which was conceived by the Holy-Ghost, CHAP. XXV. ALthough it were said to Abraham, That in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed: so that the Humanity of Christ was in Abraham and the fathers originally, and so descended unto Him: yet you may not think that any determinate * You may see the contrary opinion in Galatin. lib. 7. cap. 3. matter descended from Abraham, or the rest, of which the Manhood of Christ was to be made peculiarly, no more than the manhood of all others that descended from them. And as no more, so no less, was He in the loins of Abraham then the other Israelites. But yet with this difference, That whereas all other men being borne according to the law of concupiscence, are subject to original sin from both the parents: (a) He being not so borne, was not subject thereto. And because He was not borne according to the flesh, but according to the promise, according to the Law of the eternal life; that is, of the eternal Father only, on the one side without a mother; and so of His mother only on the other side without a father: Therefore was He, as not subject to sin; so not tithed in Abraham, when he gave tithes of all unto Melchizedek, Genes. 14.20. as Levi was, Hebr. 7.9, 10. for tithes are an acknowledgement of sin in him that is tithed; and a confession that he needs a mediator unto God. But Christ being a Priest for ever according to the order of Melchizedek, did therefore in Melchizedek receive tithes of Abraham. and by Melchizedek blessed him with whom He had beforehand established His promise. Gen. 12.23. Now when the fullness of time came, that this promise of God should be fulfilled: the blessed Virgin Mary being sanctified by the Holy-Ghost unto holiness of life, and purity of affections: was so highly favoured and accepted of God, as that in her tender years (for they writ that she was not above fourteen years at the message of the Angel) she was vouchsafed worthy to be the mother of the Saviour of the World. Her heart being therefore purified by the Holy-Ghost, to believe the promise of God made to her by the Angel, and by him to be persuaded of the possibility thereof: He wrought in her also a free consent thereto, a full submission to the will of God, and a desire of the performance of the promise. Read Luke 1. from 28. to 39 Thus according to the nature of the Holy Spirit, she first conceived her son in her Spirit, or understanding and holy desires: then by the working of the Holy Spirit, that seed which is the original of mankind was sanctified, separate and sequestered into the place of natural generation, and the Eternal Son invested therein, that according to the time of life, He might be borne the Son of man. O sacred mystery! O miraculous conception! Yet thus must His conception be, who was to unite all things in one. But for all this, is not Christ our Lord said to be the Son of the Holy-Ghost, although he were thus conceived by Him; nor yet the Son of the holy Trinity, as the Abissine Church confesseth. For as concerning His eternal being, He was the Son of the Father only: so for this His manly being, He was the Son only of His mother, having His humane nature and birth of her, and consequently His original or descent from her Fathers, David, Abraham, etc. And being then first conceived according to his humane nature, of which the Holy Ghost was not partaker: therefore he was not propagate of the substance of the Holy-Ghost, as Isaac of Abraham according to kind, to which conception only the name of Father and Son doth properly belong. Now see the reasons: That our Lord was conceived by the Holy-Ghost. You may remember how it was said in the Chapter before, § 10. Answer to the fourth objection, that the Holy-Ghost is that infinite activity, in whose strength every thing doth work. Which if it have truth in every natural action (as I shown) much more is it true in things above nature; such as is this conception of our Lord. 1. For if the fountain be corrupt; then also the water must be unwholesome. And if original sin do follow every one that is conceived according to the flesh, as it is said Psal. 51. In sin hath my mother conceived me: then as it was necessary that He which should be a propitiation for the sin of others, should be himself holy, and utterly separate from sinners: so was it also necessary that his conception should be only by the Holy Ghost, that He might be free from all taint of sin, both original and actual. 2. And as the generation according to the course of nature had been in sin (as was showed at large Chap. 17.) so also was it utterly impossible that God thereby should be incarnate. For (b) no agent can work beyond the power of its own nature. But the Incarnation, whereby God and Man became one Person, was beyond the power of all natural generation. For man, as all other natural agents, is finite; the divine being infinite, and so impossible to be begotten by man. Beside this, the divine being in this case of being conceived, must have been in the state of a sufferer by a being finite. But these things are impossible. And therefore it was (c) necessary, that the conception should be by the Holy-Ghost. 3. If the conception of our Saviour had been according to the course of natural generation, than had there been two fathers of one Person, and so the humanity taken into the Deity of (hrist, had been the cause of confusion, in respect of the Fatherhood, which had been in God the Father, and in respect of man, the Father of the same Son. So the perfection of Fatherhood had not been wholly and perfectly in God the Father. So defect should be in the first principle. But these things are inconvenient. Therefore (d) the conception was not by man. 4. And why this conception was the peculiar work of the Holy-Ghost, it may yet further appear, thus. In all the works of God in the creature, the whole Trinity works, either according to one manner common to all the Persons: or else according to their personal properties. Now in this incarnation of the Son, as the Father had begotten Him by eternal generation; so in the fullness of time, did He send His Son into the world; and this sending is that second generation or begetting. For as the thought or intent in the mind of a man, is that inward word of his understanding, which being spoken, is made understandable by others: So the Word of God remaining eternally in the bosom of the Father, being sent into the world, became manifest in the flesh. And thus the whole being of Fatherhood was in the Father, and of Sonship in the Son. And besides these two terms of begetting, belonging to the Father, and being begotten, belonging to the Son, there is only that of conception necessary to this most wonderful Incarnation, which must belong to the Holy-Ghost, lest two offices being given to one Person, the third Person should cease to work. So there should be inequality in their actions, and their works without should not be conformable to their inward beings, shown Chap. 11. and 12. But this is not to be affirmed: Therefore he was conceived by the Holy-Ghost. 5. And seeing it was necessary that the Redeemer of the world should be borne of a Virgin (as it will appear in the Chapter following) it was also necessary that the conception should be by the Holy-Ghost. For as in the ordinary way of all generation, the female seed is not of strength to become man, except it receive motion, life and strength from the masculine seed conveyed into the place of conception; which cannot be done but with the breach of Virginity: so where the Virginity was not impaired, it was necessary that the disposing of the seed and enabling it unto conception, should be by the power of the Holy-Ghost, who was able to supply all defects in nature, and to cause the Virgin to conceive, and consequently to bring forth without the feeling either of pleasure or pain. 6. Every supernatural work which proceeds from the perfection of Love, must be performed by him who is the perfection of Love. But the Incarnation of God in man, was a supernatural work which proceeded from the superabundant Love of God to Mankind, See Chap. 22. Reasons 4, 5.10, 11, 12. And therefore wrought by Him who is the perfect Love between the Father and the Son: that the perfection of the band, union, or knot of Love, might be in the Holy-Ghost; as between the Persons of the Godhead, so between the Godhead and the humanity. Notes. (a) He was not subject to original sin] A jew or Atheist may object, Object. 1 that if He were subject to the punishments of original sin, that is the sicknesses of mind, ignorance, forgetfulness, the passions of anger, sorrow, and the like: and so of the body, to be weary, hungry, faint, sleepy, etc. Then must it also follow, that He was subject to the sin; for no effect can be, but by the precedence of the cause. But it is manifest that he was subject unto most of these. Therefore it may seem that He was also subject to sin, though not actual, yet original, which was the cause of these. Answer. Though the rule be most true, that no effect can be without the precedent cause; yet in this business, where grace and mercy is above nature, the cause in one, wrought the effect in another. The sin was of Adam and his sons, the punishment of CHRIST the Son of GOD. But the supposition that these defects (if they may be so called) are the effects of original sin, is false. For man being that creature in whom GOD would show the superexcellency of His goodness, wisdom, glory, etc. Ephe. 3.10. It was expedient that he being to be brought to that height of happiness and perfection whereto no other creature can attain, should have experience of all infirmity or weakness, first from not being to the meanest degree of being, and so from state to state, till he have at last arrived unto that state of perfection when God shall be All in all. And because it was necessary that our Lord should be in every thing like His brethren, except their sin: therefore took He on Him whatsoever was natural unto man, the substance, not the sin; the perfections, not the infections. But sin was contrary to man's nature, the deformity and poison thereof wrought only by the Devil in man, after the work of God was perfect in him. And therefore our Lord did grow in wisdom, and Stature like other men, as all the sons of Adam should have done, though he had never sinned. And thus Christ took on him our infirmities, and that for this end, that He might bear our sin, that is, might set himself in our stead to bear the punishment of our sins, that by His stripes we might be healed. And thus the Lord laid on Him the burden of us all, Read Es. 53. But it is said, 2. Cor. 5.21. that God made him to be sin for us. Answer. Object. 2 This text is cited as that text of the Psalm in Matth. 4.6. is cited by the Devil. Say that which follows, Who knew no sin, and it cuts the throat of the objection. But I say that Saint Paul referreth us secretly to that sacrifice for the sin of the Highpriest, in Exod. 29.14. which is there called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chattach § Sin, meaning an offering for sin, as Psal. 118.17. the sacrifice is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chagh, the feast or holiday, by a Metonymia, meaning the sacrifice proper for the holiday. For the purpose of Saint Paul in that Epistle being to prove the end of the Law in Christ, refers us to that sacrifice which shows that the Highpriest himself needed another Mediator. For although he did eat the sin offering of the people, and so did bear or take away their sin: Levit. 10.17. Yet his own sin offering he might not eat. And therefore that was to be burnt without the camp, as Christ did suffer without the gate. Heb. 13.11. etc. Moreover job saith, 14.4. Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Object. 3 Not one. Whereby it is plain, that although Christ were conceived by the Holy-Ghost, and so no stain or touch of concupiscence came to the body of the Virgin by that conception: yet seeing the Virgin herself was conceived and borne as all mankind: it must ikewise follow, that if Christ had his whole manly being only from her, then as she herself was stained in her whole being with original sin, so likewise that which was conceived of her. Answer. It is likewise written, Deut. 4.24. The Lord thy God is a consuming fire. And the property of fire is to separate all such things as are heterogeneous: to part and divide Elements, as experience showeth. Now although it be plain, that the heavens are impure in His sight: that He found no steadfastness in His Angels: that no creature could be a Tabernacle worthy His dwelling, much less the body of sinful man: Yet seeing that glorious fire was able to purify and perfect whatsoever body that was, which He would vouchsafe to take unto Himself: therefore although for the reasons in the Chapter following, it was meet, that Christ should be borne of a Virgin; yet not to take any holiness from her. For if it had seemed good unto His wisdom to take His manhood from a corrupted Rahab, or a Tamar (as he did onginally) yet was He able to sanctify and cleanse it, as He doth cleanse or take away the sins of the world. And concerning that manly being which our Lord did take of the holy Virgin, though it were the most pure in all mankind, though the uttermost purity in all the creature, as being without the sin of the creature, as I said before: yet was it not of itself worthy to be His pavilion, but became a dwelling worthy of His presence only, because He, by that assumption of it unto himself, did make it worthy of Himself, as He saith john 17.14. For their sakes do I sanctify myself: What is that? His Divine being is perfect holiness, and thereby did He sanctify His body, which was Himself (contrary to the wickedness of Nestorius) that that likewise might be Holiness to the Lord, and a sufficient sacrifice, sanctified by that offering of Himself, for the sins of the world. And this sanctifying of that Tabernacle of His manhood, was figured by the Cloud which filled the Tabernacle, Exod. 40.34.35. and the Temple, 1. Kings. 8.10.11. into which, seeing the Priests could not enter, because of the Cloud: the Holy-Ghost signified, that when God should dwell in the temple of our flesh, the ministry of the levitical Priesthood must have an end. (b) No agent can work beyond the power of its own nature.] It were a wicked and Manichean conclusion from that text which is in Matth. 13.38. The tares are the Children of the Devil, to think that any of mankind should be begotten by wicked sprights: yet such fancies hath the devil hatched in some men's minds, to dishonour this most glorious work of God, the Incarnation of his son. And although it appear by the manifest authority of the holy Scripture, that man was that special creature of God, whereabout (to speak as a man) He took most care: Let us make man in our image: Gen. 1.26. He hath made us, not we ourselves. Psal. 100 Thy hands have made me, and fashioned me. Psal. 119.73. and Psal. 139. almost wholly to this purpose: yet hath Postel. in his Book de Nat. Med. told us of the Alani, a people among the Tartars, which (saith he) was begotten by Spirits. Thus also hath he disgraced the noble Nation of the Hungars, beside other particular persons, among whom our British Merlin. But beside the general truth of this rule, doth not common experience show, that different kinds bring out that which is neutral, as the kinds of Horses, and Asses, Mules? which engender not to bring out their like, because nature will not endure so great a disgrace, as to have her kinds multiplied contrary to kind. Moreover, seeing every thing brings forth the like, as a Man, a Man; a Lion, a Lion; Fire, Fire, etc. What possibility is there that a spirit should beget any thing but a spirit, as it appears in the works of the devil in our fantasies and affections, by which secondly he may also cause us to work on that which is in our power, not in his. I know that in the vegetable, where much seed is hermaphroditical, in planting, in grafting and the like, one kind may be bettered by another; but not in perfect animals, much less in man. I know also what poor shifts there be to prove the possibility of these monstrous generations, the fancy of Incubus and Succubus; and of the devil stealing the seed from a dead body, and such like. But that precious seed dies instantly, except it be received into the proper vessel. And when the body is once dead, and that soul gone which kept the whole, and every part and parcel of the body in life, that which was for a new life in another, must also die. I know that some both of the Fathers, and Schoolmen, are cited of a contrary opinion; but our learned King Damenob. lib. 3. cap. 3. upon reasons in nature unanswereable, hath showed the impossibility of this generation; to which I will add one reason out of the Holy Scripture. We are commanded by God Exod. 20. Ephe. 6. to honour our Fathers and Mothers. Now if Merlin, for instance, or the Nation of the Hungars were begotten by devils, then by that commandment were they also charged to honour the devil: which as no man under pain of Hell-fire may do; so were it a damnable sin for any man to think that God hath commanded it. And yet this fancy would take strength from Genes. 6.2, 4. where the sons of God which Irenaeus lib. 4. cap. 70. will have to be Angels, accompanied with women; and so by that transgression of kinds, Giants were bred: See hereto Tertull: de virg: velandis. But those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nephelim, Giants or man-quellers, who prized themselves by their violence and cruelty, were not so called in respect of their stature; for they are after called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gibborim, men of courage or strength, as every valiant or strong man is titled. But the sons of God, or, as our Lord calls them, The sons of the kingdom, that is, which held the hope of Christ to come, yet not living according to that hope, but following their own lust, and joining in marriage with Infidels and Atheists, neglecting the bringing up of their children in obedience and virtue; it must needs be, that they must become graceless, and fierce, and so for their cruelty brought the flood upon themselves. And this is that wretched and wicked state whereto the world, especially this little world of ours is again returned, and cries to heaven for that second baptism of the fire. (c) Necessary that the conception should be by the Holy-Ghost.] You see by these two reasons, one taken from the humanity of Christ, the other from His Divinity, that it was necessary that our Mediator in both respects, should be conceived of the Holy-Ghost. They that have little time to think on natural Philosophies, need some help to understand the difference of generation, and conception. And let us not be afraid to speak of the works of God to His honour, according to truth, and modesty. Generation or begetting, is actively in the Parents; for the female is also an agent in respect of the feminine seed which she affords: generation passively, is in that which is begotten. Conception is an action or passion concurrent or necessary to generation. For although the seed on both sides be afforded; yet if it be weak, and unfit for generation, as in lustful persons, or if it be not retained, and duly nourished in the womb, there can be no conception. Therefore in this wonderful generation of our Saviour, whereby he was made a natural man, by natural causes, as fare as they were incorrupted, there was also a conception necessary. The conception actively was in the Holy-Ghost, who prepared and fitted, first the mind of the Virgin (for if her actions or sufferings herein had not been voluntary, they had no way been available unto herself for eternal life, than her body with all the powers and parts thereof, that she might conceive, that is, both afford, retain, and nourish that blessed tabernacle of Him that would dwell in us. The conception passively was either dispositive, whereby the body of the Virgin was so fitted to conceive; or final, whereby that which was conceived, was perfected in every degree according to all the natural causes necessary thereto. And because the Goly-Ghost was the chief agent, or worker in all this; therefore is the conception properly attributed unto Him. (d) The conception was not by man.] That poor and base conceit of Ebion, Cerinthus, and their followers, unworthy of that soul which should presume to think on God, or His glorious works, you read before, Chap. 24. §. 4, 5, 6, 7. where it is sufficiently refuted, and their reasons answered; and before that, you might see it strangled, by all the reasons of the 22. Chapter. CHAP. XXVI. Born of the Virgin Mary. SO the Infinite Wisdom and Love of God delighted in man, that there is no kind of perfection possible to the creature, which he hath not either manifested, or promised unto him. To frame and fashion the body of Adam out of the earth, with His own hands, to breath into him an immortal soul, was a wonderful work, and one alone. Out of that virgin man to take a rib, and thereof to make a woman, was a work no less wonderful, and one alone. The ordinary propagation of mankind is the third way for increase: because He that was the Lord of all kinds here below, should not be inferior unto them in the possibility of bringing forth his like. But that fourth and last way of man's generation, was that which out of the side of the virgin woman, brought out that man which should restore and give perfection to all the rest. More excellent than the third, which from corrupted and sinful parents, multiplies more corrupted and sinful children: more powerful than the second, which out of the more perfect sex, brought out that which was less perfect: more glorious and available to us then the first, which raised Adam out of dust. For by this, God himself to become one of us, took that which was ours, that he might give unto us, that which was His. And for the clear proof of this Article, (a) That our Lord Christ was borne of a Virgin. 1. Let this be one ground, which the holy Virgin herself did stand upon Luke 1.34. That without the society of man, it is a thing in nature utterly impossible, that any generation of mankind can be. Secondly, That which is impossible to nature, because the power whereby nature doth work is a limited power; and in the perfect kinds of things according to one rule, is yet possible to God Luke 1.37. Thirdly, That the works of God Himself, the author of Nature, are more noble, excellent, and perfect then those of nature. Whereupon it will follow reasonably, that sigh our Saviour could be borne of a virgin, if He would, it was convenient so to be; but He could, as it appears by that which is said; and also would, for so He declared it by His Prophet, Esay 7.14. Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son. Therefore our Lord was borne of a virgin. 2. All the fullness of perfection ought to be in Him who was to restore man to that perfection which he had lost. Therefore as Christ our Saviour had a Father in heaven without a mother, being begotten of the substance of His father, by an unconceivable and most glorious generation: So ought He in earth without a father to have a mother, without any taint or spot, a Virgin. 3. And seeing the Incarnation or Conception and Birth of the GOD of glory, was a grace and honour to mankind above all the creature; and a special exaltation of her of whom He would be borne above all other women. Luke 1.28. if our Lord had not been conceived and borne of a most pure Virgin, than had He exalted the corrupted flesh of mankind, and tainted with lust, before that which was uncorrupt: which as in itself it had been inconvenient; so had it brought chastity and pureness of life into contempt. But these things are inconvenient. Therefore it was necessary that the Saviour of the world should be borne of a Virgin. 4. Neither was it beseeming, neither was it possible, that the Creator of all things should become a creature, but after a peculiar and special manner, the most honourable and beseeming that could be. But neither could any conception be more honourable than by the Holy-Ghost, nor any birth be more beseeming than of a Virgin. Therefore so was He conceived, so borne. 5. Adam was not deceived but the woman, yet a virgin being deceived, was unto him the cause of transgression. And lest womankind should ever be subject to the rebuke of man for this, therefore was it necessary that the Saviour should be borne of a virgin. For if man had had any thing to do in this generation of the Saviour, the woman had not so been quit from blame, in as much as man might have said, That a woman could bring all mankind into sin, but without man she could afford no help, which inequality had not been meet between them that are equal heirs of the same glorious hopes. Therefore that the healing might be so made as was the wound, it was requisite that He that takes away our sin, should be borne of a virgin. And thus is that fulfilled which is spoken jerem. 30.17. From thy wounds I will heal thee, that is, as thy wound was made, so shall thy health be procured. 6. The virgin Eve was given to man for a help before him, yet she brought him into sin, and the snares of the devil; but the purpose of God could not thereby be made void. Therefore that other virgin was she that was especially meant, who should bring forth that help of helps in man's greatest need. Therefore that face might answer to face, it was expedient that the Saviour of the world should be borne of a virgin. 7 And seeing he was conceived by the Holy-Ghost, that no taint or lust of sin might be in the conception: and that the subject of the action of the Holy-Ghost, should be the most fit subject for such a worke-master, and such an action: and that a pure and uncorrupted body was most fit for such a conception. Therefore it was also necessary that he should be borne of a virgin. For it cannot be supposed, that God who came into that harbour of His mother's body, that he might sanctify it, would at his going out, leave it in worse estate than He had found it. 8. One contrary cannot be an efficient cause of the other contrary. As to say, That that which is pure and holy, should be the cause of any impurity or corruption. But the conception which was the cause of this Birth was most pure, as having the Holy-Ghost the author thereof. Therefore could not the conception be any cause to take away the virginity of Christ's mother. For so that divine work of the Holy-Ghost should have been ordained to an end more unnoble than the work; whereas the end is ever more excellent than those things that are ordained for the end. So also He that commanded parents to be honoured, should have brought a spot upon His own mother, if by His birth her virginity had been impaired, which was not impaired by his conception. But these things are impossible. Therefore He was borne of a virgin. 9 The birth of that child which is supernatural, as being both God and man, must needs be most noble and supernatural. But it could not be most noble, if it were with the despoiling of the mother's virginity, nor yet in the highest kind supernatural, if it were not of a virgin. And this is that mystery which all the Churches, styled in Cant. 3.11. by the name of the daughters of Zion, are called to take knowledge of. Go forth o ye daughters of Zion, behold King Solomon, with the Crown wherewith His mother crowned Him in the day of His espousals, and in the day of the gladness of His heart. And that because all the mysteries of our salvation were accomplished in His humanity. 10. Thus as God both by Himself and by His Prophets hath showed, that these things should thus be fulfilled: So in the time appointed was Christ our Lord borne of a virgin. The holy authorities are, First, that which is Genes. 3.15. The seed of the woman shall bruise thy head, and if of the woman only, as the promise stands, without any aid or mention of man, then must the conception of necessity be by the Holy Ghost, who should give activity and working unto the female seed: and the birth being (as it beseemed) answerable to the conception, must of necessity be of a virgin. Neither yet doth this abate any thing of the true and perfect humanity of Christ, that He was made man only of the female seed. For seeing every second cause works only in the strength of the first and chief cause; it is plain, that whatsoever the second cause is able to do by the virtue of the first, that first is able to do by itself. And therefore God who made man of the dust of the earth, could also without any action of the manly seed, produce a perfect man of the seed of the Virgin, in which seed the whole humanity was, although it was not able to move itself to the perfection of kind. Another text is that of Esay, cited before, Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a Son; and such a birth could never be, but that the conception must be by the Holy-Ghost; And therefore it is said, The Lord himself shall give you a sign, because He was the only worker. That text of jeremiah 31.22. The Lord hath created a new thing in the earth: A woman shall compass a man: doth enforce as much as the former. But what new thing is this? Is any thing more usual than a woman with child? But this is the newness, That a woman who never knew man, should compass 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gaber, that mighty One, even God and man in one person. For seeing it was a new thing, it must be such as never was before, a miracle in the birth of a man, which could only be in this, That He should be conceived without a father among men, and borne of a mother that was a maid, as it is said, Matth. 1.25. That joseph knew her not, till she had brought forth. The text of Ezech. 44. you shall hear by and by. And beside these texts that are plain and manifest, others may seem to import as much, as that in Esay 9.7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lemarbeh hamiscah, to the increase of His dominion; where from that close Man, signifying in their later Arithmetic 600, and is not used but in the end of a word, some will define the time from the fourth year of Achaz to the birth of Christ 600. years, but it holds not. Others from thence will fetch the name Maria with as much ado. See Pet: Galat. lib. 7. cap. 13. and lib. 4. cap. 10. But I like best of their opinion who think, that the perpetual virginity of Saint Mary was meant hereby; yet will I rather profess my ignorance, then presume to offer you any thing whereof I am fully persuaded. Notes. (a) THat our Lord Christ was borne of a virgin,] It was a worthy saying of Athanasius in Epistol: Cathol. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The sum of our faith is the consubstantial Trinity: and the true God borne of the virgin Mary. And well it accords with that of our Saviour, john 17.3. This is eternal life, to know Thee the only true God, and whom Thou hast sent jesus Christ. Whereto you have the full testimony of the devil himself, in that with all his might he hath persecuted the professors of this truth, and endeavoured to deface it with so many errors, as he by his ministers hath broached to the contrary. Some you have seen before, Note (g) on the 24. Chapter; Some you shall have here in brief against this Article; And they either concern the Body of Christ, § 1. or his Soul, § 2. or else the Virginity of his mother, § 3. §. 1. Simon the Witch according to that spirit of Antichrist.] 1. john 4.3. Sect. 1 denied that Christ was come in the flesh; and so at once made void the Gospel of Christ. 2. Valentinus denied that Christ had a true and humane body, but only heavenly and spiritual, in which he passed thorough the Virgin Mary, as water thorough a pipe, without taking any flesh of her. To the same purpose Cerdon, and after him Martion, denied Christ to have been borne of the Virgin Mary, or to have had any manly body at all, but only heavenly, or to have suffered but only in show. 3. Apelles thought the body of Christ to be a true substantial body, but yet to have been borrowed, partly of the stars, from which he took somewhat, as He came down from Heaven, and partly of the Elements; which body after He had risen from the dead, was again returned into the proper principles. The madness of the Manichees is as much as all the former came unto, and both the one and the other unworthy your hearing, saving that you may give thanks unto God, that hath kept your heart upright in the holy faith of Christ, yet shall you see them briefly examined, note (a) in the end of the Chapter following. §. 2. But the errors of Arius, and Apollinarius, Sect. 2 concerning the soul of Christ must here be sifted a little nearer. Arius held that Christ took of the Virgin the humane flesh only, and not the humane soul, but that the Word did supply all the faculties of the soul in Him. 2. The Apollinarists called also Dimaeritae, sometime denied that Christ took any flesh of the Virgin, but said, that He was perfect man while he was yet in heaven, before He was borne of the Virgin; and that that same body of His was equal and consubstantial to the Divine Nature, because He made it into Himself of the Divine being: So that although He were borne of the Virgin; yet was He in her body as in a place, not as one of the same nature with her. And these Heretics though mongrels of Apollinarius, and Martion, yet Apollinarius was accounted their Syr. 3. Others among them, affirmed that Christ took a body of the Virgin, which was also enlived with a living, but not with a reasonable soul. And hence had they their name Dimaritae, because they gave these two third parts of the manly being unto Christ, but said that a supercelestial understanding supplied the want of the reasonable soul. These Heretics were either most differing, or most uncertain in their opinions, as you may find by Socrat. Eccles. hist. lib 3. cap. 36. So by Athanas. Epist. ad Epict. Epist. de Incarn. Dom. and orat. de Salut. adventu D. I. Christi, both against this opinion of Apollinaris: And because both these opinions are against this Article, you shall first see the reasons of Athanasius against his first position: his second error shall go in common with that of Arius. 1. The first reason of Athanasius is this. The Trinity only is uncreated, but flesh had the beginning of man. But Apollinarius might except by his own positions; That the Son made His body consubstantial to Himself of the Divine being. 2. Whatsoever is subject to sufferance, is created. But Christ suffered for us. Therefore by a created body. All is most true. Yet Apollinarius might except again by his own position. The Word became flesh, and that Word was uncreated, therefore also that flesh into which the Word was changed. But I lose time to dally thus with these Heretics. Therefore for full opposition to this heresy and the rest recited before of Valentinus, Martion, Apelles and their rabble's, consider these reasons which are brought, Chapter 20. to prove that the Mediator for the sin of man must be man, and see how they accord with the Scriptures there cited. So also Galat. 4.4. and Phil. 2.6, 7. You may see the reasons of Apollinarius for his opinions, in Epiphanius haeres. 77. of which I think these are the best. 1. A true manly body, is only by the male-seed. But Christ was not so begotten. Therefore He had not a true manly, but a heavenly body. Answer The proposition is false. For Adam was not of manly seed, yet that true man, from whom all humane nature descended. Neither was our Lord less perfect man because he was not so begotten; See the 10. reason before. 2. That which the Scripture hath pronounced sinful, may not be given to Christ. But the flesh lusteth against the spirit, Gal. 5.17. and so is sinful: therefore not to be given to Christ. Answer. That text of the Apostle is taken by a Metonymia. For the flesh is not sinful, but the lusts that dwell in the flesh are against the spirit, and sinful. But Christ took the creature, not the sin that dwelled therein. Against the errors about the soul of Christ, whether that of Arius, or Apollinarius, or them that had broached the opinion before their time, that Christ had not an humane soul, Ignat. Epist. ad Philadelph. you shall have the most effectual reasons out of Athanasius Epist. de Incarn. D. I. C. contra Apoll. 1. There were so many parts in Christ living, as He was resolved into, when He was dead. But He was resolved into two, the body which was buried, and the soul which went down to hell. Therefore there were two parts of Christ's humane being; a body, and a soul, which too together, do make a whole and perfect man. 2. If either the Word, or a supercelestial understanding had been in a senseless body, then could not that body have felt either pain without, or (much less) inward grief. But the soul of our Saviour was heavy unto death, Mat. 26.38. Therefore He had a humane soul. 3. A thing of one kind, cannot be given as a fit ransom for a thing of another kind; but a body must be given for the ransom of a body, and a soul for the ransom of a soul. Therefore that Christ might be a sufficient Redeemer, it was necessary that He should have both an humane body, and a humane soul. 4. If either the created Deity of Arius, or the supercelestial spirit of Apollinarius had been in Christ in stead of the humane soul, then could He not have given His soul for His sheep. But He was that Good Sepherd, which laid down 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His own soul, or life for His sheep; john 10.11. Therefore He had a humane soul. 5. If Christ had not had a soul, by the departure of which His body was dead; then had not He by His death destroyed him that had the power of death. Hebr. 2.14. neither had he triumphed over death, by His resurrection, neither had He been a sufficient sacrifice and redemption for them that were dead in trespasses and sins; and so had His coming been in vain. But all these things are impossible. Therefore He was in all things like His brethren, except their sins. Hebr. 2.17. 6. If Christ had had either a lifeless body, or sensitive only; and in stead of the humane soul, either a created deity, or a supercelestial spirit; then had He been neither God nor man, and so an unmeet and insufficient Redeemer of the world. For neither had such a body been perfect man, neither is a supercelestial spirit, nor a created deity perfect God. Yet had Apollinarius his reasons, though he erred from the truth; and by his reasons, it seems that he had most reverend thoughts of Christ. For thus he argues. 1. Man's soul is the seat of sin; of anger, concupiscence, and the like. But these things could not be in Christ. Therefore neither the humane soul, in which only they dwell. Answer. Anger, sorrow, compassion, joy, and such motions of the soul, are either ordinate, which are subject to Wisdom, and the rules of the divine justice, expressed in the Law of God, and these were in Christ, and were not sinful. But the inordinate affections only are sinful, and could not be in Him which knew no sin. 2. Two perfect things in their perfection could not possibly become one. Therefore that the Godhead with the manhood might become one Mediator, it was necessary that the manhood should be assumed imperfect; otherwise the Mediator had been two persons. Answ. This argument was answered before, Note (g) Chapter 24. § 8. Yet in brief, I say, that the word perfect, hath a twofold meaning. For the Godhead took the Manhood unto Himself perfect, that is; According to those parts wherein the perfection of the Manhood doth consist, of Body and Soul. But as our Lord in His childhood did grow in Age, Stature, Wisdom, etc. So before His birth did he grow from state to state, till the full time of natural birth. And thus the Manhood was assumed imperfect, that is, Not yet having attained unto that perfection whereto it was destinate, in the Birth; the Youth, the Manly age and state. Therefore that fear of Apollinarius, of two persons in Christ, was needless. For beside this that the Humane nature was both conceived, and taken to the Divine in one instant, nothing in mankind can be called a person till it be living, and that it be per se sola of itself, which seems not to be before the birth. But this is without doubt, that that which is sustained, or hath the being in another, can no way of itself be accounted a person. But it is manifest, that the Humanity of Christ is sustained only in His divinity. You know the received opinion touching the original of the Soul. § 3. Though by all these heaps of Arguments, which you may read from Chapter 21. to this place; I have beaten out the brains of that beggarly Brat of Ebion, which affirmed that our Lord was begotten by joseph of his wife Mary, as all other children; yet you may see, how the stink of that carcase doth rise up against this Article, that He was borne of a Virgin; so dangerous a thing an heresy is in matters of Faith. But for answer to those reasons that are brought hereto; you may read the Note (g) §. 4. on the 24. Chapter before. And although it be proved by infallible arguments, that is to say, from authority of Holy Scripture, and reasons drawn therefrom, that our Lord jesus was both conceived, and borne of a Virgin, that He might be free from original sin, whereto all the race of mankind is subject, which are begotten and borne according to the common law of humane generation; yet would I not be understood in any thing which I have said thereto, to speak contrary to that which the Apostle hath, Heb. 13.4. That marriage is honourable among all men, for whom it is necessary. But notwithstanding the reasons that Christ must be borne of a Virgins the mind will still be ask, how He could be truly man, and yet His mother a Virgin? Seeing we have derested the heresies of Valentine, Apelles, and all such madness. Whereto I answer. That the mystery of the Gospel is, as the treasure of the unsearchable riches; so of the manifold Wisdom of God, into which the Angels desire to look, Eph. 3.8.10. 1. Pet. 1.12. And therefore the pure and simple truth of God being delivered unto you, by His holy Apostles and Prophets, and after, being made manifest by such proofs as reason cannot except against; it may seem an unreasonable thing, yet further to require satisfaction for the possibility thereof. For to an infinite power, all things are possible. And as our Saviour was conceived, so also was He borne, and His mother's Virginity saved; As He came to the Apostles when the doors were shut, john. 20.19.26. But (you say) His body was then changed and made Spiritual, He being raised from the dead, I confess it. But yet that power by which He hide, or made Himself invisible, Luke 4.30. john 8.59. and 12.36. by which He walked on the waters, john 6.14. by which He filled the world with wonders, and that before His body was raised from the dead. Beside it is not unreasonable for us to think that as the woman by whom sin was brought into the world, was brought out of the side of Adam: so that man by whom the satisfaction for our sin was made, might likewise be brought out of the side of the Woman. For as it was sufficient for our redemption, that our ransom was paid in our whole and perfect nature, taken of the Virgin: so was it likewise more honourable, and beseeming the Lord of Glory, having taken our flesh, to be so borne. But Eve (you say) was so brought to being, while Adam was in a deep sleep. I answer, that it is not utterly improbable that the Virgin likewise in that birth was fast asleep. For first, it was in the night, the time of sleep. Luke 2.8. And it was according to all reason, that she which had conceived without pleasure, should also bring forth without pain. And although I affirm not this of any necessity to be believed; yet among those many of whom you read, Luke 1.1. which set forth the declaration of these things, that Gospel which was said to be written by Saint Bartholomew, affirms this much. Howsoever, I think that jerom spoke too boldly, Dialog: 2. adversus Pelag: Deum per genitalia virginis natum. Neither can I give my consent to Tertullian, lib. de carne Christi● virgo quantùm à viro, quantùm à partu non virgo. That Mary was a Virgin in respect of her husband, but no Virgin in respect of her Son. For this in jovinian was justly accounted an heresy. Aug. heres. cap. 82. And that because it is contrary to the voice of the Prophet, Behold a virgin shall bring forth a Son. I, but Luke 2.23. saith that He was presented according to the Law. Every male child, that first openeth the womb, shall be holy to the Lord, which may seem to belong so properly to Christ the holy One of God, as to none other. Answ. I question not the birth, but the manner only. And seeing it could not be but miraculous, all confessing that it was not painful: I say that to Him who only hath the power of miracles, all things are easy alike. And although the blessed Virgin at her Churching brought her offering commanded by the Law, to show her thankfulness and obedience; yet doth it not follow thereupon that she was no virgin, as other women are or needed any purification for that birth, or that her Son was either borne or begotten as other children. But the virginity of the mother of God is impugned, not only by these Ebionites, but also by them that were called Antidicomarianitae, or Antimaritae, that is, opposites to the Virgin Mary, of whom one Helvidius an unlettered fellow, sometime a scholar of the Arians, was said to be chief, about the year 389. Now his opinion was, That after Christ was borne, Object. 1 His mother had other children by her husband joseph: And that because it is said, Matth. 1.25. That joseph knew her not tell she had brought forth, from whence he would conclude that after that, he knew her. Though in the sense of Helvidius this be unlikely, joseph being fourscore years old when he took her to wife, as Epiphanius writes haeres. 28. and that she knowing how she had conceived, vowed perpetual virginity, her husband consenting thereto, See Numb. 30.7. yet the argument is only from the doubtful signification of the word Knew, which in this place hath reference unto the 18, and 19 verses, where joseph suspecting her honesty, thought to put her away; but not daring to do that, being forbidden by the Angel, he took her, but yet knew not, that is, was not yet fully persuaded by his dream that she was with child by the Holy-Ghost. But when she had brought forth her Son; then, By her miraculous deliverance, By the miracle toward the Shepherds, By the prophecy of Simeon and Anna, By the coming of the Magicians from the East-country, By the admonition of the Angel to flee into Egypt, and the slaughter of the Innocents' that followed thereon, he knew her to have been with child by the Holy-Ghost, and so to be His mother that was the Saviour of the world. Others had rather answer from the meaning of the word till, unto or until, which with a negative, in the time to come, may signify as much as never, as it is said of Michal 2. Sam. 6.23. That she had no child till the day of her death; As on the other side, with an affirmative, it may signify ever, as Matt. 28.20. I am with you always unto, or until the end of the world; not that he than forsakes them; for whom He loves, he loves unto the end, that is eternally. Moreover, it is there said, that she brought forth her first begotten Son, Object. 2 whence Helvidius concluded that she had another Son afterward. But Christ is not called the first begotten of his mother, because she had other children after Him, but because she had none before him. So first begotten in this place, is as much, as only begotten. For as he was the only begotten of his father according to His divine nature, because he was the perfect Son of a perfect Father; So wa sit fit that He should also be the only Son of His mother, because as He had in Himself all the perfection of Sonship; So by His birth had He given to His mother the perfection of mother-hood above all women 3. But in Matth. 12.46. and sundry other places, His brethren are mentioned. Object. 3 I answer; The name of Brother belonged indifferently to all the men of the same family or kindred, as Abram spoke to Lot, Gen. 13.8. We are brethren, as the Sychemites acknowledged Abimelech their Brother, judg. 9.3. So all the Israelites call Benjamin, and by a Synecdoche, his tribe their Brother, judg. 20.23, though he had been dead above 400. years. Therefore against Helvidius, beside these conjectures, either of Mary's vowed virginity, or that old age of her husband: or those probabilities which sanctified minds more than probable; That the Virgin herself had been most unthankful, if she had not been content with that glorious Son, for whose sake the holy women before her desired to be mothers: and if she should wilfully have stained that virginity which she knew to have been so miraculously preserved unto her: And joseph likewise having received the gift of continence, had been too presumptuous, if he had not forborn that sanctified body, whom by the message of the Angel, and so many miracles he knew to have conceived by the Holy-Ghost. Let us look to that which is the main purpose and intent of the Scripture, that in the setting up of that Kingdom which should be established unto David for ever, 2. Sam. 7. from vers. 12. to 17. Dan. 2.35.44. And although this Kingdom was to be a spiritual Kingdom of Grace and Glory, joh. 8.36. yet that is not first which is spiritual, but natural; So that our Lord JESUS, according to the right of natural descent by His mother, See Luke 3.5. ver. 24, etc. and of legal right by His father joseph, See Matth. 1. was the true and lawful King of the jews, as he is confessed by the Mags from the East, Matth. 2. proclaimed by Pilate, john 19.15, 19 and professed by Himself, john 18.37. and that not by any reserved and doubtful meaning, but by a plain and direct answer, according to the question of Pilate, Art thou the King of the jews? For, for this cause was he borne, that He might bear witness to the truth. He therefore being both lawful and natural King of the jews, according to His descent from David, and that by an unquestionable right of descent, as the succession of that Kingdom had stood from David to jehojakim above 400. years, and after the captivity, from Zorobabel to janna Hircanus almost 300. years, and that by the covenant of God Himself to David, which was to be established in Christ for ever; it must follow of necessity, that joseph had no children by Mary his wife, as Helvidius barked. For so the right of that title to the Kingdom of David, should have been to that heir who had the right by natural descent from both parents, rather than to him which had right only by His mother and adopted father. Neither had this which I plead, been good only for josephs' sons, but also for his daughters (if he had had any by Mary his wife) as it appears in the case of the daughters of Zelophehad, Numb. 26.7, 8. Wherefore seeing it cannot be supposed but that the holy Virgin, blessed above other women, and freely beloved, should not have been denied the blessing of children, if she had desired any after her Son JESUS, it will follow of necessity, that for the eternity of David's kingdom, to which our Lord had the only right, not by intrusion, or dissannulling of a better title, I mean in civil right; He was that stone cut out without hands, that shall fill the whole earth, and that the blessed body of his mother, according to that vision of Ezechiel 44. was that East-gate, or ordinary way of entrance into mankind in which the Prince did sit to grow before the Lord, as he that ears bread; even until the time of His birth when He should go out thence perfect man. And because the Lord God of Israel had entered in by that gate, Therefore shoulod it be shut that no man might enter in by it, but that the holy Virgin should continue a virgin as in the conception, and birth; so for ever after a virgin. For neither had the outward Sanctuary of the Tabernacle, nor of the Temples afterward, any such secluded gate, but that both Priests and People did go in and out thereat, to do their daily service. So then that mystical Temple of Ezechiel, must needs intent the Temple of the Virgin's body, by which God Himself entered into our Tabernacle, and came forth God-Man, blessed for ever, Amen. ARTICLE FOUR ❧ 1. Suffered under Pontius Pilate: was 2. Crucified. 3. Dead. and 4. Buried. CHAP. XXVII. WHat the infinity of that glory was of which the Son of God did empty Himself, when He clouded it under the form of a servant, all the Angels in heaven cannot comprehend. Yet such was the infinite love of God to man, as that for our sakes (a) He was pleased to be borne man, that (b) by His partaking of our sufferings, He might become a faithful high Priest for us unto God, that we might be made partakers of His glory. For a friend loveth at all times, and a Brother is borne for adversity, Proverbes 17.17. His friends we are, if we do whatsoever He hath commanded us, john 15.14. neither is He ashamed to call us brethren, when He saith, Psal. 22.22. I will declare thy Name to my Brethren, In the midst of the Church will I praise thee. Hebr. 2.12. Now what these sufferings were, it is in part manifest by the Prophets, and by the Evangelists Such was His poverty, as that He was borne in a stable among the beasts; A manger was His Cradle. In His infancy, He was persecuted by that cruel King, that sought His life, and compelled Him to seek His safety by banishment in a foreign land. The poor Trade of a Carpenter was His means of maintenance, that had made all the world. Subject He was to our infirmities, of Hunger, Thirst, Heat and Cold, Weariness and Grief, both of mind and Body, neither had He less afflictions, though He were free from sickness. But when the time came that He should show Himself to be that Redeemer, that was to come, than was He most busily tempted by the devil, railed on, and reviled by His ministers, that praised themselves therefore: Say we not well, that thou art a samaritan, and hast a devil? then was he loaden with injury and scorn, His life was sought by treason, and at last betrayed by His own. Scholar. But how great was the anguish of His mind, how great was His affrighting at the sight of that death, whereby He must fight against the fierce wrath of God inflamed against Him, that had set Himself the surety, to pay for the sins of the whole world? Arise, o Sword! against my Shepherd, against the man that is my fellow friend, saith the Lord of hosts, I will smites the Shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered. Zach. 13.7. What was that anguish of His mind, that forced Him thrice to pray with strong crying and tears, and to sweat like drops of blood running down to the earth, That that bitter Cup might pass away? verily the sorrows of hell compassed Him about, and the snares of death were before Him. Psal. 18.5. Yea, so were the sorrows of His heart enlarged, as a man that sought for comfort and could find none. He prays, and comes to His Disciples, to seek some ease by their mutual speech, but they are fast asleep, and there finds He none. Thus while the Godhead doth rest toward Him. Psal. 22.1. And according to the law of justice leaves him in His pure humanity, to bear the burden of our sin alone, while all the waves and storms of God's wrath pass over Him; while the dogs of hell, with their several temptations, compass him about; while the horrible curse of the Law ever sounds in His ear, Cursed is every one that confirmeth not all the words of this Law to do them. Deut. 27.26. which curse, He that had become our surety, Psal. 40.7. Hebr. 7.22. must bear for every one; What marvel was it if He prayed, that His soul thus left alone, might be delivered from the power of the dog, that He might be saved from the Lion's mouth, being thus beset with the horns of the Unicorns? Read Psal. 22. and 69. But yet remembering that for our cause He came into this hour, that He might fulfil the will of His Father, Hebr. 10.5. and that by that one offering of Himself, He should bring many sons unto Glory; therefore, as the valiant Captain of their salvation, did He willingly and courageously offer Himself to the hands of them that sought His life, having first commanded a safe conduct for His Disciples. john 18. from 3. to 10. Then what scorn and reproaches, and speaking against of sinners He endured before the high Priests, the holy Prophets and Evangelists have recorded. I gave my Back to the smiters, and my Cheek to them that plucked off the hair, I hide not my Face from shame and spitting, Esay 50.6. He giveth His Cheek to him that smiteth Him, He is filled with reproach, Lament. 3.10. See further in Micah 5.1. Matth. 26.6, 7, 8. Mark 14.65. Luke 22.63, 64. john 18.22. But because the Article of our Creed mentions only His sufferings under Pontius Pilate, under which all these by a Synecdoche, are comprehended; let us look unto them in particular, for therein was the accomplishment of our Redemption. But first, it may be here demanded, why mention is made of Pontius Pilate, as if the truth of God, and his most glorious work in the creature, that is, the redemption of man by the death of His Son, should any way need or admit of humane testimony. I answer, that as the Spirit of God in the Evangelists, vouchsafes to apply the history of the Gospel, to the times of Tiberius, of Pontius Pilate his proconful, of Herod, of Philip, etc. Luke 3.1, 2. so likewise this short abridgement of the Gospel, our Creed, doth not neglect them. For seeing the suffering of Christ was for the benefit of mankind, it is necessary that we should be made so sure and certain of the truth thereof, that howsoever that truth were tried by divine, or by humane authority, of reason, or history, it might most clearly and plainly appear. And therefore is this truth of Christ witnessed, not only by the Prophets, and Evangelists, as you read before, Chap. 24. Reason 10. and by the Ecclesiastical Histories; but even the profane writers, yea, the persecutors and enemies of this truth, are not silent herein. Pilate himself might be a witness of those things which he had heard and seen concerning the miracles, the death, and resurrection of Christ, whereof he writ unto Tiberius the Emperor. And although it seemed not fit to the Wisdom of God, that that glorious truth concerning his Son, which He himself had testified from heaven, and had confirmed by so many miracles and gifts of the Holy-Ghost, should afterward receive authority from the Senate of Rome, that Senate, by whose authority so many thousands of false gods were worshipped, See Aug. de civ. D. lib. 3. cap. 12. yet even to that Senate, the truth of his Deity by that testimony of him that had heard and seen, was clearly manifest, See Tertul. Apolog. cap. 5. Euseb. Eccl. hist. lib. 2. cap. 2. And although Lucian, and Porphyry, and Celsus, and such dogs barked against the holy Religion of Christ; yet even therein they testified, that Christ did establish a faith and Religion among His faithful followers. Plini. Epist. lib. 10. Epist. 97. and Tacitus Annal. lib. 15. though they no Christians, for the first was a cruel persecuter of them, yet have they testified so much, and have always been held faithful in their writings: And so may josephus, though he make it questionable, whether Christ were only a man, Antiq. lib. 18. Cap. 4. This therefore being without doubt, that our Lord did suffer under Pontius Pilate, it may be further asked, why He being a jew should be condemned to die by the authority and power of the Romans? For this there be two reasons principal, and chief: For the understanding of which, you need to remember that there have been four principal Monarchies in the earth; the first of the Assyrians and Babylonians, which took the beginning from Nimrod, of whom you read, Gen. 10.8, 9, 10. and was after increased by Ninus, Semiramis, Salmanasar, Bellochus, and others, but most of all by Nabuchadnezar. This Monarchy, after it had flourished about seventeen hundred years, was overthrown by Darius the Median, and his nephew Cyrus' King of Persia; who were the founders of the second Monarchy, which continued not much above 130. years, and was then broken by Alexander, who in battle overthrew the last King Codoman. This Alexander began the third Monarchy of the Grecians, which after him was divided among his Captains, of which four were chief, See Dan. Cap. 8. of these four Kingdoms, Egypt, Syria, Greece, and Asia; Asia continued but two descents of 23. years; the other three one after another, were subdued by the Romans, who made the fourth Monarchy. Syria, and by and by judea was subdued by Pompey, and made a Province of the Romans, about 60. years before the birth of Christ. This Syria is a Country wide and large. Palestina inhabited by the twelve Tribes, a small part thereof. See Ptolom. Geogr. lib. 5. cap. 14. and Asiae tab.. 4. This Country in the time of Christ, was divided into three parts, or shires, judea toward the South, Galilee to the North, and Samaria between them. john, 4. v. 3, 4. These Samaritans were stranger's in the land, sent thither only to till the ground, after Salmanassar had carried away the ten Tribes in the days of Hoshea, 2. King. 18. from the 9 to the 13. verse, judea and Galilee were possessed by the jews, after their return from Babylon. But after they were subdued by the Romans, they were compelled t accept of such government, as they appointed. These Romans, for the good services and deserts of Antipater Prince of the Idumeans, and of Herod his son after him, gave the Kingdom over the jews, to that Herod surnamed the great, who held it 37. years. Augustus beside the gift of the Senate, enlarged the Kingdom of Herod, with the Countries of Batanea, Trachonitis, Abylene, and others. But the jews knowing the time of Messiah to be at hand, whose Kingdom they thought should be of this World, most obstinately refused the government of Herod a stranger: And though he sought the establishment of a just government over them, and did many things to their content; yet when he saw that by no fair means he could win them to accept his government, he filled all places with cruelty and blood, till in the 31. year of his Reign, they were compelled to acknowledge obedience to him as their King; and to his posterity after him. So when the Sceptre was utterly departed from juda, even by their own consent; then according to the prophecy of jacob, in the 32. of Herod, was the Angel sent to the holy Virgin, when the jews had thus been taught to know, that the true Messiah was to bring a greater deliverance, not to them only, but to all mankind, than any could be from an earthly bondage. So in the beginning of the 33. year of Herod's reign, was jesus borne. After six years lawful reign, Herod died miserably: After whom, his Kingdom by Augustus was divided to his four sons, of their number called Tetrarches: so that Archelaus had Idumea, judea, and Samaria; Herod called Antipas had Galilee; Philip had Iturea, and Trachonitis: And Lysanias had Abylene. But Archelaus for his wicked government being by Augustuss thrust from his dignity, and banished in Gallia, Roman Precedents, Coponius, Ambivius, and Rufus, were sent thither to order that Tetrarchy, each two years under Augustus. Then by the appointment of Tiberius, the succeeding Emperor, Valerius Gracus held that government 11. years, and after him Pontius Pilate; the other sons of Herod still holding their dignity, as you read, Luke 3.1. Now to the arguments. Such was the mercy of God to man, that although the Gospel which was preached in Paradise ought to have been that chief thing which man should remember; yet because his way was corrupted, and he become abominable by his cruelty in the earth, his whole race, except eight persons, were swept away by the flood. This great judgement might have taught all posterities to know what that was which God required of men, and to desire the fulfilling of that promise of Him that was to come. But this being neglected of all men, except some few among the least of all nations, which God had chosen for his people, and they now in captivity in Babylon; God did again call upon the World, to turn unto Him, because His Kingdom is an everlasting Kingdom, and deliverance and salvation is by him alone. Read Dan. Chap. 2. v. 44. and Chap. 3. v. 29. and the King's Proclamation at large, in the 4. Chapter. Not long after, the World was summoned again by the like Preaching, and Proclamation of Darius in the second Monarchy of the Medes. Dan. 6.25. and later histories testify abundantly, how Alexander marching with fury against jerusalem, at the sight of jaddua the Highpriest (as Paul before Danascus) of an Enemy, became a Convert, adored the Priest, sacrificed, and offered gifts unto the true God. His successors son in Egypt Philadelphus, had the old Testament translated into Greek, and not long after, jonathan Ben Vziel, translated it in Chalde, that all the world might be prepared to receive that Saviour, that was shortly after to be manifested, in that time when the greatest and most powerful Empire did flourish most, that is, in the days of Augustus, and his Successor Tiberius. The argument in brief is this. 1. That seeing the satisfaction for the sin of man was to be made by the death of Christ, believed on in the world: it was necessary, that as in every age, and Empire of the world, He had been preached; So He should die by the power of the greatest Empire then in the world, that all the world might take knowledge thereof. Therefore in the greatest and most solemn feast of the Passeover, whither the jews and Proselytes from all countries' resorted (for He was first to be preached to them; Luke 24.47) and by the deputy of the greatest Emperor, was this thing done and after published in that Senate, which ruled all; that as the salvation was wrought for all, so all might know it. For by this means the preaching of His Apostles and Ministers afterward was more easily believed, that He was the Saviour of the world, whom after so much good done, and so great miracles showed by Him, they did unjustly cause to die, when they found no cause of death in Him. 2 The second argument is this. The holy Scripture is the declaration of the will of God: Therefore it is necessary, that as all the will of God; so the holy Scriptures also be fulfilled. Among these, that of Gen. 49.10. is directly to this purpose, The Sceptre shall not departed from judah, etc. till Shiloh come. This Shiloh all the best Interpreters, both jews and Christians agree, to be Christ the King; from whence it follows necessarily, that when Christ came, the Sceptre or authority had departed; And therefore that the Messiah being to be slain, the execution of that death must be by that foreign authority that ruled over them. And this the jews themselves professed, john 18.31. It is not lawful for us to put any man to death; you may put hereto, Esay. 7.16. with those texts cited in the 24. Chapter, Reason 10. But you may object, that in the captivity, that Sceptre was utterly broken; yea so, that after their return they had no Governors, but by the appointment of the Kings of Persia, as it is manifest by the Books of Ezra, and Nehemiah, especially Chapter 9 vers. 36.37. I answer. That as the jews in that captivity, knew the time of their return by the Prophet, jere. 29.10. so they ever held the hope of their liberty from that subjection; and therefore after Alexander, defended it against his successors in Syria, and Egypt; especially when they had the favour and countenance of the Romans, See 1. of March. Chap. 15. verse 16. and Iust. Hist. lib. 36. But in their subjection to Herod, they gave the government of themselves and their posterity unto him and his. And although Archelaus his son, for hismis-government lost it, yet it returned to the Romans, of whom he received it; and therefore in this case between Christ, and Caesar; they utterly disclaim Christ for their King, and profess, they have no King but Caesar, john 19.5. So than it being clear, that our Lord was to suffer under the Lieutenant of the Romans, which at that time was Pontius Pilate, let us see what He suffered under him. It is not likely that a Prophet having been condemned by the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and suffering most unjustly, such reproaches as you heard before, should be better entreated before a civil Magistrate. Yet Pilate hath more patience to examine the cause. What accusation bring ye against him? The points of His accusation were three. First, He is a malefactor. How prove you that? If He were not so, we would not have delivered Him unto thee: john 18.30. A very substantial proof, we malicious liars say so, therefore it is so. The second point, He is a blasphemer, for He said, I am the Son of God. john 19.7. He said true, and proved it. Mark. 2. verse 7. and 10. and john 10. verse 35, 36, 37, 38. Thirdly, Treason! He makes Himself a King: He speaks against Caesar— calcemus Caesaris hostem. john 19.12. But He explained Himself, That His Kingdom was not of this world. john 18.36. And by the rule of your own teachers, All they shall be cut off that watch for iniquity, That make a man an offendor for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth openly. Esay 29.20, 21. So that for these crimes falsely objected, He was three times pronounced, Not guilty. I find no fault at all in Him. john 18.38. and 19.4. and 6. No, nor yet Herod. Luke 23.15. and therefore, I will be free of the blood of this just man, and washed his hands. Matth. 27.24. And was He innocent and just? most and wicked judge! aught not a judge aswell to defend and deliver the innocent, as to punish the wicked? If He be innocent, Why dost thou, most unrighteous judge, betray the innocent to the power of His accusers? Take ye Him, and judge Him after your own Law. john 18.31. If He be innocent, Why dost thou torture Him with scourges and thorns, and the mockery of a purple robe? john 19.1, 2, etc. Why dost thou deliver Him to the will of His enemies? Luke 23.35. Thus the wicked play in the credit and welfare of the righteous, and account it no sin, if they can have any pretext to say they are innocent. Thus our Lord was denied His right to His Kingdom, Luke 19.14. betrayed by His rebellious Subjects: His life was set at nought, to save a murderer, unjustly accused; stripped of His clothing; And beside all this of loss which He endured; He suffered all that pain and punishment which they could bring upon Him. As first, His base and scornful apprehension, as of a thief in the night. 2. His being hurried from place to place, from judge to judge. 3. The most unjust sentences of Blasphemy, of Treason, of Death. 4. His Buffeting, Mocking, Whipping, Crowning, with all kind of contempt and scorn: and 5. That by a most unjust judge, who still professed Him innocent, He was betrayed to the will of His adversaries to be Crucified. 6. And yet, because nothing could glut the gorges of those bloody Priests, in the agonyes of death, behold a fresh onset of Scorn and Reviling. Matth. 27, 41. 7. Neither will the abjects be left out, with their Gall and Vinegar. 8. No, nor yet the thiefs in the same condemnation with their upbraid. O man of sorrows, and contradiction! Behold and see, all you that pass by, if there were ever any sorrow like unto that which was done unto Him, wherewith the Lord afflicted Him in the day of His fierce anger. Yet were all these things but small afflictions, in comparison of this; that God had withdrawn the light of His comforts from Him. For this cause alone were His roar poured out. My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Yet may it not be thought but that He was still one with the Person of the Godhead; and that not only in His agony on the Cross, but in death also; when His soul was parted from the body; So that although there was a dissolution in nature, of the Soul and the Body; yet the unity of the Manhood with the Godhead, was still saved in the Person of the Godhead. See Acts 2.27. But although this act of Pilate in himself was most unjust: yet in God the Father; whose Person Pilate, in that judgement did represent, the act was most righteous and just. That Pilate in his judgement represented God the Father, it is manifest not only by this, That all power is of God; Rom. 13.1. but even in this very case, by that which our Saviour answered unto Pilate: Thou couldst have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above. john 19.11. In this act therefore of Pilate, God did summon and judge the whole world to answer for their sins: And because every mouth was stopped, and the whole world was found subject to the judgement and wrath of God, for their sin; therefore was it necessary, that the condemnation and punishment should fall on Him to the full, that had set Himself to answer for us, lest no flesh should be saved. So through His sufferings, as we were condemned in Him, by Him are we also saved. But it comes now to be enquired, Why our Saviour should be condemned to a death, so infamous, as to be 2 Crucified. THere were four kinds of death appointed for Malefactors by the Law of God; Stoning, Burning, the Sword, Hanging by the neck. The particular offences you may find gathered from the Hebrew Doctors by Henry Ainsw: on Exod. 21.12. And although Hanging, amongst all those, was accounted the most easy death, yet on that kind of death was the curse pronounced, as you see, Deut. 21.22. But if they that committed the least sins, and therefore suffered the most easy death, were accursed, as the adulterer, etc. how much more they which sinned in higher degrees and were judged worthy of greater punishment? This kind of death, by nailing to a Cross, more cruel than any appointed by the Law of God, was in common use among the Romans, after their first Kings, especially for their slaves. See M. T. Cic: orat pro Rab: perduell: and Lips: de Cruse. lib. 1. cap. 12. over whom every Lord had power, and used to crucify them for theft, and especially for running away. After, it grew in use for the base sort of malefactors though freemen, as thiefs and such like, and for their provincials. And when the lawless power of the Emperors had made all slaves, than they that called themselves Freemen and Citizens of Rome, were also crucified at the will of the Emperors, as you may see Lips: de Cruse. lib. cap. 15. et lib. 2. c. p. 7. But although this kind of nailing on the tree by which our Lord did die, was not in use among the jews, as Lip. de Cruse. lib. 1. cap. 11. supposes; unduly confounding the staking, strangling on a Gibbet, or bough, and nailing on a Cross; yet by the interpretation of S. Paul Gal. 3 13. did the curse directly belong to this suffering of Christ, wherein He was made a Curse for us. Now among those reasons, why our Saviour should die by this most vile and infamous death of the Cross; The first shall be even from thence, because it was most base and shameful. For seeing mankind by his sin, had forsaken God his just and lawful Lord, and made himself a slave to the Devil; what manner of death, but the most vile and shameful could He be judged worthy of, that had so falsely and basely transgressed? And therefore was it necessary, that He who had made Himself man's surety, and put Himself in his stead, to bear his punishment, should also die by the most infamous death of the Cross, the punishment of slaves that had run away from their Lords. 2. It is fit and necessary that the Son of God should be exalted to the highest degree of glory. The greatest glory is not due but to the greatest humility. The lowest degree of humility that can be, is to be subject to the most shameful death. Therefore that our Lord the Son of God might be exalted to the highest degree of glory, it was necessary that He should first be abased to the death of the Cross. Neither is this an argument of amplification but founded in the rules of the infinite justice, and therefore urged by Saint Paul. Philip. 2. verse 8, 9, 10. He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross. Therefore God hath exalted Him, and given Him the Name which is above every Name, that every tongue should confess that Christ is jehova. 3. And seeing He suffered under the power of the Romans, it was necessary that He should die by that manner of death which was most usual with the Romans, which for their servants and provincials, was the Cross. And although it seemed unto Pilate himself an unworthy death for Him, Shall I crucify your King? Yet nothing could content His enemies, but Crucify Him, Crucify Him. And because our Lord had no such privilege to plead for Himself, that He was a free man of Rome, as Saint Paul did. Act. 16.37. & 22.25, 29. & 25.11. and so lost his head by the sword: Therefore He must needs endure that bitter, and accursed death of the Cross. 4. The tree through the craft of the devil was unto mankind a cause of sin. Therefore lest the tree which was created good, might become a curse to him for whom it was created, and thereby the end of the creation might be perverted, it seemed fit to the Wisdom of God, that as the tree had been an instrument in the work of man's condemnation, it should also be an instrument in the work of his redemption, that man by his wound might also be healed. And therefore that our ransom should be paid on the Cross. 5. Man by his sin had made himself subject to the curse of the Law. Therefore that the promise to Abraham, That in his seed all the Nations of the earth should be blessed, Gen. 12.3. might come upon them, it was necessary that the curse should fall upon that promised seed, in whom they were to be blessed, as Saint Paul doth argue, Gal. 3.13. and 14. 6. This crucifying of our Lord was prefigured diversly in the Law, as by the Serpent in the Wilderness; if you compare Numb. 21.8. with john 3.14. Moses also spreading out his hands in the form of the Cross, overcame Amalec by his prayer, Exod. 17.11. But above all other figures: that glorious Type of Christ, Samson, who should begin to save Israel, jud 14.5. most lively figured our Saviour on the Cross, when he laid his hands upon the Pillars, and slew more at his death, than he had done in all his life, jud. 16.30. So our Lord, the Author and Finisher of our Salvation, though by His Preaching and His miracles He had shaken the Kingdom of the Devil, yet by His death upon the Cross He did triumph over all the power of hell, Col. 2.15. David, Psal. 22.16. prophecies plainly of the wounds wherewith He was pierced in His hands, and His feet, when He was nailed to the Cross, as the Prophet Zechary, Chap. 12.10. of that wound which through His side they made in His heart. I (the Lord) will pour upon the Inhabitants of jerusalem the Spirit of Grace, and supplication, and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced. And thus according to the Prophecies that were before, was our Saviour crucified, as you read in the Gospel. 3. Dead. We see JESUS made a little lower than the Angels for the suffering of death, that He by the Grace of God should taste of death for every man. Heb. 2.9. All the reasons for His crucifying confirm thus much. And for this cause was He conceived and borne, that He might redeem His people from their sins. The arguments also of the 19 Chapter, of the 21.22. and 23. come all to this centre; that Christ our Lord, and only Redeemer, must die for our sin. 1. For seeing man by his sin had made himself subject unto death, according to the just sentence, Gen. 2.17. In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die; it was necessary, that He that had made Himself our surety, Heb. 7.22. and taken our sin upon him, Esay. 52. should die for our sin. 2. It was necessary that the highest degree of obedience, should be in him, in whom was also the perfection of Sonship. But all the perfection of Sonship was in Christ, both that which is Eternal, and that which is in time, as hath appeared. Therefore also the perfection of obedience. But there can be no degree of obedience beyond this, that a son should die at the will of his father. Therefore it was necessary, that our Lord should die. For God so loved the world, that He gave his only begotten Son to die: that the world by him might be saved. But because it was impossible that He in his Eternal being should be subject to death, therefore was it necessary that He should be incarnate, that He should be conceived of the Holy-Ghost, and be borne of a Virgin, as it hath been proved. 3. If Isaac the shadow, were content to die at the will of His Father, how much more ought Christ the substance, to fulfil the will of His Father? 4. The manifestation of the infinite dignities of God the Father, is the proper and peculiar office of the Son, See john 17.6. and 26. And how could either the infinite justice, or Mercy, or Love of God the Father toward His creature; or His honour in the creature be better manifested, than in the death of that Son? For although it were fare from Injustice to punish the innocent for the wicked, when He had set Himself to answer for the sins of the world; yet was it the uttermost, the most severe and eminent justice that possible could be, to lay upon Him, in whom there was no sin, neither was there any guile found in His mouth, the burden of us all; to break him for our sins; to multiply His sorrows; and at once to deprive Him of all the comforts of God, and life itself for our offences. Neither could the Mercy or love of God toward His creature be greater than this, that when we were enemies, yet spared He not His own Son, to work our reconciliation. Neither can the honour of God be more magnified by the creature, than for that mercy and love, which he hath showed toward the creature, in the Eternal Glory, and happiness which He hath reserved for it, through the satisfaction of his Son. And because these things could not possibly be brought to pass otherways than by the death of the Son of God, therefore was it necessary that He should die. 5. Of contrary effects, the immediate causes must needs be contrary: The greatest delight and joy which the natural man hath, is to follow his sinful lusts. Therefore the recovery, or restoring of man from his sinful state, cannot be but by the suffering of the greatest sorrow, that is, of death. 6. The obedience and sufferings of Him who was to make satisfaction for the disobedience and rebellion of all mankind, could not possibly be either exceeded or equalled. But if our Lord had not died a most bitter and cruel death, in those torments which He endured, both in his soul and body, than had His sufferings been equalled, if not exceeded, by many of the holy Martyrs: who for their love and faith in God, endured most bitter and exquisite torments, Heb. 11.35. etc. and that with joy unspeakable, and glorious. Therefore it was necessary, that our Saviour should die a most cruel death, and bitter, both in the sufferings of His soul, and body. 7. The greatest exaltation or glory that could come unto the creature, was in this, that it should become one Person with the Creator, which we have proved before to have been done in the incarnation. For the greatest glory and grace done to the creature, the greatest love, and humility is due to the Creator. But our Lord, who was so exalted, had not been humbled to the lowest degree of humility, if He had not died a most shameful death. Therefore it was expedient that He should so die. 8. Full and perfect obedience, is due from mankind, unto the Creator, and especially from that Man of men, their Prince and Captain, who ought to be an example unto them, of all those virtues whereby they ought to glorify His Father. Therefore that faithful men might willingly die for the love and service of God, it was necessary that our Lord should give the example, See 1. Peter 2.21. 4. and Buried. 1. IT is said that death is the uttermost or last of evils. And that we might by all arguments be assured of His death, by whose suffering of death, we are ransomed from the power of death; it was necessary that after His death, our Lord should be buried: Seeing that by His burial we are assured, not only that He was truly dead; but also, that during the time of His burial, He was held under the power of death. 2. The greatest triumph cannot be ascribed but to the greatest victory manifest and known. The greatest victory is over the greatest enemy, Death, and him that had the power of death, the Devil. And that Christ might be acknowledged to have risen again, and so to have triumphed over death, it was necessary that after His death, He should be buried: Seeing many persons in Apoplexies, Plagues, Singer in his drunkenness; so after hanging, drowning, falls, and other both inward sicknesses and outward violences have been supposed to have been dead, which yet have returned to life again. But after burial for so long time, no man ever returned to life, but by a power that was divine. Therefore that our Lord might truly be acknowledged to have risen from the dead, and so to have triumphed over Death, it was necessary first that He should be buried. 3. That blessed Spirit which knew from the beginning what should come to pass at the last, who foresaw the malice of the Priests and Scribes, and knew their hardness of heart to believe all that was spoken by the Prophets, that the resurrection of Christ might be most manifest, beforehand decreed and spoke, Esay 53.9. That He should make His grave with the rich in His death. Therefore was He not only buried in fine linen, and perfumes of joseph our Apostle, and Nicodemus; but also by the plot of the High-Priests was He made sure in His grave; the great stone which shut it up being firmly fastened in the Rock, See Lamentations 3. verse 9.53. into which the Grave was hewed, with (c) cramps of Iron sodered into Both, and surely guarded with a strong watch, that both His Death, His Burial, and His Resurrection, might be witnessed even by His very enemies Matth. 28.11. Notes. (a) 1. He was pleased to be borne man.] The errors of Simon, Valentin, and Apelles, which you had before Note (a) on the 26. Chapter, though directly they oppose the truth of the former article, yet have I referred the refutation of them to this place, because they also take away the merit of Christ's passion from us, wherein alone our hope consists. But seeing that Simon in his Heresy sided with the jews, against whom I have disputed in the 24. Chapter: and besides them, had not many followers, though after him it were recalled from hell by one Proclus an obscure fellow, Aug. heres. cap. 60. Seeing no reasons are, or can be brought, either by Simon or by the jews, to prove the assertion, the only authority of S. john is able utterly to strangle this whelp: See then Chap. 1.4. The Word was made flesh: And 1. Ep. Chap. 1. That which was from the beginning, which we have heard and seen, and lookedon, and our hands have handled, etc. And again, Chap. 4. Every spirit that confesseth that jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God. 2. The doctrine of Valentin is refuted at large by Irenaus, lib. 3. cap. 11. & 32. And that by the manifest authority of S. Paul, Gal. 4.4. where it is said, That Christ was made of a woman. So also by Tertullian, in his Book De carne Christi. The Evangelists Matthew and Luke describe His humane generation: Besides His manly Passions approve Him to have had the true holy of a man, as to be Hungry, Thirsty, Weary, to Sweat, to Weep, etc. Moreover, if He had not suffered in the true and very Body of man, His suffering for us had been of none effect, for the ransom of our bodies. Their Arguments you may see more at large in the Books cited. But Epiphanius; Haer. 1. lays not this Heresy to the charge of Valentin, as the Author's forenamed; And S. Aug. haer. oap. 12. but rather puts it to Martion, Haer. 42. who taught that the Incarnation of Christ was not in deed, but only in show; whom he refutes only by those Scriptures which Martion allowed of; as the Gospel of S. Luke, which Martion received (except that which concerns the Genealogy of Christ) and certain Epistles of Saint Paul: For all the Old Testament and the rest of the New lie rejected. But in these Scriptures Christ calleth Himself the Son of man. He was thronged by the multitude, He lift up His eyes, He prayed on His knees, His feet were anointed, He slept on the sea. He is made of the seed of David according to the flesh, Rom. 1.3. So that if, David had a true manly body, than also the body of Christ was a true manly body. He gave up the ghost: His lifeless body was taken from the Cross, wrapped in Linen, and Buried. After His Resurrection also He said, Handle me, and see me; for a Spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have, Luke 24.39. And these Texts out of those Scriptures only are sufficient to reproove the falsehood of these Heretics. And for full satisfaction herein, you may take the interpretation of Tho. Aqu. cont. gent. l. 4. c. 30. to those Texts of Scripture whence Valentin might seem to have taken occasion or his Heresy. First it is said john 3.13. No man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, the Son of man which is in heaven. Answer. This coming down from heaven cannot be meant of His body, or of His soul, because of that which follows, The Son of man which is in heaven; for it is proper only to the Godhead to fill both heaven and earth. jer. 23.24. Therefore as God is said to have come down from heaven, not properly, but in respect of His dwelling in the Manhood; So is the Son of man also said to be in heaven, not properly, but in respect of the unity of His humanity with the Godhead. According to this sense He said also, john 6.38. I came down from heaven to do the will of Him that sent me, as you read before. Note (g) §. 10. ob. 9 on Chap. 24. Another Text which may seem to make for Valentin is 1. Cor. 15.47. The first man is of the earth, earthly: the second man is the Lord from heaven: Yet this proves not that the body of Christ was not taken from His mother, but rather that as we are stained with original sin by Adam; so are we washed and cleansed by the blood of Christ, for so it follows, Verse 49. As we have borne the image of the earthly; we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. And although it be said, The second man is the Lord from heaven, yet proves it not that He brought His body from heaven: but rather because we understand nothing of heavenly things, but by bodily likenesses: therefore is He called, the man from heaven, to signify that new manner of being which God had with us in our nature, and to assure us that He our Redeemer is our eternal God, able to save us; and man with us, that doth pity our miseries. 3. The Heresies of Apelles are refuted by Epiphanius, Haer. 44. briefly, and plainly: but this which concerns the body of our Lord more fully by Tertullian, in his Book De carne Christi. You shall have what I held fit to gather from both, or to add thereto. The arguments of Apelles are in part all one with those of Valentin already answered; The rest are these that follow. 1. If the Angels appeared in flesh not taken from mankind, much more might Christ. But the first is true; therefore the later. Answer. The consequence in the Proposition is not good: For the Angels came not to die, therefore not to be borne, as our Lord Hinselfe appeared to Abraham not borne of a woman, because the time appointed that He should die was not yet. But when the fullness of the time was come, that He by His death should take away the sins of the world, than God sent His Son made of a woman. Besides this, they are beside the question. For to prove their Pofition, that Christ took His body of the Stars and Elements, they ought to prove that the Angels also took such bodies. But that they cannot prove. For if the Angels made themselves that which by nature they were not, why might they not do it by that which was not? 2. It is said, Matth. 12.48. Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? If then Christ had no mother or brethren but in that spiritual kindred of them which kept the word of God, He had no body taken of the Virgin. Answer. No man would have told Him that His mother stood without, which did not know that snee was His mother. Therefore the circumstances and time of His speech must be observed. He was now in the business of God His Father, for whom all earthly parents must be denied, as He also answered, Luke 2.49. 3. But the flesh of sinful man was an unfit and unworthy dwelling for Him that came to destroy the works of the devil. Answer. As sin, the work of the devil, was brought into mankind by the body, and the bodily senses, as it appears, Gen. 3.6. The woman seeing that the fruit was good for food, and pleasant to sight, took and did eat it: So was it necessary that sin should be destroyed in the body of that flesh wherein sin was conceived and wrought. Moreover the difference not of the matter which must be one, but of the Spirit of sanctification which was in Christ, made His body a fit sacrifice for sin. But concerning this unworthiness alleged, answer was made before, Note (a) ob. 1. & 3. on Chap. 25. 4. But if He had flesh like ours, He should have been begotten like us. Answer. The consequence is not good, as was showed before, Note (a) §. 2. on Chap. 26. 5. If the flesh of Christ were the same with ours, the common accidents of both should be alike, so that our flesh should forthwith rise again like His; or His like ours be resolved to dust. Answer. When our Lord had fully satisfied the justice of God for the sin of mankind, it had been agianst justice that He which had done no sin should have still continued under the power of death; and therefore impossible, Act. 2.24. But our bodies do therefore still rest in hope, because all His enemies are not subjected unto Him, among which the last is death, 1. Cor. 15.26. Therefore for conclusion of this point, over and above those reasons which you had in the twentieth Chapter, and the authorities in the end of the three and twentieth Chapter, and these which are here already cited, take that of Eph. 5.30. We are members of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones. So that if we know or believe that we ourselves have a body of flesh and bones, we must also know that our Lord had a true natural and humane body, as one of us. Which authority is yet of so much the greater regard, because it was prophesied in Paradise, Gen. 2.22. That our Redeemer should be incarnate; that in the body of His flesh, through death, He might present us holy and unblameable, Col. 2.22. For seeing the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same, that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil, Heb. 2.14. Read the Chapter, from verse 5. unto the end, and see how many arguments you find to this purpose only. The fancies therefore of these Heretics, being lighter than vanity, it will follow, that all those opinions which might seem to be raised therefrom, were as false as foolish. As first, that of Celsas, That the body of Christ was not subject to pain, and grief: Against which, Saint Origen disputes, lib. 2. Cont. Cells. For as for that Stoical unsufferance of His mind, which Clemens Alex. Strom. lib. 7. thought not to be subject either to joy or sorrow; it was only an oversight in so learned a Writer, and directly contrary to the Text of the Scripture, john 11.35. Matth. 26.38. where jesus wept, and was exceeding sorrowful, even unto death. And concerning the joy of His Spirit, See Luke. 10.21. Secondly, that of Saturnilus, That Christ did suffer only in show, Epiph. Haer. 23. Thirdly, that of the neatheard Basilides, who taught that Simon of Cyrene was crucified in Christ's stead, Epiph. Har. 24. Of all which, if any thing were true; what thanks were due to Him from us, when He had suffered nothing for our sakes? 2. How are we freed from that damnation, under which we were brought through the sin of Adam, while the Divine justice is yet unsatisfied? 3. And if Christ have not suffered for us, what example hath He left unto us, that we should follow his steps? 4. We that are the Disciples, should be above our Master-our patience more than His, our love to Him, more than His to us, If we for His sake should willingly suffer, persecution, shame, loss, imprisonment, death, which He Himself had not suffered for us. And 5. It had been utterly to no end, that He should have become man. For as it had been in vain for Him to have taken a body which should again have been scattered into that from whence it was taken (as Apelles affirmed) so had it been to no end to take a body, and therein to suffer the darkening of His divine glory, if by that body, no benefit had redounded to the creature. But if you desire more reasons hereto, they that are brought in the Chapter for His suffering, crucifying, death, and burial, may give you full satisfaction. So the errors that are yet remaining about the suffering of Christ, are two; one of the Theopaschites, who held that the Godhead of Christ did suffer, while His body was nailed on the Cross. Aug. de. Haer. Cap. 73. The other of the Patrispassians, such as Praxeas and Sabellius, who because they thought, that as the Father and the Son were but one substance so were they likewise but one Person; and therefore they affirmed that God the Father was incarnate, and suffered, Aug. de Haer. Cap. 41. But the former of these is sufficiently reproved by the doctrine of the 9 Cham For if God be not any kind of matter, nor a compound, nor a form body, nor subject to any accident, but that His being be most simple and pure as was there showed; by every one of these circumstances, it will follow necessarily, that God cannot suffer. The later is refuted by all the reasons of the 11. and 23. Chapters: And if you hold not yourself satisfied by that which is brought in those Chapters, and the answers to the reasons of Sabellius, Note (d) on Chap. 11. You may do well to read Epiph. Haer. 57 and Tertullian against Praxeas: For this very question, whether God the Father was incarnate and suffered, is the Argument of that Book. (b) That by His partaking of our sufferings, He might, etc.] It may here not unsitly be demanded, for what causes Christ the Holy one of God should die for us, and how that death becomes available to free us from the power of sin, of death, and hell? For answer, We must first put that which was the first and principal cause of our salvation, the eternal purpose of God, which He purposed in jesus Christ our Lord, Ephe. 3.11. See Acts 2.23. And this, not for any graces or works foreseen in us, But according to the good pleasure of His own will, Ephe. 1.5. For He hath saved us, and called us with an Holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ jesus, before the world began. 2. Tim. 1.9. And he that puts any outward cause, or good works foreseen in us, whereby God might be moved to choose us, takes away the chief glory of his grace, and makes him to be less good. So then, the first cause of all the causes and means of our salvation in Christ, is the free mercy and purpose of God the Father, which because it is the first, it must needs also be the chief cause, seeing all other cames work to that end to which they are ordered and guided by the first. And because the Son doth nothing of Himself, but what things soever He seethe the Father do, those also doth the Son likewise: john 5.19. Therefore secondly did the Son according to that eternal purpose of the Father, offer Himself unto His Father for man, as a ransom and satisfaction for their sin, as it is said, Psal. 40.7. Lo I come (in the volume of the Book it is written of me) to do thy will O God. Heb. 10.7. For in Him only is God well pleased, Matth. 12.18. And this is that Eternal Gospel of the Lamb, slain from the foundation of the World, Apoc. 13.8: For through the Eternal Spirit did He offer Himself without spot unto God. But if this offer of our Redeemer, who offered Himself for us, had not been accepted of His Father, than had it been of no avail for us. Therefore in the third place, it must appear that God did accept this Sacrifice of His Son, which is manifest first by this: That it was the disposition and purpose of God Himself, as was showed in the first place, and as it is said, Heb. 10.10. By the will of God are we sanctified, through the offering of the body of jesus Christ, once for all. Neither was God in this reconciliation of mankind, a willer or disposer only, but a worker also of our Redemption. For God was in Christ, reconciling the World unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them. 2. Cor. 5.19. If God then be for us, who can be against us? If He justify, who can condemn us? who have the decree and will of God for our justification, the offer and acceptance of Christ, both God and man, for our ransom and reconciliation, and that offer was made by the eternal Spirit, And this Spirit also beareth witness to our Spirit, that we are the sons of God, Rom. 8.16. The second cause concerns the justice of God, by which our Lord Christ died for us. And it stoned in this, that He according to the will of His Father, became our surety, Hebr. 7.22. and bound Himself to make satisfaction for the sin of man, which ma● himself could not do, as it hath been manifest before, Chap. 19 Now i● this satisfaction of Christ, the infinite justice was accorded with the infinite Love of God to the creature. The infinite love appeared, as was said before, first in this, that the Son was called and appointed to the performance of this glorious work. Hebr. 5. verse 4, 5.10. Then in this, that being performed, it was accepted in our name, and for our everlasting happiness, as it is said, john. 3.16. God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth Him, should not perish, but have everlasting life. The infinite justice was manifest in this, that the satisfaction of Christ was a full and perfect satisfaction, according to the rigour of justice, and that both in respect of the infinite value thereof, and of the punishment which our Mediator endured. The infinite value of the satisfaction, was first in the Person that offered it. For as the grievousness of the injury exceeded by the worthiness of the Person of the Father, that was offended: So the value of the satisfaction exceeded by the worthiness of the Son, that ma●e the amends. And because the honour which was done to God herein, is valued according to the worthiness of the Person, which worthiness in Christ is essential unto him, not accidental, as that of Aaron, therefore the satisfaction also is essentially infinite, and therefore abundantly sufficient in respect of the Person that did fulfil it. For the satisfaction to an infinite justice, was as fully made by the Person of the Son an infinite being, than if the creature being finite, even all Angels and men had suffered the torments of hell eternally. Secondly, the infinite value of the satisfaction appears in the worthiness of the thing that was offered. For our Mediator having no greater nor better sacrifice to offer unto God (as nothing could be better than that which was equal to God) offered Himself God and man, for the saving of His people, as it is said, jer. 3.23. Truly in the Lord our God is the salvation of Israel. Thirdly, the value was increased by the manner of the offering, wherein was the perfection of the obedience of the eternal Son to His Father, and the perfect submission of the humane will of Christ, unto the will of God, that this sacrifice might by all means be meritorious in Him for us, See Note (g) on Chap. 24. §. 11. No. 4. The second means whereby the satisfaction of Christ according to the rigour of justice was perfect, is the greatness of that punishment which He endured for us, which in proportion was answerable to that death which in justice was due to the sin of man, having the same degrees and parts: which punishment Christ (so fare forth as it was possible for the Son of God) did endure. First, the bodily death, with all the circumstances, as I remembered before: Then the loss of that joy and Comfort of His soul, wherewith the fruition of God, and the fullness of His graces did ever replenish Him. And this joy He lost, not finally or fundamentally, as the damned (for that was impossible, both in respect of His innocence, and of His union with God) but only according to the present act and feeling. Thirdly, he was subjected to the powers of hell, not enthralled thereto as a vassal, but yet subject for the present vexation and temptation: so that His soul and understanding was affrighted in sorrow and horror, knowing Himself to be made a curse for us, which brought with it a full sense of the justice and wrath of God against sin. Fourthly, and although it be most true that God cannot suffer either pain or loss, as was showed even now; yet it is as true, that God having taken to Himself the living Tabernacle of a soul and body, offered this soul and body of His to death for us as it is said, Act. 20.28. That God purchased His Church with His own blood; and not so only, but for a time left that body under the absolute power of Death and Burial. And thus the justice why Christ should die for our sins, and the plenary satisfaction which He hath made unto God thereby doth plainly appear. Now a reason or two, why, and how the benefit hereof doth belong unto us. 1. First, seeing the person of our Redeemer is infinite, and therefore His merit also infinite, an infinite reward is due thereunto, which if God would not give (O pardon that we speak in the voice of reason Thy gift in us) than He were unjust; if He could not, then were He unable to requite. But both these things are impossible. And seeing he that makes a recompense for any desert, either gives to the deserver that which he hath not, or forgives that which he might require; and yet our Lord, to whom the reward of His obedience and death is due, neither needs any thing, nor can receive any thing more than He hath, having in Himself the fullness of all perfection, and all things which the Father hath, john 17.10. Neither yet needs forgiveness, having never offended: neither yet can so great obedience, and such an infinite merit be all in vain, therefore doth this infinite reward redound to us: so that we which claim by His Title, may draw near unto the Throne of Grace in the full assurance of faith, that God doth not, nor will not refuse them that come unto Him in the name of His Son, seeing unto all them that seek salvation and eternal life by Him, all His infinite merit doth assuredly belong. For that which is infinite can no way become divisible, for so should it cease to be infinite. So His infinite merit belongs to every one of His, according to the infinity thereof. See the door of our hope set open wider than the walls of heaven: See how God with Christ hath given us all things: See also if the infinite merit of Christ, can any way be compatible of any man's merit, or the mediation of Saints. 2. Seeing our Lord jesus being God, could not become man but by the power of God, Chap. 25. & 26. who of the whole nature and substance of the Virgin, made Him perfect man, both soul and body: And that He being thus also the Son of God and man, did perfectly fulfil the law of a Son, to do always those things which were pleasing to His Father, john 8.29. whereas all other men had revolted from their obedience, and so forfeited their state of Sonship and interest in their Father's inheritance, by the sin o● the first Father Adam, which was created the son of God, Luke 3.38. therefore the whole right in that inheritance of glory and happiness, which should have come unto all mankind, is due to Christ only: So that by the right of inheritance, no man beside Himself can be capable of heavenly joys. But because the possession of eternal happiness is due to Him by a double right, not only that of Sonship, or inheritance, but also by purchase, through the infinite merit of His most precious death; whereto, according to the will of His Father, He became obedient for the sin of mankind; therefore by this right, hath He given an infinite right in the heavenly Inheritance, to all them that come unto Him by a lively faith, their hearts being cleansed from dead works, to serve the living God. In which right, If He had not fully stated mankind, than had the benefit of His purchase been utterly lost. So His Incarnation, His sufferings, and all His promises made to us, had been in vain. But all these things are impossible. 3. Moreover, it is to be considered, that the sin of man in respect of the sinner, must needs be finite, because a finite creature can no way do an infinite action, but the infinity of the sin is only in respect of Him against whom the sin is, because of His infinite justice that is offended thereby. But the satisfaction and the merit of Christ's death was infinite, not only in respect of the infinity or His Person who performed it, but of Him also that did so accept it, of Him that was not bound thereto in respect of any need or debt of His own, but He performed all that obedience which was due for our sakes, and in our name: where a the merit of all other men being finite, could no way be satisfactory for their sin against an infinite justice; neither yet can they be so accepted of God, because man's works, how good soever they are, yet can they neither be moe, nor better than man is bound unto, Luk. 17.10. Neither are good works truly ours, but such as God hath done by us. 1. Cor. 15.10. But seeing all our righteousness is as filthy rags, Esay 46.6. let us look unto Christ jesus, who alone of God, is made unto us Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification, and Redemption. 1. Cor. 1.30. 4. And as the ransom of our sin must of necessity be of an infinite value, that it might be a full satisfaction to an infinite justice, and therefore fit that our Redeemer should beeboth God and man: So was it necessary that He should become ours, that we might have that which we might give unto God for a full satisfaction; And that our obligation to God might be infinite, not only for our creation, or being from nothing; but much more for our well-being, and restoring from worse than nothing: Therefore that we might have an infinite ransom to give unto him, did He first give unto us His only Son, john 3.16. And yet that our claim and right might be in Him, not only by the voluntary gift of His Father, which in Him that had power to give, made our right and possession sure enough; but also by our own purchase, that we might have all manner of right in Him, and assurance of Him, therefore at His own, rice of five Shekels of silver (Sixteen shillings Eight pence, Hen. Amsw. on Gene. 20.16. other 25. Shillings, Ed Brerew:) in our money, did we also redeem, or buy him of God. See Exod. 13.13. Numb. 18.15.16. O most rich and precious purchase! At so easy a rate, to buy that which was more worth than all the worlds! And that the benefit of this bargain might not redound to the jews alone, therefore came the wise Gentiles from the East to relieve the penury of the poor Carpenter, not only for the payment of this purchase, but also for saving of that which was bought, by His slight into Egypt, Matth. 2. Chapter. And thus are we become a Royal Priesthood, while we offer unto God that infinite sacrifice, beseeching His mercy for the merit of His Son. Thus then, the infinite justice being fully satisfied in our nature by that which Christ hath suffered for us, our sins are not only freely forgiven us in the beloved; but we are also brought into the perfect favour and Love of God, and the assurance of those benefits which depend thereon. Which love, how great it is, Our Lord hath sufficiently declared, john 17.23. where He saith, that the Father hath loved us, as He hath loved Him. (c) With cramps of Iron sodered.] How joseph buried the body of JESUS, rolling a great stone, Matth. 27.60. a very great stone, Mark. 16.4. to the door of the sepulchre, the Gospel's show. And although the stone were so great, that women, moe than four Luke 24.10. durst not undertake to roll it away; yet the chief Priests and Pharisees held not that surety enough, and therefore, by the leave of Pilate, made the grave fast, and sealed it, and set their watch to keep it. The words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to seal and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to make fast or sure, as the word is used. Act. 16.24. He made their feet fast in the stocks, cannot import such sealing as is on a bag of money, or with a piece of paper which makes nothing fast, but is only a sign of honest dealing. For if the Disciples had purposed to steal the body of their master, no such sealing could, or should have hindered them. And therefore that making fast and sealing here spoken of, was such as I have said, and that for the ends expressed. CHAP. XXVIII. ❧ He descended into Hell. § 1. Sect. 1 I Have said before, That every difference in opinion, though in an Article of Faith, is not immediately an heresy: And therefore, though divers expositions have been made of this Article, yet so long as the substance of it is granted, and no obstinate nor malicious, or condemning of others is; there is no heresy or schism towards, especially, seeing that divers expositions may sometimes stand with the truth of the Scripture, the authority of Fathers, and the clear meaning of this Article. The different interpretations do arise especially from the meaning of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sheol, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hades, Sheol of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shaal which signifies to crave or ask, because Hell is never full. Proverb. 30. Hades hath the derivation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not to see, because of the darkness which is supposed to be there, or not to be seen, because the state of death is not known, to the living, or else (as others will have it) of the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Adamah, earth, by the authority of Sibyl lib. 1. paulo post initium. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Aden they call, because the first Adam When he was dead and buried, thither come. Therefore all men that on this earth are borne, Into th' house of Ades, are said to turn. This interpretation may seem to have ground on that of Gene. 3.19. Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return. And therefore 1. The word signifies sometimes as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Kever, the grave wherein they Kuver the corpse of the dead, as in 1. Kings 2.6. Let not His hoary head go down to the grave, Hebrew Sheol, Greek, Hades, in peace. 2. Sometime they signify the power of death, the place or state of the dead, either wretched or happy, appointed for all men, as it is said, Psalm. 89.48. What man is he that shall deliver his soul from the hand of Sheol, Hebr: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greek: To this place jacob, Genes. 37.35. to this Sheol, job. [14.13.] desired to come, as to the rest from all their labours, as to that place whereto all must return, as the verses cited affirm. 3. They signify the place of torment, as Psalm. 9.17. The wicked shall be turned to Sheol, Hebr: Greeke, to Hades. In this sense also the words, Tophet, Esay 30.33. Gehenna, Mark. 9.43. and Tartarus, 2 Pet. 2.4. are used. Hades also in Matth. 16.18. by a Metonymia, signifies the devils, as, The gates of hell shall not prevail against it; that is, All the devils which go in and out at the gates of hell, shall not prevail against that Rock Christ, whom thou hast confessed. But in Luke 16.23. it is taken properly for the place, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and being in hell, lifting up his eyes, etc. as contrariwise, with other Authors, it sometime signifies the place of blessedness, as Plato uses it, in Phaed. concerning Socrates, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If ever any man came to happiness, but in this sense, it belongs to Numb. 2. 4. They signify such sorrows or pains as may be supposed are suffered in hell, as in 1 Samuel 2.6. The Lord casteth down to hell, and bringeth up again, and in Psalm. 18.5. The sorrows of hell compassed me: So Psalm. 86.13. Thou hast delivered my soul out of the lowest hell. In all which places, Sheol, by the Septuagint, translated Hades (except by way of prophecy concerning Christ) cannot signify the place of the damned, from whence there is no returning; but only extreme dangers, grief, or hellish sorrows of mind: or such sicknesses as brought the body in danger of the grave. To these words especially in the three last significations, 2. Of the state of the Dead. 3 Of the Place, and 4. Pains of the damned; the words, Inferi and Infernus, in Latin do answer. But hell with us is proper to the place of torment, and doth not signify any thing else, but by a trope, and is not of Heal (as I think) which sometime signifies to cover, much less of Helle, the Dutch word, as much as bright or shining; but of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hell, a deep ditch, or trench, as the word is used 2 Sam. 20.15. They cast up a bank against the City, and it stood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bahel in the trench. And he that thinks not that the Saxon, our true language, hath many things common with the Hebrew, knows neither the one nor the other as he might. § 2. Sect. 2 Now according to these take of the words, different interpretations have been made of this Article, of which, because so much hath already been written among ourselves, I may, and purpose to be more brief. But because some forms of confession have left this Article out, therefore it hath grown questionable, whether it was always in this Creed of the Apostles, or not. Of the Apostles, I say, or Apostolical men, their hearers, gathered as the sum of the Apostles doctrine, concerning the Faith. And true it is, that as it cannot be said, by whom, where, or when, this Creed was first composed, as being the most ancient in this kind; the rest being only explications of some points herein, made upon occasions of heresies, or doubts thereabout: So do some men certainly affirm, that all the other Articles were not put together at once. Yet is it without doubt, that this Article is as ancient as the rest that are found in the Creed; seeing the most ancient among the Fathers, Athanasius, Origen, Tertullian, Irenaeus and others, have so received and declared it. And therefore that fancy of Eraesmus, who suspected that Thomas Aquinas might foy'st it in, was fare below both the one and the other, seeing it is confessed by Ruffinus, who lived within the first 400. years after Christ, to have been in the Creed used in the Church of Aquileia, and so by him interpreted with the rest. But although the Council at Nice in Bithynia, left it out of their Creed, because their special business was against Arius concerning the Deity of our Saviour; and although the Arians in their Council at Nice in Thracia, put it in their Creed; nay although Aquinas had first put it in, were it therefore fit to leave it out, or not to count it an Article of Faith, as some would do? I think not, seeing the holy Scripture gives authority to it. Psalm. 16.10. referred to Christ by the exposition of Saint Peter, Acts 2.27. seeing all the Christian Churches have received it, and seeing that according to the true and necessary meaning thereof, there is no Article of the Creed, which doth more clearly and directly overthrow the heresies of Arius, and the Dimaeritae, concerning the humane soul of Christ, of which you read, Chapter 26. Note (a) § 2. 1. Now concerning the different interpretations; Some according to the first meaning of Sheol and Hades, for the Grave, think that Christ was truly buried, and kept in the Grave three days, and that this Article had no other meaning, but a further declaration of Dead and Buried, against the opinion of Martion, Valentin, and such other heretics as denied the truth of Christ's being, and His suffering, as you heard before, Note (a) on Chap. 27. 2. Others would, that beyond the death and burial, it should impart a disposing of His body to corruption. But if their meaning therein be this, That the body of our Lord was laid in the grave where corruption doth seize on the bodies of other men, than this blind descent can look no further than His burial; or if it must needs mean any thing more, than would they force us, by this Article, to believe and confess that which by the Scripture we know to be false. For it was impossible that the holy One of God should either see corruption, or be brought to any degree or disposition thereunto, beyond the death and burial of His body. See Acts 2.24, 27. 3. Some other, by this descent of Christ, will understand the uttermost degree of His humiliation, that could come unto Him while His Soul was parted from the Body, His honour laid in the dust, the devil and his instruments triumphing over Him. But the Creed was not framed to teach us the triumph and joy of His enemies, but His victory and their confusion. And concerning our Lord Himself, this goes no further then either of the former interpretations, except in that sense which you shall hear anon. Therefore none of these can be the meaning of this Article. For in the abridgement or sum of our Faith, interpretations are not fit, especially such as are more dark than that to which they should give light. Therefore this Article He descended into hell, cannot in any of the former meanings, be a declaration of that He was dead and buried. 4. A fourth interpretation is, of them who think the descent of Christ means thus much only. That His soul being departed out of His body, went unto the souls of the faithful which were in Paradise, which they interpret heaven. But seeing heaven being taken not metaphorically, for joy and happiness, but properly for a place; must in all sense signify that which is upward from the earth: It must needs be a very awkward interpretation of He descended into hell, to say, He ascended or went upward into heaven: yet because this interpretation brings both reason and authority, it shall be examined by and by. 5. A fift interpretation is, of them who will have this descent to signify nothing else but the endurance of those unspeakable sorrows, and torments which He suffered in soul, being in His agony, and on the cross. 6. A sixth sense is, of them who hold that He did locally go down to hell; so that according to the essence or being of His soul, He was truly present there. And as the former of these deny not, but that Christ by His death did utterly spoil the powers of darkness, and so may be said virtually, and by the effects of His suffering, to have gone down into hell, because that by the eternal offering of Himself a ransom for the sins of the world, and the performance thereof in the time appointed, He did utterly free all His believers from Hell, which was their due, and settled them in the inheritance of eternal life: so these latter (for the most part) deny not but that all this which is said, is agreeable to the truth of the Scripture, and the analogy of Faith: only they cannot yield that it is the true and native meaning of this Article. And between these two parties, all those texts of Scripture which are brought for the local descent of Christ, are hammered so thin, that may seem pliable every way: But let the strength of the Holy Text for ever stand sure, and let us see the reasons a little on all sides, with their answers and exceptions. And first of them that interpret this Article by the sufferings of Christ's soul. Object. 1. Sect. 3 As the sufferings of Christ, even from the first minute of His Incarnation, were meritorious for us; yet our ransom from the torments of hell, was wrought especially by the suffering of His humane soul, which torments of His soul He endured, not only by the torture or fellow-feeling of His natural body, nor by compassion only on the sins and sorrows of His body mystical, but also He might be said even to feel the sorrows of eternal death, when He saw Himself to be now set to suffer the wrath of God due to the sins of the whole world. And if this be not the proper and native sense of this Article, how are we taught by our Creed, to believe more concerning Christ, than we confess to be true of the thiefs; of whom we may say, they suffered under Pontius Pilate, that they were crucified, dead, and buried: Al. Hume. rejoined. to Doctor Hil. I answer, First the holy Scripture is profitable for doctrine, for instruction, for reproof, etc. But the object of our faith is only the Holy Trinity in Unity, and the satisfaction of Christ, for our Redemption, and the benefits which we receive thereby. And therefore although I believe and know by the Scriptures, that Samson was the Son of Manoa, yet I neither believe in Samson, nor Manoa: And though I know by the Scriptures that the penitent thief suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, and died, yet I believe not in him. But concerning Christ, as I believe that all His merits redound to us; so I believe that all His sufferings were according to the Scripture, a satisfaction to the justice of God, for the sins of the world: which they could not be, but by the suffering both of His soul and body, as it is said, Esay. 53. He shall see the travail of His soul, and be satisfied. If then we know that whatsoever befell unto our Lord, was that the Scripture might be fulfilled, Matth. 26.54.56. and if we believe and confess in our Creed, that He suffered according to the Scriptures, and died, and risen again according to the Scriptures: and that the Scriptures do plainly testify, that by His sufferings and death, the wrath of God against man's sin, is fully satisfied; which (as I said) could not be, but by His sufferings in His soul, as well as in His body: After these sufferings under Pontius Pilate, what needs a second remembrance of His sufferings in soul, under a title of a descent into hell? Therefore, when as I am bound to believe and confess, that the sufferings of Christ under Pontius Pilate were according to the Scriptures, that is, in soul and body, I am bound to deny, that the suffering of Christ in His soul, is the native meaning of this Article, He descended into hell. 2. Beside the doctrine of Faith, being a catechism doctrine. Heb. 6.1. and the sum thereof being for the use of children and novices, it is not likely that the Church would have so generally received a creed, wherein the thing to be believed should be laid down inwords, that were tropical and obscure, when plain and proper terms were necessary, and at hand. But hell cannot signify the torments of hell, but by a metonymia of the place for the adjunct of the place: neither yet could it properly be said, That our Saviour went down into bell, when He was lifted up upon the Cross, where the especial endurance and expression of His hellish torments were both in soul and body. 2. Neither can it truly be said, He descended into hell, that is, He suffered in soul the torments of hell, but by a Synecdoche of the whole man for one part. Neither were these torments of His soul, more properly or truly, called torments of hell, than those torments of His body, which we confess, He suffered under Pontius Pilate. 3. Moreover, after He was dead and buried, it comes in unduly, again to make mention of His sufferings in soul, a great part of which were endured in the garden, before He came to the hands, either of Pilate, or of the Priests. 4. And yet beyond all these reasons, there is another argument, that the Church did not interpret this Article by the sufferings of Christ's Soul, because as Gerrardus Vossius puts it, De statu animae separatae Queen: 1. It was the received opinion of the ancient Fathers, even to this our time, That the souls of the faithful, before Christ entered not into Paradise, till Christ by His death had set it open, and entered thereinto, according to His promise to the thief on the Cross. And if all the souls of the faithful were in hell, (taken in the second sense before mentioned) though in a place of rest (as Theophilus speaks) and that by the coming of Christ thither, they were brought to Paradise, or a place of further joy; then certainly this Article must in their judgement, be interpreted by the descent of Christ into hell after his death, rather than by the sorrows of His soul before it. And to this purpose the learned Vossius brings some 20. Fathers from Tacianus the scholar of justin Martyr, about the year of Christ 180. before whom He might have put His master justin, as it is plain in his Triphon. Among those Fathers are Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Eusebius, Athanasius, Ambrose, jerom, Epiphanius, Chrysostom, Augustin, Cyril, and beside them whom he reckons up, he adds [innumerable others] and with them the sentence of the Council of Toledo in the year 633. He descended into Hell, that He might free them which were there detained. Aug. Ep: 99 writes thus; If the reason be asked, why our Saviour would come into hell, where those sorrows are, of which He could not be held: it was, Because He was free among the dead. Psal. 88.5. Moreover, concerning the first Father of mankind, almost the whole Church agrees, that He freed him there, which may not be thought that the Church believed without cause, although the express authority of the Canonical Scripture be not alleged. He saith, almost the whole Church, because the heretics, called Tacians, denied that Adam was saved, De Haeres. Cap. 25. Vossius, beside all these, brings the consent of the African, and of the Eastern Churches, both of the Greeks' and of the Nestorians, with divers later writers, as Zuinglius, P. Martyr and others. Obiect. 1. Sect. 4 But the Fathers agreed not all in one judgement. Answer. True: Neither yet they of later times. For concerning the end of His going to hell, some thought, that He delivered all that He found there, both good and bad indifferently. 2. Others because they thought that the whole punishment for man's sin could not otherwise be discharged, said that He went to hell, that He might there suffer, for the souls of men, as on His Cross He had suffered for their bodies. Nay, as Postel. de nat. Med. relates, the Abissine Church holds, that He went thither for His own soul. This last is heretical; the other, against the direct authority of the Scripture. For our Lord Himself, when He gave up the Ghost, professed, That whatsoever was necessary for His suffering, and our redemption, was then finished. And therefore both Saint Peter 1 Epist. 2.24. saith, That He bore our sins in His body on the tree; and Saint Paul, Colos. 1.20. That He wrought our peace, through the blood of His Cross, And Chapter 2.15. He spoiled the principalities and powers, & triumphed over them openly in His Cross. Beside, His promise to the thief, This day to be with Him in paradise, doth directly cross this opinion. 3. Others, upon that text of 1 Pet. 3.19. He went and preached unto the Spirits in prison, which were disobedient in the days of Noah, think that He went to hell to upbraid to them their infidelity. But this was not according to the end of His coming, which was to seek and to save that which was lost, Luke 19.10. Therefore others, and with them Martinus Cellarius, de operibus Dei, think that He preached repentance unto them, and that such as believed Him to be God, were redeemed from hell, and saved by Him. But because our Church hath rejected this opinion; compare the Synod Edw. 6. with the Synod Eliz. therefore I refuse it. And that text of Peter may be interpreted, of the preaching of Noah, while the Ark was preparing. 5. Some again, on better ground than the former, think, that that descent of His into Hell, was for manifestation or investing of Himself in that Lordship which He, as the Son of man, had over all the creature, and consequently over the powers of hell, That at His Name every knee should bow, both of things in Heaven, and of things in earth, and of things under the earth. Phil. 2.10. Thus, He that liveth and was dead, is alive for evermore; and hath the keys of hell and of death. Thus He that descended first into the lower parts of the earth, did ascend fare above all heavens, that He might fulfil all things. Ephes. 4.9, 10. That fluttering distinction, That He, as God, dwelled in the manhood on the earth, the lower part of the world, and then He as man ascended, will not help. For first, every globe of the Moon, the Sun, or any star, as it hath a centre to which every thing thereon inclines, for otherwise it could not hold together in one body: so is it a centre to the universe that is about it. And so is likewise the lowest, in comparison of those globes that have different centres. Beside, He which descended, is even the same that ascended: But God and man are not the same. Thirdly, He descended and ascended, that He might fill all things, which God did for ever, neither ascending, nor descending. And therefore Augustine said well, Totus Filius fuit apud Patrem, etc. The Son was whole with the Father, whole in the Virgin's womb, whole in Heaven, whole in Earth, whole on the Cross, whole in Hell. 6. But howsoever private opinions might fall in by the way, yet by that which was said before, it is manifest that the ancient Church did believe that Christ did therefore descend into hell, that the faithful by Him might be brought into Paradise; which if it were the meaning of them that did compose, and of them that did generally receive the Creed, then cannot that Article of Christ's descent into hell, be interpreted according to their meaning, which say, That it must signify no other thing, but that He suffered the pains of hell in His soul. Concerning them that received the Creed, and interpreted it, you have heard, § 3.4. and shall further hear their meaning. The Author's meaning you shall hear anon. Object. 2. But the same Fathers are cited on both sides. Object. 2 Answ. Every man that writes or speaks may be taken short, and his words wrong to a sense contrary to his meaning. But in this question it is not much stood upon, even by favourers of this new opinion, but that the current of the Fathers bears all the other away, insomuch that the learned Bucanus. Instit. Theol: Loc. 25. though he seem to allow this later exposition better; yet he professes that he dares not condemn the judgement of the Fathers; seeing it is neither contrary to the Scripture, nor hath any inconvenience in it. So others, yielding that the opinion of the Fathers is (for the most part) for the local descent of Christ into hell, would yet be excused to follow it: See Synops: Pap: Contr. 9 qu. 1. edit. 4. pag. 403. which demand truly may seem to be very just, that being put which Augustine said a little before, that it is not by the express authority of the Canonical Scriptures, which ought to be the ground and rule of our Faith. But that clause of Augustine, concerning the want of the authority of the Canonical Scripture, is ill referred to Christ's descent into Hell, which belongs only to the freeing of Adam there. But if their mistaking were indeed Augustine's meaning, That the descent of Christ into hell had no authority of the Canonical Scripture; yet remembering that it may not be thought that the Church, yea, the whole Church believed it without cause, seeing it hath no inconvenience in it, seeing it is not contrary to the Scripture, and that the holy Scriptures, by Anselmes judgement [cited in the Preface] confirms all that which it doth no way contradict, being lawfully gathered from manifest reason; Let us be bold to look upon the Reasons which may seem to have drawn the ancient Church unto this opinion. And because it is necessary first to agree upon some principles; let it be put, Sect. 5 that these words He descended into Hell, are not spoken either of the Godhead of Christ, of which it is confessed, that it is every where, nor yet of His dead body, of which it is said in the Article before, that it was buried; but that the enquiry is here, what became of the soul of our Saviour, after it was departed from His body. Secondly, That seeing the soul neither came to nothing, nor was an infinite being, to be every where, it must of necessity be in some definite ubi, some place, where while it was, it was not in another. Thirdly, Seeing the soul of Christ was a true humane soul as one of ours, and that it became Him in all things to be like His brethren, except their sin: His soul also being separate from the body, went unto that place where the souls of the faithful were before His coming. This I think none will deny; the Doctor's old and new, come all hereto. The Reverend P. Martyr, in Symb. saith thus, Descendit anima Christi ad inferos, etc. The soul of Christ descended into hell, means no other thing, but that it did undergo the same estate, which other soves being separate from the body, had experience of. So Musculus in Eph. 4.9. Descendit ad nos in hunc mundum, etc. He descended to us in this world, unto the grave, and unto hell. He descended to them whom He came to redeem: and as fare as they either living or dying, had descended; so fare also did He Himself descend, that He might lift them up from below, unto those places above, from which He had descended. Irenaeus said as much long ago. Lib 5. Cap. ult. The Lord kept the law of the dead, that He might be the first-begotten from the dead. Hitherto it seems, all parties are agreed: But the assumptions set them at odds again, as fare as heaven and hell. For the old Interpreters infer that the faithful before Christ, were in Abraham's bosom, or in hell, taken in the second sense: But the new Interpreters infer thus. But the faithful which were before Christ, were in Abraham's bosom, that is, ascended into heaven, properly so called. For so the word Paradise doth signify, by the express authority of the Scripture, 2. Cor. 12. verse 2. and 4. where the third heaven by Saint Paul, is called Paradise. For the first heaven is this of the Air to the Moon. The second heaven is, that of the Planets and Stars; and the third heaven is Paradise, the place of the blessed souls. And this is one of the Arguments of them that reject the judgement of the Fathers, and the ancient Church, and hold the tropical interpretation of hell, for hellish torments of the mind. And because I am here fallen into these briars, I will first put fire to them, and afterward go forward to the conclusion. Therefore I answer. The first heaven is, this of the fowls of heaven, Gen. 1.20. The second is, that of the clouds of heaven. Revel. 1.7. So the third heaven for Paradise, is in the Moon. But this conclusion you laugh at. Therefore you see on how weak and ungrounded principles they dispute. 2. Beside, is there no difference between a thing really performed, and a vision, as that of Paul, which is not by things actually being, but represented only for instruction to the Prophet that sees it. 3. But to grant all, that the third heaven is Paradise, and that the third heaven must signify that which is above all the stars; is there no Paradise beside, when every place of pleasure is a Paradise? Therefore though Saint Paul were in the third heaven, yet the faithful souls might be in another Paradise, before they came thither, as Adam was. 1. Objection. This is contrary to the first conclusion of Vossius; That the faithful before Christ were not in Paradise, till Christ opened it by His coming thither with the thief. Answer. It crosses not the opinion of the Fathers. For though they put all the souls of the Saints in hell; whither they also sent the soul of Christ: yet they put them there, into a place of rest and refreshing, into a higher place; in death free from torments, and the tyranny of the devil, and that by the authority of that historical parable in Luke 16. where Lazarus on the one side of the gulf was in Abraham's bosom comforted; the rich man in flames on the o●●er side tormented. So that first place or Paradise, was that state or quiet, wherein the faithful souls rested from their labours of this life, job 3. from verse 13. to 20. in joy and hope of Him that was to come. But that Paradise which the Fathers meant, was a more free state, and the enjoying of a fuller happiness by the presence of Christ, the work of their redemption being accomplished, they having their Redeemer with them, a sure pledge of their entrance into heaven, after their resurrection; as He should forthwith be raised, and ascend to heaven; whither till that time they had no hope to come. 2. Objection. The same Faith hath the same fruits, the same effects. But the Fathers before Christ, had the same Faith; Therefore they went to Heaven, as they that have been since Christ. Answer. The same faith hath the same fruits, the same effects, concerning the uttermost end of faith, which is the salvation of the soul, and the consummation of that bliss which is to be in eternal life: but not concerning all the degrees and circumstances between. For many Prophets and Kings desired to see the day of Christ, yet saw it not, but as they saluted the promises afar off, by their Faith. The bodies also of divers Saints were raised at the resurrection of Christ, and appeared to such as had known them alive, for proof of all that benefit, whereof all the faithful shall be partakers. Which blessing, neither Daniel, Dan. 12.13. nor Paul, are yet partakers of. And this answer may serve for divers texts of Scripture, which are unfitly brought to this purpose, as that of john 5.24. Heb. 13.14. and such others. And therefore though it be most certain and true, according to the Scriptures, that the Gospel of Christ was an eternal Gospel, and that His death was available to eternal life, to all that believed in Him since the beginning of the world: So that their souls, after they were delivered from the burden of the flesh, were in joy and felicity: yet is it as true, which the truth saith, john 14.2. In my Father's house are many Mansions. So that although the souls of the faithful departed before Christ, were in Paradise in Abraham's bosom, in the Kingdom of God, in Everlasting life, yet were they not in heaven properly so called, neither could they have the presence of their Redeemer, when He was not yet incarnate, by whom they might enjoy the vision of God, as now they do. 3. Object. 3 Objection. By this answer, you grant then, that they suffered the penalty of loss, as they call it though not of sense: of loss (I say) because they were not in heaven, in full happiness, as after their ascension with Christ; which could not be, but either the merit of Christ's sacrifice was not of force enough, because it was not yet accomplished: or else because their faith was not accepted. I Answer. Neither for the one reason, nor for the other, but because of that disposition and order which God had appointed to His creature, into the reason of which no man may presume to inquire. Then concerning the loss which you speak of, it is denied to be a penalty, if it be not found. Can the pint pot say, I am not full, because I cannot hold a gallon? or shall the gallon say, I am not full, because I hold not a tun? Doth not one star differ from another star in glory? So is the resurrection, and so are the degrees in the blessedness of the Saints. And if every man that considers the disposition of God toward himself in this life, do look thereon with a thankful eye, he may confess with Saint Augustine, That it hath been such, as if God had neglected His other creatures, to think in mercy on him alone. Beside, to say nothing of the merit of our Saviour, confessed to be infinite, and all-sufficient for us; I say, That the force of this reason, stands on two false foundations: One of the proposition: for if the same faith must have the same effects in every quality and degree, Why are not we that have the same faith, translated hence as Henoch was? The other, of the supposition; That in the kingdom of glory (which we on both sides account to begin actually, immediately after this life) there is not a progress from one degree of happiness unto another; which as it is contrary to reason, so is it to the holy Scripture. For is it not meet, that as there hath been a going forward in virtue and godliness in this life, so there should be of the reward thereof in the next? Shall not the joy of the soul be increased, when both body and soul do joy together? which cannot be till the resurrection, till when, we must endure that penalty of loss, as you are pleased to call it. Beside, the holy Text is plain, 2 Cor. 3.18. That we beholding the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image, from glory to glory. And how fare, or how long shall this be? Even till God be all in all. 1 Corin. 15.28. You may read to this purpose. Revel. 6.10. 4. Objection. Enoch was taken unto God, Object. 4 and Elias was carried up to heaven in a whirlwind, 2. Reg. 12. Therefore the faithful before Christ, were in heaven. Answer. Elias was taken up into heaven, that is the Air, and translated into Paradise, whither Enoch had been translated that he should not see death; but into the highest heavens they came not yet, as it will appear by john 3.13. 5. Objection. But we are come to the City of God, Object. 5 the heavenly jerusalem, to an innumerable company of Angels, to the spirits of Just men, etc. Heb. 12.22, 23, 24. And the Angels are the Inhabitants of heaven, not of any terrestrial, or infernal Paradise, Ergo. Answer. Wherever the favourable acceptance of God, and His holy comforts are, there is heaven: where not, hell. But to the place alleged, I say. 1. We are come in faith, and hope to heaven, not to the actual possession thereof. 2. It is one thing to speak of the state of the soul since Christ; For from His ascension, it is not denied, but that the souls of the faithful go immediately to heaven, as Cyprian, Ambrose, and some few other of the Fathers do think, whom you shall find cited by joh. Vossius, pag. 104.105. But the question is, of them that died before, who, if they were in heaven already, than the prayer of our Lord, john 17.24. had been in vain; which were wicked blasphemy for any one to say, or think. 3. It is denied, that heaven is so the proper place of the Angels, but that they are every where, whither they are sent. And do they not in every place pitch their tents about them that fear God, to deliver them? Psal. 34.7. and 91.11. Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth for their sakes that shall be heirs of salvation? Heb. 1.14. And this is, and shall be their employment, till God by their ministry, have gathered all His children into one. So this text of Hebr. 12. proves not either that the Angels are perpetual inhabitants of Heaven; or that the faithful souls went thither before Christ. Obiect. 6. Object. 6 Christ dying, commended His spirit into the hands of God. Therefore that went into Heaven; and therefore the souls of the faithful were in Heaven. Answ. This is worse and worse. The faithful were in Heaven, ergo Christ: Christ, ergo the faithful. o Circle! But to the text. The hand of God shall find out them that hate Him. Psal. 21.8. Are they therefore in Heaven? In His hands are all the corners of the earth. Psalm. 95.4. What is your conclusion? But if the hand of God in this place must signify that fullness of joy, which is at His right hand for ever: that doth always accompany the faithful soul, and is not tied, either to time or place: or whether it signify the protection of God, which might seem to be most needful in the horrors of death and passage unto that place which, as man, He knew not: it doth not follow thereupon, that the soul of Christ ascended into Heaven, much less, that the souls of the faithful were in Heaven before. And that the truth of this position may more plainly appear, that the souls of the faithful, before Christ, had not ascended into Heaven, and consequently that the soul of Christ, who was free among the dead. Psalm. 88.5. Who was made in all things like to His brethren, except their sin, did not ascend from the Cross into Heaven, you may, if you please, examine these Reasons. 1. Sect. 6 The Lord is righteous, and His judgements are upright. Psalm. 119. verse 137. And all His works are done in truth and equity. Psalm. 111.8. But it might seem a breach of an infinite justice, to give the full accomplishment of happiness in Heaven, to the souls for whose sins the satisfaction was not yet made. And therefore, although the Elect which were dead, were justified from their sins, By the blood of the everlasting Covenant. Rom. 6.7. were freed from the punishment thereof, and set in assured hope and expectation of those benefits, whereof they should be made further partakers by the death of Christ, and so rejoiced under the hope of the glory of God that should be revealed in them; and in the mean time were filled with all the comforts of a present joy: yet they received not the fullness of the promised joys in Heaven, God providing better for us, that without us they should not be perfected. Hebr. 11.39, 40. Neither doth this any way abate from the all-sufficiency of Christ's merit, no more than that we assoon as we have received the full assuredness of faith, are not carried up to heavenly glory; or that the Saints that are dead in Christ, are not yet raised up to immortality. For seeing the word is to be fulfilled between us and the reprobate Angels, that the first shall be last, and the last shall be first; that no creature may glory in it self, it is necessary that we pass by all the degrees of perfection, from this low estate of mortality, wherein we are, till such time as we come to be equal with the Angels, Luke 20.36. For the law of Grace doth not take away the law of Nature: That from one extremity to another, there is no passage but by all the means. 2. Doth reason only dictate this? Doth not the Scripture say also the same? For if Christ be therefore the firstborn from the dead, 1. Cor. 15.20. that He may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 firsting, or having the first place or pre-eminence in all things, Col. 1.18. Is not the argument also good? Christ is ascended, that He in all things may have the pre-eminence: And if the dead be therefore raised again by the virtue of Christ's resurrection, who was therefore raised up by the glory of the Father. Rom. 6.4. john 5.21. do they not also ascend by the virtue of His ascension? So that before the Ascension of Christ our head, there was no ascension for any of the members. It was the word of our Lord Himself, john 3.13. No man hath ascended up to heaven. But I hear one whisper against this, that the soul is not said to ascend without the body, and therefore the souls might be in heaven, though they ascend not. So the cavil is only about the word Ascend. But the reason? For it is said, Acts 2.34. David is not ascended up into heaven. And this was spoken by Peter, after Christ's ascension. So that although David's soul was not in heaven before, but went with Christ at his ascension; yet David is then said, not to have ascended. Al. Hume. Rej. to Doctor Hil. But had this man well considered the circumstances of this text, in the 25. verse, David speaketh concerning Christ, and so as it followeth in the 29.30.31. he would have taken this text from David, as S. Luke doth, when he saith, David is not ascended, that is, this Scripture doth not at all belong to David, concerning any ascending or descending of his; but to Him alone of whom David speaketh, Psal. 100 The Lord said unto my Lord, sit at my right hand: The like speech to this, is that of our Lord, Luke 22.42. Not my will, but thy will be done. And yet it is said of Him, Psal. 40.8. I delight to do thy will O my God; Thy law is written in my heart. So the will of God was done as the first moving cause of our salvation; the will of Christ was done as subordinate, not as the first cause, See Heb. 10.9. So 1. Cor. 15.10. Not I laboured, but the grace of God which was within me. And yet who knows not the labours of Paul to have been above all the rest of the Apostles? 2. Cor. 11.23. ad finem, yet he of his own motion, laboured not for the Church, but persecuted it. So David ascended not as the first fruits of them that slept, but Christ ascended so; by virtue of whose ascension, David, and all the rest of the faithful shall ascend. But not to fight with the shadow; I take the word at the manifest meaning, that David is not ascended: and from thence conclude against themselves; That if David had not ascended before Christ, nor yet ascended with Him, much less were the faithful souls in heaven before Christ; but that the soul of David dwells, and must still dwell in Paradise with Daniel, and the rest of the faithful, till the end be. Dan. 12.13. But if they will needs have the soul of David in heaven, not formaliter, as all the faithful souls are, in respect of the heavenly joys which they have in Paradise; but locally; then (I say) it must needs have ascended. For if the soul being in one place, is not in another, and if heaven be upward in respect of the earth: then when David's soul went into heaven, it must needs be said to ascend, or go upward, as Luke 2.15. speaks of the Angels; and Solomon, Eccles. 3.21. speaketh of the spirit or soul. There o'er this is but a poor shift, such as they must needs be driven unto, that oppose the truth. Yet thus he holds it sufficient to mock at the direct word of our Lord, which is, john 20.17. I have not yet ascended to my Father. For if He had, then must there be two ascensions, as they believe; one of the soul alone, and another of the body and soul together. 3. Yet it is said, john 14.2. I go to prepare a place for you; And if I go to prepare a place, I will come again, and receive you to myself. By which it is plain, that none could go to heaven before Christ our Lord, had gone and prepared a place for them, which was not done before His death and ascension. 4. Moreover, it is said, Heb. 9.8. the way into the holiest of all was not yet open, while the first Tabernacle was yet standing. Whereto, if you take that which is verse 24. Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are figures of the true, but into heaven itself, it will be manifest that there was no entrance; as not into the holy of holies, so much less into heaven, before that Christ by His death had opened it; as our Church confesseth in the hymn of Ambrose; When thou hadst overcome the sharpness of death, thou didst open the Kingdom of Heaven to all believers. Whereupon, it must necessarily follow, that the souls of the faithful were not in heaven properly so called, before the death and resurrection of Christ. 5. To this purpose you may also bring that which is, Ephe. 4.8. When He ascended up on high, He led Captivity captive. Now what was this captivity, or multitude of captives? Were they reprobate? You will not say it. If the Elect, than it follows necessarily that they were not in heaven before the ascension of Christ, except you will bring them down from thence to fetch up Christ in triumph; but then had they not been captives; if already triumphing in heaven, than had not the conquest of Christ over death, and him that had the power of death, been so glorious, if he had had no captives to lead in triumph. And therefore, Esay. 53.12. after the suffering of Christ, describes His conquest thus; I will divide Him a portion with the great, and He shall divide the spoil with the strong. The faithful souls therefore being held under the power of death, though free from His tyranny and torment, as it is said, Sap. 3.1. The souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and no torments shall touch them, whereby Christ having bought them of God, and paid their ransom, brought out of all power of their strong enemy, out of the shadow of death, into the everlasting light of Paradise, in all the liberty and joy of the understanding, to view the Wisdom of God in His most glorious works, as you may read further a little below, Sect. 8. Numb. 3. Sect. 7. Sect. 7 Now having showed the different interpretations of this Article, and (as I think) fully proved, that the soul of Christ went not to heaven, properly so called, before His resurrection, but that it was glorious and blessed among His Saints in happiness, and so in heaven formaliter, as they speak: It is fit that we draw toward a conclusion; which before we can come unto, it must first appear what Abraham's bosom, what Paradise is, and where it was. Then, why the word of descending into hell, is here used, with the solution of such doubts as fall in the way. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a bosom, sometime signifies a bay of the sea, wherein harbour and safety is, from waves and tempests, and thus the word is used, Act. 27.39. Thus Lazarus, Luke 16. might be said to be in Abraham's bosom, that is, to have arrived and cast anchor in that safe and quiet haven of happiness, where Abraham the father of all the faithful, because he against hope believed in hope, Rom. 4.18. was now in bliss: or else it may signify a bosom properly, as it is used in Luke 6.38. and thus also Lazarus might be said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in cheer, and joy, in Abraham's bosom, as Saint john: joh. 13.23. lay leaning in the bosom of jesus his uncle at supper, as the manner of that country was sometime, to eat their meat lying on the ground. The word Paradise, whether it be native greek of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it is supposed to be plentifully watered; or a Persian word, as good Authors affirm, and that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pards used in Eccles. 2.5. and Cant. 4.13. signifies a place of pleasure enclosed, or a park, and so it is used in Xenophon Cyrop: lib. 1. or a garden, as the Greeks' translated the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'Gan, in Genes. Chap. 2. and 3. or an orchard, as in the texts of Solomon before. And hither was our Lord first said to have come after His death, because as Adam by his sin had lost his happy estate in the earthly paradise: So Christ by His death did recover the hope of our return into the heavenly, For the gift is not as the offence. Rom. 5.15. By these two words the blessed estate of the faithful is signified, though with some difference, not of place, but degree of happiness, as I shown. For although the children of the kingdom were all, and at all times, heirs of the fame hopes; yet they that were in Abraham's bosom before Christ, had not that fullness of joy which they had, after their redemption was fully wrought; and He not now in Abraham's bosom with them; but Abraham and all his faithful children with him in Paradise. To the same sense concerning the state of happiness is the Kingdom of Heaven used. Luke 13.28, 29. though that word express also the joys after the resurrection; And because it was ever thought, even among natural men, as the Heathen Philosophers, that the soul was immortal, and that after death it was better to them that had lived well, then to the wicked; therefore were they persuaded that their souls went to a place of rest and happiness, which they called, as they pleased, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the house of Pluto by the common name; and that of pleasure, the Elysian fields; of torment a place enclosed by Acheron a river without joy. And sigh the body, went down to the earth from whence it was, and that they persuaded themselves, that every creature might be abundantly happy in that region whereof it was an inhabitant, as being the only region that was fit for it; therefore they thought that the place of the soul's rest, was not fare from the body; and so went down into the earth. And because the ancient Church could not teach the heathen converted to God, but by such words and language as they understood, and differed not much in meaning, from that which they themselves believed; therefore were they content to use this manner of speech of descending to Hades, the house of Pluto, or hell, which the vulgar had been taught by their guides the Philosophers and Poets. In stead of all the rest, see Plato in Phaedone, and Virgil. Aeneidos' lib. 6. yet they meant by this descent of Christ into hell, no other thing, but that His soul being separate from His body, went into that place where the faithful souls were then at rest, and in assured hope of further joy; But because our Church uses not the term descending, but teaches her own children in their own tongue to confess that Christ went down to hell, Artic. 2. Let us not forsake the law of our mother. Proverb. 6.20. but rather endeavour to know, what this going down to hell may mean. And certainly it must needs be thought a thing either of great obscurity, or of little necessity; wherein our Church (as most other) hath not held it fit to make any further declaration. Therefore, though I take liberty to inquire what the possible or most likely meaning of the words may be; yet I presume not to affirm any thing, but with submission to the Church's judgement, when God shall vouchsafe further light thereto, to determine according to the Scripture, what is the certain truth in this, or any other question of the like doubtfulness. 1. To descend, to go or come down is used diversely; But that I may descend to every understanding, I will make it of two kinds; one of place, and that is of three kinds, The other of state or condition: 1. Of place higher, and lower, as it is said Luke 9.37. They came down from the hill, and Act. 11.27. There came Prophets down from jerusalem to Antioch, or from a place of more fame, to a meaner, as Act. 13.4. From Antioch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they came down to Seleucia. Now if the earth and water made one flat surface, which stretched from one side of heaven to the other, as the old fancy was; then could this descent of Christ, mean no other going down, but under that surface. And although some of the Fathers were no better Cosmographers, then to think thus; yet for the most part they were better thewed. But because our faith suffers not to put any untruth in nature, therefore this going down must be refused. 2. But if this globe of the earth be hollow; then this going down may be meant (as most of the Fathers took it) into that hollowness of the earth. 1. And that the earth is hollow, both reason and authority show it. Authority you have, 4. Esdr. 4.7. where to the question that might be made, How many springs are in the beginning of the deep? the answer by the Angel is supposed to be, I have not as yet gone down into hell; whereby you see that hell, or the place of the dead, was below this earth on which we tread; and that they that died from hence, did all go thither. This was the opinion of the ancients, both Heathen and Christians, which held the local descent of Christ, and knew the System of the world. 2. Had they not reason? For neither God, nor Nature His servant, do aught in vain, which yet must needs be here, if from the upper face of the earth, to the centre, a distance of some 3500. miles on every side, should be only an idle load of earth and water. Moreover, the generation of all the Minerals, which is only from water steamed up in vapour, and congealed by the spirits of sulphur in the metals; of salts in all manner of stones; or of the earth itself, as vitriols and such like; argue both emptiness and heat; neither of which can be in a massy lump of earth and water: See to this purpose, Novum lumen Chemicum. 3. Beside this, the huge quantity of vapour sent out of the earth, and waters for rain and snow in the winter time, argues not only that there is a hollowness of the earth; but likewise that there is some powerful principle, for sending up such waters which naturally do flee from heat, as this macrocosmicall Sun is for drawing of them upward. For in the Summertime, when our Sun hath most strength to exhale those vapours from the earth, and sea, we have least rain, and that because that central Principle hath then his greatest declination to the South; whereas in the Winter, when his declination is to us in the North, then is it most powerful to send out those vapours on this side of the earth, and to cause so much rain, except some violent frost do close up the face of the earth, that they cannot get out; which thing is yet further manifest, by those boisterous storms of rain and wind, which happen in those Countries that are near to that girdle of the earth, which they call the Equinoctial line, where the influences do meet in direct opposition. 4. If no such central Principle be, by whose heat and warm vapours the earth is opened; it were impossible that any trees, or roots could continue in life; especially in Countries that are removed above 20. degrees from the Tropics toward the Poles. For as those vegetables do live with a meet temper of cold and heat: So where the cold exceeds, there is no possibility of their growth, as it appears in the places of our Whale-fishing, and others within 20. degrees of the Pole. Now what heat hath the Sun here with us in a hard frost, continuing 3. or 4. months (yet is not our winter so cold as the Continent of the same Latitude) for enliving our trees, who are not 52. degrees from the very Equinoctial; but that they are still kept in life by the warmth and moisture which is sent to them from below. Object. 1. Object. 1 But is not every heavy thing carried naturally to the centre? which if it be, then cannot that centre be in a place of emptiness, as this opinion would make it. I Answer. The centre is either of magnitude, as the imagined centre of this globe of the earth: or else of weight. The centre of magnitude suffers nothing to stay in it, but drives it to the centre of weight, as the South pole of the Loadstone, drives away that end of the needle which is touched for the North: So that if the firmament of this globe of earth and water be 50.100. or 200. miles thick, which seems a great deal too much, not only because such a thickness were to no use, but rather an utter impediment to the passage of the Sun's heat for the generation of the minerals, winds, and vapours, as I spoke before: Yet there is left an hollowness, whose diameter is about 7000. miles, wherein if such a principle of heat be, (as I shown) I see no reason why that opinion of the Poets and Philosophers concerning their Elysium, or of the Father's concerning their lower Paradise, should be so slighted as it is. This then being either proved or supposed; that centre of weight which I speak of, cannot be the same with the centre of this globe of the earth, but rather an imagined surface, in the midst of the firmament of this globe, in proportion of the convex and concave surfaces, somewhat further from this convex surface, then from that hollow which is within. 2. Object. 2 But you object that of 4. Esdras 5.44. That the world cannot hold them at once that should be created in it: And if this outward surface cannot, much less that hollow one which is within, which must needs be less than it. And yet if all that die go thither, it must contain at least 20. times as many since Christ, as are now alive in this world. Answer. Do you think, that if any man had in him, the spirit of lust, of wrath, of pride, and all those seven devils which were in Mary Magdalene, that his heart would be any bigger than any other man's? or was that man bigger than all the sons of Adam, in whom the Legion was? Mark. 5.9. For a full Legion or regiment was 6000. Foot, and 726. Horsemen. Veg: de remil: lib. 2. cap. 6. Now the state of the soul separate; because it is a spiritual being, must be such as that of Spirits is, which do not occupy a place bodily, though they be in a place definitively. So that fear of thronging, which is such a block in the way of those new interpreters, is like that fear of the Satire that wound his horn, and ran away from the sound. Sect. 8. 3. Sect. 8 The third way of local descent is best understood by that supposition of Almicantrahs', and Azimuths from the Zenith. For every man in what position of the earth or sea soever he is, supposes himself to be in the highest part of his hemisphere, and so is. So that if circle's of any sensible distance, suppose of 60. Italian, or 55. English miles, which answer on earth to one degree in heaven, were drawn about him; then they that are in that circle, should be one degree or step lower than he, and so to the horizon, and so to the Nadie or point directly opposite unto him on the other side of the earth. But you will say; If the dead before Christ did thus descend, and our Lord likewise to them; then must it follow, that the whole surface of the earth is Paradise, and that there is no difference between the state of the godly, and the wicked, which is directly against the word of Christ himself, in that parable of Lazarus and the rich glutton, in Luke 16. I Answer. That before the earth was cursed for man's sin, there was no cause why it might not be wholly Paradise. The desoription of the four rivers of Paradise, Genes. 2. do not obscurely show it, howsoever Beroaldus would bring them all within the compass of * See Gen. 2.13, 14. Dan. 10.4. Canaan; other, by as strange Geography, to the springs and falls of Tigris, and Euphrates. But I hold, That that Paradise of Eden, wherein Adam was put after his creation, was not in the Moon, nor in the Air, as some have thought, but some special place of the earth, of plenty and pleasure above the rest, as we see there are great differences unto this day. And though many places are grown barren and fruitless for want of husbandry, and especially to prove the just indignation of God against sin, and to manifest the truth of that word, Cursed is the earth for thy sake: Yet to the soul being separate, and so without the help of the senses and imagination, by the light which God hath given to it, able by itself to see what the possibilities of the whole creature are, every place is a Paradse; while it considers the infinite goodness and power of God in the creature, as well in that which is deprived of the effects thereof, as in that wherein His goodness is still effectual. For as there be three estates of man's being; This of the Warrior, in this life; That after death, of the Conqueror; And the third, after the resurrection, of the Triumpher: So likewise are there three means and degrees of His knowledge; One in this life, wherein we know nothing but by our senses, from whence the imagination or fantasy, that Hevah the mother of all living, carries unto reason her Adam, all the species or forms of things which she gathers from the senses. For nothing lives in the understanding but by the power of the fantasy, which because it is false, fickle, and will of itself without reason be working upon every object, as the appetite is moved thereby; therefore the reason following the fantasy, is deceived, and not constant, and so it comes to pass, that we know few things according to the truth which is in them. But in that second estate of man, when the body returns to the earth, and his senses, and consequently his fantasy doth utterly perish. Psalm. 146.4. Then the soul looking on the creature with its own eyes, sees the wonderful blessing and goodness whereof man had been made partaker in the right use of the creature, if he had not lost the knowledge thereof by his sin, and returns to the Author thereof, that praise that is due to Him therefore; and acknowledges that state wherein he lives, out of the proper habitation, to be the reward of sin; yet because it doth evermore enjoy the comforts of God, in a certain knowledge, and some present feeling of those joys whereof it shall be fully partaker hereafter, in the perfection of the whole man, and sees that this separation is but a preparation for a further perfection in that immortal being which is to come; it hath thereby, as it were, a seizure and delivery of those heavenly joys, which it had here only in assurance of hope, though till the third state it hath not the full possession. And although the soul of the wicked man views indeed the creature, and knows now the loss of that blessing which it might have had in the right use thereof; yet because it hath no hope in the life to come, all that knowledge which it hath, is but to see further the wretchedness of itself, and for a foretaste of that bitter cup of wrath which it must drink, even to the dregs. And this foretaste is able to make all the creature hell, unto the miserable soul; as the joys and assurance of heaven make all places Paradise to the faithful: For the devil was not therefore happy, because he was in heaven. job 1.6. and 1 Kings 22.22. nor therefore miserable, because he was thrust out. Reuel. 12.9. for not the place, but the holy Spirit of comfort only, which never leaves the faithful soul. john 14.16. gives heavenly happiness; as that soul which is destitute thereof, hath hell in itself, and must needs be in hell, wheresoever it is. Now as it is most certain, that there is such a mean state between this of mortality and that of glory; so is it most reasonable to think, that this is the employment of the soul, at least for a time, before it be raised up with the body in glory. For seeing man was therefore set in the creature, and therefore endued with a reasonable soul, that he might in the creature behold the Wisdom and goodness of God, and to His praise, be happy in the right use thereof; It was necessary that He should know the creature, and the possibilities thereof: which knowledge, having by his sin debarred himself of, he could not use the creature aright, and so became mortal. Yet seeing it is impossible that the sin of man should frustrate theend of God, but that He should be glorified by man, whom He hath purposed so exceedingly to glorify; therefore in that second estate, wherein the soul is better fitted to know, as the Angels, by intuition, or view of the creature, only shall that be effected. Moreover, seeing our Lord ascended not to heaven, before His soul was joined again to the body; and that it may not reasonably be thought, that the servant in his greatest baseness, and lowest estate, should have preeminence before his Lord; nor yet, that the soul, that most active part of man, should be idle: what can the soul and understanding be busied about, but only in the enquiry of that truth and wisdom which God hath manifested in the creature? But whether this inquest shall be immediately after the soul's departure from the body, or at the time of restitution, of which Saint Peter speaks, Act. 3.20. I cannot define. But although for the truth, and quietness sake with them that would instantly be in heaven; I denied not an immediate passage into heaven for the faithful since Christ, yet seeing most of the sons of Adam must come into this middle state, I see not why any man should withdraw himself from that task, whereby he ought to give honour unto his Creator. Objection. 1. Object. 1 But by this you put a possibility of those illusisions of the devil, appearing as the ghosts of the dead, and justify that poetical fiction of Hesiod, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. 1. that they of the golden-age became all Angels, and in airy bodies, lived every where on the earth, seeing all the good and ill deeds of men. I answer. All things are not therefore false, because A Poet affirms them, but that which he speaks out of the light of nature, is certainly true, and this (what weight soever it hath) sways on my side. But for the upholding of those old-wives fables, of the walking of the spirits of the dead, there is no fear. For being dead, they must keep the law of the dead, and not live to us, that are dead to them; for when they are gone from hence, they are no more seen, Psal. 39.13. Thus much it was necessary to speak concerning the means of the soul's knowledge, while it is in the state of separation from the body. The third manner and degree of the soul's knowledge by comprehension in the morning vision, is, when the whole man glorified, shall see the true being of all things in Him that is the cause of all; For than shall it know as it is known, as you may see, 1. Cor. 13.12. But this kind of knowledge belongs nothing to the question that is in hand. 4. The other kind of descent which is in state or manner of being is, when any thing is changed from any estate either proper thereto, or else appropriate to an estate or condition, that is, or seems to be lower, or worse. Thus our Lord was said to descend or come down from heaven, when He clouded His Deity in our humanity, as I have showed heretofore. Thus also He, and all mankind may be said to descend, to be abased, or brought low, when the soul is parted from the body. For seeing both the parts are for the perfection of the whole; the whole must needs be more excellent than either of the parts, so that the whole being dissolved, both the parts do suffer hurt or loss thereby, especially the soul which sees the loss, and finds itself in a state of being, beside the end of the creation of itself, which was to give life unto the body; and this is the cause why the soul would not be unclothed, but rather that this mortality might be swallowed up of life. And this is the lowest state of humiliation, whereto the soul of our Lord could come naturally, and by this state, some will interpret the descent into hell, as I shown in the beginning, Nu. 2. But if this humiliation must mean also the separation of the soul from the body, while the body was laid in the dust; it reaches no further than to his death: For a man is not said to be dead, till his soul be departed from his body. But if this state of humiliation be taken in that sense, as some do very fitly interpret it, by that phrase used often in the Scripture, of a man's being gathered unto his people, or coming unto that congregation of the saints, which had died in the faith of Him that was to come; then taking also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or hell according to the interpretation of the word Unseen, it will easily be admitted of all, that when our Saviour was dead, His body was buried, and his soul went unto the assembly of them that were unseen. And because this is true, safe, and unquestionable, it may on all parts be agreed unto (as I said before) and yet the word of descending or going down reserved to the right meaning, by the abatement or loss of that estate which the soul had with the body, in the being of the whole and perfect man. So also the question about the place of hell, and Paradise, which hath moved most doubt herein, by this interpretation is avoided. But because all this will reach no further than to be perfectly dead, and because the Latin interpretation, Descendit ad inferos, rendered by our Church, He went down into hell, suffers us not to stay here; and because the most voices amongst the Fathers have swayed the meaning to a local descent, and that (as it seems) in the third sense spoken of before, and most of all because the holy Scripture binds us thereto; let us follow our best and surest guides, and confess with the Prophets and Apostles, that the soul of our Lord, after His death on the Cross, went down into hell, or the place of the dead, and there continued three days and three nights in the heart of the earth, as it was prophesied in the sign of jonas the Prophet. Matth. 12.40. And let us believe that the flesh of Christ did therefore rest in hope, because His soul was not left in hell, nor His body was suffered to see corruption. Psal. 16.9, 10. Acts 2.31. Objection. 1. Object. 1 They object that the soul may signify the whole man, as in Gen. 46.27. All the souls of the house of jacob were 70. But how doth that help to prove that this Article must be interpreted only of the torments of Christ's soul, while He was yet alive? For it is manifest that Saint Peter bringing that text to prove His resurrection, speaks not of Christ's soul while it was yet in his body, when He was not subject to a state of resurrection, but of His soul after His death. But if they will hope by that text of Gen. or the like, to interpret it, as Al. Hume. loc. cit. Thou shalt not leave me in the grave; let them answer me, what they mean by this word Me, whether the body, or the soul, or both together. If they say the soul, it was not in the grave: they will be ashamed to say both together, for so they should make Him not yet to be dead, as the word Me doth truly signify the whole Person yet alive: if they say the body, let them see what an unfit tautology it will make with that which followeth, Nor suffer thy Holy one, that is, the body of Thy Holy one to see corruption. But in this place the soul and the body are made direct disparates; so hell, and the place of corruption, so that we may argue, the body was in the place of corruption. Ergo, not in hell; the soul was in hell, Ergo, not in the grave, or place of corruption. Object. 2. Object. 2 The purpose of Saint Peter was to prove the resurrection of Christ, and that belonged to the body, which had died, not to the soul, which died not. Answer. If this be given, what will you conclude thereon? But I say, the resurrection is of the whole man returned again to life, after the parting of the soul, and the body. So it is neither of the body only, nor of the soul only; but of the whole man, which Saint Peter proves here to have been done in Christ, because His soul was not left in hell, where it was, but was again joined to the body, to cause it to live, that it might not see corruption. And because all the glorious do and sufferings of our Saviour were for our uttermost benefit, and comfort; therefore is this going down of His into hell, also to give us assurance of our full and perfect deliverance from all the powers of death and hell, and restoring of all His believers unto an immortal life and glory. And because the doctrine of our Church, into which I was baptised, binds me to believe that our Lord jesus after His death, went down into hell-locally, and that by the authorities of the Scripture: and because I have before shown that the soul of Christ did not ascend to heaven before His resurrection, and have denied also that I think with them that say, that He went down to suffer for our sin; And having (as I think) said enough to all contrary opinions: the truth by the Holy Scripture, and the reasons grounded thereon, must be made to appear. But first of all, it is plain, that the meaning of our Church is such; for in the 8. Article it is said, that the Creed of Athanasius ought thoroughly to be received, and believed, and that because it may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture. And in the 7. Article, the Church of Ireland agreeth hereto in these words; All and every the Articles contained in the Nicene Creed, the Creed of Athanasius, and that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed, ought firmly to be observed and believed. For they may be proved by most certain warrant of Holy Scripture. And because it may not be supposed that our Church citys the authority of Athanasius, but according to his own meaning, as he himself hath explained it; if it were the meaning of Athanasius, that Christ after His suffering descended locally into the hell of the damned, it must needs be that our Church accorded to his meaning. And what the meaning of this Article in the Creed of Athanasius is, we need not to doubt, who have Athanasius himself to declare it in his Epistle of the incarnation of our Lord jesus Christ, against Apollinarius: where he proves against his Heresy, that there be only two parts of the humane nature in Christ, a body which the grave received; and a soul, which went down into hell: the grave received that which was bodily, hell that which was not bodily: And by his reason you may yet understand his meaning better. When the Creator (saith he) called man into question for his disobedience, He decreed against him a double punishment; For to the body He said, Thou art earth, and unto earth thou shalt return: But to the soul He said, Thou shalt die the death: And for this cause, man being dead, is condemned to departed to two places; And therefore it was also necessary, that the judge Himself that made this decree should also undergo it, that in the estate of man condemned, showing Himself free from sin, & uncondemned, He might reconcile man unto God, and restore him to perfect liberty. In the same Epistle, he had said a little before, that in hell He condemned death, that He might every way perfect the salvation of man in our image, which He had put on; and in his fourth oration against the Arians, he saith, that the powers of hell withdrew themselves, being afraid at the sight of Christ. So the meaning of Athanasius is plain, that the soul of Christ did locally go down to hell: and withal the meaning of our Church. Now among these texts of Scripture, by which this doctrine of Athanasius may be warranted, that text of the 1. Pet. 3.18.19. is most plain, especially as it stands in the Greek. Christ suffered for our sins, that He might bring us unto God. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. being put to death in the flesh, but quickened in the Spirit, by which He went and preached to the Spirits in prison. Which Scripture must be applied only to the manly being of Christ, who Himself had set an example to His followers, to suffer ill patiently, which could be only in His manly being. For as God He could not suffer ill. Beside, His Godhead moves not by any local motion, as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signify. And moreover, His divine spirit was no way quickened nor could be, but He went and preached in that Spirit in which He was quickened, which could be only in His humane spirit or soul, in which having once suffered death, He manifested His power to the disobedient spirits, by taking to Himself the keys or power over hell and death, to shut in and keep out whom He will. Reuel. 1.18. And although I deny not that the sense is true and good, He was quickened by the Spirit, that holy Spirit which He received not by measure; yet I hold that this is not the native meaning of this place, and the best printed copies of Stephan Plantin and others, are with me: Neither will the words naturally bear that change of In and By; Neither did the reverend Noel, Deane of Paul's, and other like Him, accord with them. Neither is this the only place of Scripture that proves the local descent of Christ's soul into hell; For that argument of Saint Peter, Act. 2.31. whereby he proves the resurrection of Christ out of Psalm. 16. because His soul was not left in Hell, strangles these interpreters, harder than Achelous was strangled in the hand of Hercules. So that which jonah, the figure, said of himself, being by Christ, the substance, applied to Himself, To be three days in the heart of the earth, must be as true in the substance, as it was figuratively true in jonah. This is the confession of him that was holy as no man was. Psalm. 68.2. Thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest hell. vers. 13. as the Apostle speaks, Ephes. 4.9, 10. He descended first into the lower parts of the earth, and ascended above all heavens, that He might fill all things. So then, the Scriptures not being of any private interpretation, that is, to set out the stories of private men. 2. Peter 1.20. must have their highest and uttermost interpretation in Christ. Now that this is the native interpretation of this Article, and consequently the right meaning of the Composer or Composers of the Creed, beside the texts of Scripture on which the Article is grounded, it will be further manifest by the Reasons. 1. In a Catechism, the use of Tropes or borrowed speeches are not fit, for the use of children and novices; and such is the Creed or form of the confession of our Faith, as it is manifest, Hebr. 6.1. And the suffering of Christ, His Death, Burial, etc. is taken properly; therefore His going down also into hell. Object. If Christ went to the faithful that were dead, Object. whose souls were in Paradise, why do you say to hell, whereby is specially meant the place of the damned? Answer. He first went to the dead in Paradise, as His promise was, That the Thief should there be with Him in Paradise: Then to hell, to take to Himself all rule, all authority and power. For God had put all things in subjection under His feet. 2. If this Article, He went down to hell, be not to be referred to the soul of Christ, after His death, then have we no direction by the Creed, to know what became of His soul; neither are we taught hereby, whether He had a humane and immortal soul, or no. So we are still left in doubt, whether this Christ be the Saviour of the world. But if this Article be referred to the state of Christ's soul after His death, then are we truly taught and informed against these doubts. But that adulterate interpretation of His sufferings is excluded. 3. And seeing our Lord Christ is appointed of God to be the judge of the world, and that as He is the Son of man, it was necessary that our Lord should go down to hell, both in regard of the justice, and of the mercy which ought to appear in His judgement; of His justice, that the enemies of mankind, the devils, may not torment them according to their cruelty and hatred of man, but only in justice afflict them, according to the sentence passed on them, according to the measure of their sin, and not beyond, as it is said, Luk. 12.47, and 48. The servant which knew his masters will and prepared not himself, shall be beaten with many stripes, but he that knew it not, shall be beaten with fewer. 4. And because our Lord Christ was by the Father appointed to be the Saviour of mankind, it was necessary that His compassion toward mankind, should by all means be inflamed, and therefore that His soul should go down to hell; that as by the bodily feeling of our miseries in this life, He was made a merciful and faithful high-Priest for us. Heb. 2.7. so by the actual and present sight of those unsufferable torments, He might have the uttermost mercy and compassion which can stand with justice, on those whom He should judge. 5. It is necessary for our Redeemer to pass thorough fire and water, that is, to have experience of all tentations and all manner of afflictions, of death and hell, that for us He might overcome them all. But He that was the pattern of all Heroical and excellent virtues, that knew Himself to have come into the world, that He should die that shameful death of the Cross, john 3.14. and 12.33. was not so affrighted at the bodily death, but His strong crying and tears, were, That the pit of hell should not swallow Him up, nor that deep should shut her mouth upon Him. Psalm. 69.15. And He was heard in that which He feared, by Him that was able to save Him from death. Heb. 5.7. But He was not delivered from the bodily death: Therefore His prayer was, That He might be delivered from the power of hell. Psal. 22.20, 21. For hereupon depended the life of the whole world, not only that He might suffer, but much more on this, That He might overcome death, and him that had the power of death. And for this great deliverance would He magnify the Name of God with a song, and set forth His praise among His brethren. And because the benefit of this redounds to us; let us also offer the sacrifice of praise, the fruit of our lips, confessing His Name. Sect. 9 Now having thus declared the meaning of this Article, Sect. 9 It remains that I show for what reasons I hold this interpretation of this Article rather to be followed, then that of them, who say, That it signifieth only those hellish torments which Christ endured in His soul while He was yet alive: which although it be the drift oh the whole Chapter before, as you may see particularly in §. 3. Yet to make up the garland, take these flowers which have not yet been bound up with the rest. And first I put this as granted, That as the Articles themselves, so their interpretation must be such as must stand in the greatest evidence and declaration of the truth; in greatest opposition to falsehood, and heresy, and for the highest hope and comfort of the faithful. 1. Now if you follow the interpretation of the Fathers, that the soul of Christ, after death, ascended locally or really to hell, or the place of them that had died in the hope of the deliverer that was to come, than it follows necessarily, that the soul of Christ had a being, separate and apart from the body, and that it was therefore an immortal soul, that died not with the body, being able to subsist of itself without the body. Whereby the heresy of the Sadduces, which deny the being of spirits and souls separate, and consequently the immortality of the soul, and thereupon the resurrection also Mark. 12.18. Act. 23.7. is plainly refuted. And so that lie of the Thnatopsychitae, which thought that the soul of man came to nought, as the souls of the beasts; and no less, that opinion of Apollinarius, That Christ took of His mother, a vegetable, but not a reasonable soul; all which you see make the death of Christ, and our faith in Him, of none effect. But if that interpretation be only true, That Christ being yet alive, suffered hellish torments in His soul; are any of these falsehoods refuted thereby? doth it from thence follow against the Sadduces, ergo, the soul of Christ is immortal? he will deny the consequence, he will yield, it might suffer in His body; but that it died with His body, or against the Apollinarists, therefore Christ had a perfect humane soul; he will deny it: For although he yield that the soul of Christ suffered such torments; yet he will say, That it was only by a vegetable or animal soul, which suffered by compassion with the body. 2. But because the heresy of Arius did trouble the Church, more than any ancient heresy beside; Let us see what force our battery hath against his fortifications. The soul of Christ went down to hell locally, to the souls of other men; therefore Christ had a soul like other men. They will answer here, That His created Deity, which they falsely imagined, went down to the places under the earth. (For so they explain it out of job 38.17 as you may see, Answer: to the Ies: Chal: pag. 282. But that answer will not serve. For though it were a created Deity, yet being a Deity, it must have those conditions of omnipotency in the creature, of ubiquity, wisdom, etc. without which it could not be a Deity. So then that created Deity of Christ must be in hell before the death of Christ, as well as after, and those hellish torments of the new interpreters, which say nothing of the state of Christ's humane soul, after His death, avail nothing to the contrary of this heresy. 3. Neither doth this new interpretation only dismount our artillery against those ancient heresies, but also dismantles our fort of that refuge and succour which the distressed soul may have in the agonies of death. For be it put that our Saviour took our sins upon Him, and felt in Himself the fierce wrath of God against Him, so as if He had committed the sins of all men; I find therefore that God doth not deal with me according to my sins, nor reward me according to mine iniquities. And be it, that being dead, His body was buried in the grave; I will therefore say unto my grave, O sweet bed of rest, that wast so perfumed with the odours of His most precious Merits! But when I see my soul all over leprous with original sin, and spotted like a Panther with actual transgressions, now going to a place that it doth not know, and of which I have no assurance that He hath been there, to destroy the power thereof; then death, which was hoped to be the rest from the sorrows and troubles of this life, becomes the beginning of fear and doubt. For though I know my debt was paid upon His Cross; yet the Prisoner is not set at liberty, till satisfaction be acknowledged, and the discharge entered in the Book. But being fully persuaded that my Redeemer hath broken those brazen gates, and hewed the bars of Iron asunder, and hath there set up the Trophy of His conquest on high, than the life, cheerfulness, and vigour of faith is strong, because I know that as hell had no power to hold Him; so hath it no power of any of His; because His promise is, that the gates of Hell shall not prevail against his Church, and that the Prince of this World hath nothing in Him, john 14.30. He speaketh not of His natural, but of His mystical body: so that every member thereof may say with David, Psal. 13.8. Though I make my bed in hell, Thou art there; there shall the wings of thy protection cover me, and I shall be safe under thy feathers. For as thou hast died for me; so hast thou gone down to hell, for me, to spoil the powers thereof, that Thy Eurydice may follow thee from thence, without any fear of turning back again. 4. Moreover, if it were necessary in the Articles of our Faith, to bind us to believe that His body was buried, is it not much more necessary to know what became of His soul, especially seeing the redemption of our souls, and the freedom of them from hell, doth much more concern us, and hath much more comfort therein, then to be assured that our bodies shall rest in hope? Skin for Skin, and all that a man hath, will he give for his life, and ten bodies would he forsake, that his soul might be partaker of eternal life. But when the sum of our faith helps us to give no reckoning what became of the soul of our Saviour, more than this, that it was afflicted with hellish torments while He was alive, we cannot say of our own souls, whether they die or sleep, (as some have dreamt) till the resurrection; Therefore having confessed Him to be dead, that is, His soul to have departed from His body; His body to have been laid in the grave; let us also believe as we confess, that His soul went down into hell, which none but an Infidel will deny. 5. For the greatest benefit and deliverance, the greatest glory and thanks are due to God, which the creature is able to give. But the greatness of the deliverance is not known to man, but by the danger which he hath escaped. Therefore that man may be truly humbled, and truly thankful to God therefore; it is necessary that he do know what that vengeance and wrath of God against sin is, and what that punishment which is due thereunto, which he cannot do but by the true sight and knowledge of that punishment; which cannot be possibly in this life, wherein we know nothing but by the sense. Therefore as it is necessary, that man do know in the state after this life, what the torments and pains of hell are, by the true sight, and perfect knowledge thereof, that is, in his spirit and understanding, which with the acknowledgement of hell as his due, is that actual descent unto hell, whereto every man is bound, so for the assurance of our hope, is it always necessary to know, that our ransom from thence was wrought and manifested by the most certain proof and declaration that might be, which could not be by any messenger, or tidings, but by the presence alone of Him that wrought it. For as it had been of no avail for our Lord to have gone to hell, before the satisfaction for sin was made, so being made and manifested unto the powers of hell, it was not possible, but that it should be available for all them for whom it was made. And thus was that fulfilled, which in Hosea 13.14. O death, I will be thy plagues, O [sheol] hell, I will be thy destruction: repentance is hid from mine eyes. 6. As it is impossible that the end of all the sufferings of our Lord should not follow, when all those things were performed which were for the effecting of the end; which was the delivery of the believers from the power of death: so was it impossible that the end should follow, till all things were performed that were for the end. For so some of the means had been ordained in vain. But that is impossible, for His work is before Him, so that He leaveth nothing without the perfect accomplishment. Therefore it was necessary that as our Lord had redeemed us by His death, so He should also go down to hell for the delivery of His captives, * 〈…〉. as it was spoken of Cyrus the type, concerning the temporal captivity: but the highest truth was verified in our Lord concerning the eternal delivery. He shall let go my captives, not for price nor reward, Esay 45.13. and as it follows more clearly in the 14. verse, compared with histories, and most plainly by verse 15. Thou art God that hidest thyself, etc. 7. It was proved before, §. 5. and 6. That the souls of the faithful before Christ, had not ascended into heaven. From whence it follows, that they were in some other definite place, which by the common consent of men, heathen and Christians, and the Holy Scripture itself, is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hell, as it was showed before, § 1. nu. 2. to which place the souls of all men could not come, but by the decree of God upon all mankind. Now if the soul of our Saviour had not gone down to them, than had He not been made like to His brethren in all things except their sin: Then had He not been subject to the decree of God upon all mankind. Then had not His love to mankind been perfected, that having paid their ransom, would not see them set at liberty, without which the merit of His satisfaction had been in vain. But all these things are impossible. And therefore our Redeemer did really and actually go down to hell, or the place of the believers being dead; that He might free them from the power of death, as by the virtue of the eternal offering of Himself, He had preserved them from the hell of the damned. Thus according to the meaning of the Church of England (as far as I understand it) have I faithfully declared, and proved the meaning of this Article. That our Lord after his death, as concerning His soul, went down into hell; and that not only because I was baptised into this faith, as this Church doth hold and profess it: But also because I know that this Church, holy, and beloved of her Lord, is faithful unto Him, and to Him alone: For though she hold other Churches her sisters, called, faithful, and beloved; and esteems of their true Pastors and Doctors as beautiful and shining lights: yet follows she nothing of any man's, because it is his; whether Luther, or Calvin, or any other: but Christ her Lord alone doth she follow, according to his own rule, My sheep hear my voice, a stranger will they not follow, for they know not the voice of strangers. But therefore as I said before, so do I still profess that of this Church upon any light from God, shall hereafter declare the meaning of this Article otherways than I have done; I forsake myself to follow her, so far as she shall follow Christ. And if any faithful man be otherwise minded concerning the meaning of this Article, than I have showed: yet do not I therefore hold him of another Church or faith, so long as he doth hold fast the foundation; one God, and one Mediator between God and man, the man jesus Christ. For the Kingdom of God is not in the excellency of knowledge; much less in wilfulness of opinion in matter of doubt: but in joy, and peace, and comfort of the Holy-Ghost, while a man doth those things which he knows in himself, he is bound to perform. ARTICLE V ❧ The third day He risen again from the dead. CHAP. XXIX. THe sufferings of Christ were fulfilled, as we have seen: now it follows that we see the glories that should follow after, of which, the first is His triumph over death, by His resurrection from the dead, set against that in the Article before, He was dead and buried. And although by His death, He is said to have triumphed over the principalities and powers of death and hell, in His Cross. Col. 2.15. that is, by the power and virtue of His merit, as a champion by His valour and courage in the field, overcame His enemy: yet the actual manifestation of His triumph, was not solemnised, till by His resurrection, the power and glory of His victory did appear. But it may here be asked, How Christ our Lord is said to have risen again, seeing Saint Paul saith, Rom. 6.4. That He was raised again by the glory of the Father? To which the answer is easily returned, that Christ our Lord by His own active power, as He was God, raised Himself from the dead: and as man, by a passive or received power was raised again, as He said of Himself, john 10.18. I have power to lay down my life of myself, and I have power to take it up again. This commandment have I received from my Father. For, for this end was it necessary that our Mediator should be both God and man in one Person, that that which was not fit, nor possible for the Godhead, might be endured in the humanity, as those things which concerned His death and suffering: and that which was impossible to His pure humanity, might yet therein be perfected by His divinity, as Saint Paul saith, Rom. 1.3.4. that He was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God by His resurrection from the dead. But there is a great difference between the state or manner of His being before His death, and after His resurrection. For although the unity of the humanity with the Godhead, were always before, in, and after His death the same: yet was not that unity always manifested in the same glory and excellency. For in the first state, while He bore our infirmities, His body was subject to hunger, cold, weariness, death, and other accidents of a natural body, His soul also, though according to the principal, or first acts endued with the excellency of reason and knowledge; yet according to the second acts or practice, not knowing the grave of Lazarus, the day of judgement, etc. In the second state also, His body was deprived of sense and life, His soul of the proper habitation. But in His resurrection, His body was raised immortal, spiritual, 1. Cor. 15.44.45. glorious, and as in all the perfection of grace and compassion on us; so with the fullness of Wisdom and Knowledge to see our miseries, and to make intercesSion for us, according to the will of God. Rom. 8.26, 27. Now concerning the truth of this Article, that our Lord jesus risen again from the dead, though it be most powerfully witnessed, by God Himself, by Angels, and men, as you may read: yet because the authority of the Scriptures wherein those things are recorded, is set at nought by jews, Turks, Infidels, Heretics, and such God less people: let not us endeavour to lead them like sheep that follow their shepherd, but drive them like asses with the cudgel of reason. And as Saint Peter, Acts 2.24. takes his first argument from the impossibility of not performing those things which are contained in the Scripture; so our arguments shall be from the impossibilities in reason. 1. It hath been proved before, that man was created innocent, Chapter 15. That by his sin he became subject to death, Chapter 16. That there is a restoring to a better estate, Chapter 18. And that the restorer of mankind must be both God and man, Chapter 20. and 21. Then, that this restorer was jesus our Lord, the Son of the Virgin Mary, Chapter 24. who by His sufferings and death, made satisfaction for the sins of the world. Whence I argue thus. For the greatest good that can be done for mankind, the greatest ill may not be rewarded, for that were unjust with God. The greatest good that could come to mankind, was the ransoming of man from eternal death both of the body and soul. The greatest ill and baseness, is to be left continually in the state of death; wherein if Christ had still continued, then had He suffered the greatest ill, for the greatest good which could be performed. But this was impossible: Therefore our Lord did rise again from the dead. 2. If Christ, who sinned not, should have borne the punishment of sin, that is, to be subject to the power of death; yea, when the satisfaction was fully ended, then should His obedience to God the Father, have been not only without reward, but also for the satisfaction of the justice God, had He suffered from God (I speak after the manner of men) extreme injustice, who had neither sin of His own, for which He should suffer, and had fully satisfied for their sins whose surety He was. But this was utterly impossible; For he that fulfilleth the Law, shall live therein. Levit. 18.5. ergo, It was necessary, that Christ having fulfilled the Law, john 19.30. Luk. 24.44. should rise again. 3. If Christ after His suffering and death had not risen again, then had He not proved Himself to be the Saviour of the world; seeing none would have believed Him to be able, to give life unto others, that was not able to quicken Himself: So His suffering had been in vain, and His satisfaction, if not believed, should have been to no purpose: So His greatest and best work had effected no good to us, but a perpetual ill unto Himself. But all these things were impossible. Therefore Christ our Lord did rise again. 4. It is impossible but that where the greatest union is, there should be the greatest love and consent. The greatest union that may be, is in our Mediator, seeing the humane nature is sustained in the Person of the Deity. But the soul of Christ being separate, did naturally desire to be united to the body; for otherways should it not have desired the perfection of itself, that is, to give life and sense, and to be one with that body which was peculiar to itself, as the desire of all humane souls is, and therefore departed so unwillingly from the body. But if this were the natural desire of the soul, no way sinful, the Deity infinite in power, and in regard of the unity consenting thereto; it must follow of necessity that our Lord was raised again from the dead. 5. Contrary causes must have contrary effects. The devil, by the sin which he wrought in Adam, had caused death to prevail over life in all mankind. Therefore Christ, who came to destroy the works of the devil, must cause life to prevail over death. But this could not be done in the members, before it was perfected in the head. Therefore Christ being dead, must of necessity be the first fruits of them that are raised from the dead. And if it were necessary that Christ should first rise; Ergo, it was impossible that He should not rise. See Log: chap. 26.11.1. 6. If Christ our Lord had not been raised from death, (a) then had it been impossible that any of His believers should be raised again by the power and merit of His resurrection. 1. And so the natural desire of the soul to dwell with the body, should be created in vain: 2. So the debt being paid, the prisoner should ever be detained: 3. So the afflictions of the Saints, which they have suffered in body, should be in vain, as cold, hunger, nakedness, reproach and shame, imprisonment, stripes, yea, and death itself willingly sustained for the love of God, should be without reward. But it were against the justice of God, to cause the body and soul to suffer together, and not to glorify them both together: 4. So also the death of Christ should not be meritorious and effectual for the procuring of all that good which might and ought to come thereby, both to Himself and all His believers; For although the souls of the faithful, for the merit and full satisfactions sake of His death, being separate, might enjoy an eternal, though not a full happiness without the body, yet the body should be left eternally to the power of death, and so the works of the devil should not be destroyed by Christ: 5. So also the body should be created in vain, if to sorrow only, without the hope of happiness: 6. So God should lose His right in His creature, if He were not Lord both of the living and of the dead, both of the soul and of the body: 7. So the one sin and disobedience of Adam, should be more powerful to condemn mankind, than the everlasting and most perfect obedience of the Son of God should be to save it. But all these things are impossible; And therefore Saint Paul saith, Rom. 4.25. That Christ was delivered to death for our sin, and raised again for our justification. For if Christ be not raised again, then are we yet in our sins. 1. Cor. 15.17. not that any addition was made by His resurrection, to that satisfaction which He made by His death: but because the resurrection of Christ is a sure and manifest proof of His conquest over sin, death, hell, and all the power of the devil: and that His suffering and death was a full and sufficient sacrifice, whereby the wrath of God, against sin, was fully satisfied, so that we are now justified in His sight: whereas, if in the conflict of our Redeemer with death and hell, He had been overcome, then could we have had no faith nor hope, that our sin by His death had been done away. But now knowing that He hath overcome death and is returned to life again, in all the troubles and sorrows of this life and in the agonies of death, we may be secure; as the feet or toes that are lowest under the water, may hope at last to come to land, because they know that their head being above the water, the body cannot be drowned. 7. Now concerning that impossibility of Saint Peter, it stands thus. It is impossible that the Scripture, being the declaration of God's truth, made by Himself, 2. Pet. 1.21. 2. Tim. 3.16. should fail. But it hath been declared by the Scripture, that Christ should be raised again from the dead: Therefore it was impossible that He should still be held under the power of death. The text cited by Saint Peter, is found Psal. 16.10. to which you may add the types of the old Testament, whereby the death and resurrection of our Lord was signified, as that of Noah, Gen. 9 ver. 20. etc. When our Saviour, being as it were drunken with the love of His Church and desire of man's salvation, took our state upon Him, and for us became subject to the death of the Cross; when being seen by the jews, those Chumits, in the nakedness or infirmity of our estate, He was set at nought by them that thought that their Messiah could not die. john 14.34. But when Noah our Rest and Comforter awaked out of His grave, He brought on them, that destruction which was foretold, as the punishment of their hardness of heart and unbelief. See Psalm. 41.10. Dan. 9.26. So the Ram taken by his horns in the bush, Gen. 22. was the type of His death; and Isaac taken alive from the Altar, the figure of His resurrection: joseph also taken out of the dungeon, to be ruler over all the land of Egypt. To the same purpose was the law of the two goats, Levit. 6. the one slain for a sin offering, the other sent alive into a land of separation, to make an atonement for all iniquity, transgressions and sin of the people. So by the two Sparrows, Levit. 14. He that was like to the solitary sparrow on the house top, Psalm. 102.7. shed His blood for the cleansing of our leprosy; yet by the other that was sent alive into the open air, His resurrection was figured. Samson the Nazarite asleep in Gaza, signified our Lord in the sleep of death for the love of His Church; yet waking, and having opened the gates of death, He carried them away, and ascended in triumph to the top of the mount. judg. 16.3. And because the strong gates of death are carried away, we are assured that all they that sleep in the dust of death shall rise to give an account of their works. Beside these types, you have also the prophecies of the old Testament, as Psalm. 68.20. That to Him belonged the issues of death, both to pass out of death Himself, and also to bring out His from thence. Esay also Chap. 53. after He had declared His sufferings and death, proves His resurrection by His dividing the spoil with the strong. Our Lord also foretold His resurrection Himself, in Mat. 12.49. and Luk. 18.33. and the (b) infidelity of Thomas made it certain unto all. Upon all which texts, we may firmly conclude with Saint Peter, that it was impossible that our Lord should be held in the bands of death. 8. And why the third day was appointed for His resurrection, a reason or two are rendered. He risen not before, that none might doubt but that He was certainly dead: See the 27. chap. for His death and burial: Neither was it fit to defer the resurrection longer, lest the faith and hope of His Disciples should fail, Who trusted that it was He that should have redeemed Israel. Luke 24.21. 9 As Christ was man, that He might suffer death Chapter 20. so was He also God, the Lord and giver of life, Chapter 21. But it was unreasonable, that He which is one Person with the Author of life, should be subject to death, longer than that it might appear that He was certainly dead, and that by His own life and power He had overcome death. Therefore our Lord risen again the third day from the dead. 10. Although by the unseparable union of the humanity with the Person of the Deity, the body of our Lord might have been preserved uncorrupted (for if the devils have power to preserve man's body uncorrupted for nine days. Hom: Iliad. , or for a longer time, as it appears in the bodies of the Witches that die not by the justice of the Law) much more might the body of the Lord have been preserved; Yet because in Him, and by His death, the whole state of nature was to be restored; the soul of Christ returned again to the body, before corruption, in the course of nature, could seize on it. 11. The sign of jonas did prophesy as much. Matth. 12.40. and Hosea in plain and direct words Chap. 6.2. After two days He will revive us, and in the third day He will raise up, and we shall live in His sight. For in as much as Christ our Lord doth now appear in the presence of God for us, we also are said to have risen with Him. Colos. 3.1. The word of Christ Himself is plain to this purpose, that He would rise again. Matth. 17.23. and 20.19. and joh. 2.19. and that even in the understanding of His adversaries: Matth. 27.63. And that it was the same Saviour that had suffered for us, who risen again from the dead, the circumstances of the place do make it evident. For therefore was He buried in a new tomb hewn out of a rock wherein never any one had been laid, because the hardhearted and brazenfaced jews might have no pretext to say, That any other had risen in His stead. Notes. (a) THen had it been impossible that any of His believers, etc. Concerning the resurrection of the dead; fit place to speak will be in the Article following, Chapter 38. Here it shall be sufficient to remember that the believers only are raised up by the virtue and merit of Christ's resurrection, as it is said, john 11.25. but that the rest that shall be raised up in the last day, shall rise by the power of the Father, that according to the rule of justice, and that sentence upon Adam and all his seed, In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt die the death, they may receive according as their works shall be. (b) The infidelity of Thomas made it certain unto all. God that brings light out of darkness, used the unbelief of Thomas for a most evident proof of the resurrection of Christ: so that although he would not believe the testimonies of so many witnesses as had seen him alive; yet his own trials according to his own manner of proof, by his finger put into the print of the nails, and his hand thrust in his side, might make him to believe; yet was nothing of all this of any avail to them that are without. For as Epiphanius, not obscurely signifies, Haer. 28. and Aug. De Haer. cap. 8. directly affirms, Cerinthus that Heretic, and his followers, taught that Christ was only man, and consequently, that He was not yet risen from the dead. But both the proposition, Matth. 13.55. and the conclusion, Matth. 28. from verse 11. to 16. were made by the blind-hearted jews, before our Lord's ascension, and still is it their error unto this day. But if no man could do those miracles that He did, except God were with Him, john 3.2. If God alone doth know the heart; If God alone can forgive sins, Mark. 2.7, 8. then their seared consciences were bound by their own words to acknowledge, that He was God: Yet because they ever resisted the Holy-Ghost, Acts 7.51. that their conclusion might stand, that He was not risen from the dead; therefore with large money hired they the Soldiers, that had watched, known well to be takers, that they should say, that His Disciples had stolen Him away, while they slept. But this foul lie stinks to him that hath but half a nose: 1. For if they slept indeed, how could they say, His Disciples stole Him, rather than that He risen again of Himself? 2. Besides when the Disciples themselves did not believe, nor when they heard it, understood, that it was possible that He should rise again, Mark. 9.10. and 31. Luk. 18.34. no, nor yet after it was come to pass, could they believe them that had seen Him. Mark. 16.11. and 13. to what end should they be the author's of such a device? 3. Moreover all other circumstances are against it: For if they had stolen Him away, wherefore should they offer themselves the second time to a needless danger, as you read, john 20.4. etc. 4. Wherefore left they the fine linen wherein He was wrapped; which either respect to the corpses, or covetousness, or haste, or fear of the soldiers, or all together, would not have given them time to pluck off, when all places were full of fear, the earth itself trembling and quaking, Matth. 28.2. 5. Beside all this, the Priests having such power of themselves, such favour from Pilate, why did they not call the Apostles in question for the fact? That the whole truth, (if it were as they said) might have appeared, and would easily by their wit and greatness, have been fished out of fishers, if they should have gone about to conceal it? But— male verum examinat omnis Corruptus judex— And because they knew well enough, that by their further questioning, the truth of God, and their lie, would be manifest to all; therefore neither then, nor at any time afterward, durst they endeavour to disproove this truth, to which, God Himself with so great power of miracles and wonders, and gifts of the Holy-Ghost, gave witness: which Christ, who five time: in that one day, and at sundry times afterwards, showing Himself alive, did confirm: which the glorious Angels, and the holy Women did assure: to which the Apostles, who did see and handle Him, 1. john 1. that it was He Himself, and not a Spirit, which hath neither flesh nor bones, with great power gave testimony: which His very enemies the Soldiers, while they were yet unbribed, did confess. Yea, all the circumstances of the action itself, reproove the blindness and infidelity of the jews. O ye fools and blind, how long will you not understand? You see not your signs and wonders any more, there is not one Prophet more, the signs of your Messiah are fulfil'ed in jesus the Son of the Virgin Mary, that great Prophet, that was raised unto you, as Moses of your brethren: is there not one man among you that understands any more? Do you not hear the words of your Prophet, Hosea 1.7. I will save them (saith GOD) by JEHOVA their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen, as you still dream. But which is the greater deliverance, that from hell and the power of sin and eternal death, or from any temporary and worldly thraldom? If the greatest deliverance be performed, why dote you on the less? Which cannot be, till you forsake your infidelity, and return. Return therefore unto jesus your God, for whom you are fallen by your unheliefe: Take with you words, and turn to the Lord your God, and say unto Him; Take away our iniquity, and receive us graciously: so will we render the calves of our lips. But you will say, why did not Christ show Himself alive to all the jews at once, that they might all believe? I answer, that the life to which our Lord redeemed us, is a spiritual life, unto which we must walk by faith, and not by sight. And if it be not sufficient proof of His resurrection, that He beside other times, shown Himself alive to five hundred at once, 1. Cor. 15.6. neither would it have been sufficient to them that seeing, would not see, and hearing, would not hear, who said that His great works were done by the power of the devil, though He had conversed among five hundred thousand of them every day. ARTICLE VI ❧ He ascended into heaven, etc. CHAP. XXX. § 1. THough the justification of the Articles of our Creed be my only work: Yet here I hear two questions demanded of me. The first, who those were which are said, Matth. 27.52. and 53. to have risen at the resurrection of Christ, and to have showed themselves to many in Irerusalem? The second, where our Lord was in that time of 40. days, between His resurrection and ascension; seeing it is manifest that He conversed not wholly with His Disciples, but shown Himself unto them at several times, and that especially on the first days of the week, as on that day He had risen from the dead. To these I answer, where I have the authority of the Scripture, boldly: where I have not, I leave you at your liberty to think with me: First therefore in the number of them that risen immediately after the resurrection of our Lord, I put those high Saints which are reckoned in the Genealogy of our Lord, from Adam unto joseph, His nursing Father, except Henoch, and with them many of the Saints, who had slept in the faith of Christ, to come in the memory and knowledge of such as were yet alive in jerusalem, as Zechary, and elizabeth, Simeon, Hanna, and many others, who by special grace were raised again, shown themselves alive unto such as were appointed thereto, and to them bare witness, not only of the resurrection of Christ, but by experience in themselves, did also testify, that the power and virtue of His Resurrection was of force and avail for the raising up of all them that should believe in Him. And of these, especially, you must understand that speech of our Lord, which is john 5. Chapter from verse 19 to 30, where He saith that the hour was coming, and was even then at hand, when the dead should hear the voice of the Son of God, and should live. As you may remember how it was said, Note (a) on the last Chapter, that the faithful are raised by the virtue of Christ's resurrection, but they that shall be raised up to judgement at the last day are raised up by the power of the Father: Of these faithful that had died, was that word of our Saviour spoken, as it is manifest by the text. And this is that captivity or number of Captives, which till then had been held under the bands of death, but by the victory of Christ's resurrection, were freed from death, and ascended with Him on high, when He gave gifts unto men. Eph. 4.8. And although some will needs interpret that resurrection only of a new life, by repentance from dead works; yet the arguments in that place, will not so hold. All that are in the graves shall hear the voice of the Father, and shall come forth, some to life, some to damnation, ver. 28.29. Therefore some shall hear the voice of the Son, and live, verse 25. For the Father quickeneth the dead; so the Son, verse 21. And whatsoever the Father doth, the same things doth the Son likewise. But to raise the dead, and to give Repentance, are not the same things: So than that which is here spoken by our Lord, is no other thing, than that which was prophesied by Hosea 6.2. The third day He will raise us up, and we shall live in His sight: and was here fulfilled by the testimony of the Evangelists. And if the first fruits be holy, then also the whole lump. Rom. 11.16. So that we which have the same faith, shall at last receive the end of our hopes, and have our parts in that holy resurrection, whereof whosoever is partaker, on Him the second death can have no power. For as that prophecy of joel 2.18. was fulfilled in part, after the ascension of our Saviour, It shall be in the latter days that I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh, etc. Act. 2.17. and for a proof or assurance of that which shall be fulfilled, not in 120. Persons, but in all flesh, when the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea. Es: 11.9. Hab. 2.14. So likewise was that resurrection a pledge and assurance of that holy resurrection of the dead in Christ, which shall rise first. 1 Cor. 15.23. 1 Thes. 4.16. but the rest of the dead shall not rise till the time be fulfilled that they shall be judged according to those things that are written in the books. Revel. 20.4.5.12. Whereas of these it is said, john 5.24. That they shall not come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into judgement, much less 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into condemnation, but are passed from death unto life. For he that judgeth himself, and condemneth himself, and brings no other plea unto Christ but that, for mercy, may be sure to find mercy in the time of need. See 1 Cor. 11.31. Heb. 4.16. Now for the second question, although it seem more curious than profitable, to ask where our Saviour was after the time of His resurrection, during His absence from His Disciples; yet I will answer what I think, and leave you upon better consideration to give a better answer. First therefore it is manifest by the Scripture, that our Lord shown Himself Eleven times after His resurrection; if oftener, yet is it not manifest by the text. Of this number five manifestations of Himself were on the day of His resurrection. 1. To Marry Magdalen alone, Mar. 16.9. 2. To her again, and the other Marry, Mat. 28.9. 3. To Simon Peter, Luke 24.34. 1. Cor. 15.5. 4. To Cleopas, and his friend, Luke 24.15.35. 5. To all the Apostles, except Thomas, john 20.24. to which, if you put that time when He ascended on the 40. day, from mount Olivet, the five appearances remaining (for I speak not of those extraordinary manifestations of Himself after His ascension to Steven, Acts 7.56. and to Paul, Acts 9.17. and 1. Cor. 15.8.) will be most likely to have been on those five Sundays (as we call them) which were between, as it may well be gathered from john 20.26. because the Lord would fully finish the ceremonial use of the jewish Sabbath, and sanctify the day of His resurrection, for the remembrance of those benefits which we receive thereby. This use the Primitive Church made of it, Iust. Mart. Apol. ad Anton. and further (against our Traskits) because they would prevent their errors, who under the profession of Christianity did still retain their judaisme; whose folly to avoid, in stead of the jewish Sabbath, they celebrated the day of Christ's resurrection Ign: ep. ad Mag: These times of showing himself were. 1. To the Disciples, and Thomas with them. john 20.26. 2. At the Sea of Tiberias. john 21.1.3. 3. On a mountain of Galilee appointed to them. Mat. 28.16. 4. To above 500 brethren at once. 1 Cor. 15.6. 5. To james. ver. 7. And for the times of His absence from them, because it is said in the text to the Ephesians, cited above, That He did therefore descend into the lower parts of the earth, and ascend fare above all heavens, that He might fill, or fulfil, all things which were written of Him, not only those which were necessary for our salvation, as His Suffering, Resurrection, Ascension, etc. but also whatsoever belonged unto man to do in that state between His resurrection and ascension, as you may in part understand by that which hath been said, Chapter 28. N. I think that in those 33. days, He in His manly being, did view this earth and the fullness thereof, and especially visit and bless those places where He did purpose that His Church and truth should most of all flourish and continue. Sect. 2. Thus much for the questions by the way. Now turn to that which is the main. To every degree of the abasement of our Redeemer, there is a degree of exaltation and glory opposed. So this of the Ascension of our Lord into Heaven, is set against that of His descent into hell, and that by the authority of Saint Paul, He that descended, is even the same that ascended. And although it may very well be thought, that after His Passion finished on the Cross by His death, His going to hell was the beginning of His victory, to take to Himself that power whereby He, as the Son of man, is to reign over all the powers of death and hell; Yet because His body during those three days, is by most supposed to have been held under the power of death; and that all the parts of His victory are to belong unto Him, as He is Lord both of the quick and dead, that is, in His entire humanity, soul and body together; therefore that descent is rather held by many, as the lowest estate of His humiliation, as you might read a little before. Chap. 28. § 2. N. 3. But that our Lord (after that He had by many and infallible signs and arguments, by the space of forty days, given abundant proof of His resurrection) did ascend into heaven, these reasons do make it manifest. 1. Unto every body is a place due, according to the qualities and properties of that body, as in all natures here below, it appears that the place is both conseruative, and also generative of those things which are peculiar thereto, as the lower parts of the earth of the minerals; the surface of the vegetables; the water of fishes, etc. And again it is manifest that all things under the Moon are subject to corruption and change: no beauty, strength, or excellency is such as is not fading: no pleasure such, but that in the very using it grows loath some: no bravery so costly, but in three days wearing it waxes stolen; so that by the voice and consent of all men, the Angels and blessed souls, and all such beings as are free from corruption, and in the state of glory, are sent into heaven. But it is manifest that our Lord by His resurrection and conquest of death, purchased first to Himself, and then to us, a state of glory and immortality. Romans 6.9. Ephes. 2.6. Therefore also that He ascended into heaven. 2. The blessedness of the creature is only in this, That it may behold the glory of God, in whom alone is the excellency of all perfection; And this glory is seen only in the face of jesus Christ the Mediator, as was showed Chapter 24. § 10. N. 5. unto which blessedness, only the pure and blessed inhabitants of heaven, as the holy Angels and souls of men, are dignified. And from hence it must follow, that our Lord is ascended into heaven, the place of Angels and happy souls: For no man dwelling in his ruinous house of clay, is able to behold that glory. Exod. 30.20. 3. Hell is the place of torments; the earth of troubles, changes and calamities; therefore heaven is the place of happiness, or else no happiness at all is to be found. But that is impossible. For so all things should be created to wretchedness and misery only, which cannot stand with the love of God to His creature, and His infinite goodness. And if any such place of happiness be, and He our Saviour not brought thereto, than the greatest obedience performed to the Father for the manifestation of His glory, should be without reward. But this were unjust with God, and therefore impossible. And therefore it was necessary that our Lord after His resurrection, should ascend into heaven. 4. By the consent of Christians taught of God, and of Heathens taught by nature, heaven is the place of the greatest glory and happiness, as hell of sorrow and wretchedness. For although the Heathen allotted a degree of eternal bliss to the souls which they sent to Elysium, as you may read of Anchises and others, Aeneid. 6. yet they supposed that their false gods, and such as were by them canonised, went up to heaven, as Hercules, Castor and Pollux, Romulus, and he that was one of the chief masters of the devil's slaughtermen, julius Caesar. From whence you may reason thus: The place of the greatest glory is most due to Him that is both the Creator, and Restorer of all things. But such was our Lord jesus, as it hath appeared before. Therefore He ascended into heaven. 5. It is necessary that the blessed and damned do differ, by all those means whereby the pains of the one, and the blessedness of the other may be increased. The pains of the damned are increased by the horror of that place wherein they are tormented; therefore the joys also of the blessed, are increased by the superexcellent beauty and pleasures of that place of their abode. And because our Lord is blessed and holy above all that are blessed and holy, therefore it is necessary that He should ascend into heaven. 6. If Christ after His resurrection had not ascended into heaven, than could no other creature be blessed in heaven by His merit: So the place of perfect bliss should be without inhabitants, and therefore created in vain. So God should want that praise which were due to Him for His mercy and goodness shown to the creature. But these things are impossible. Therefore the holy Angels and Saints are blessed in heaven, and Christ our Lord, their King, among them. See john 14.2, 3. and Ephes. 2.6. 7. If Christ our Lord had not ascended into heaven; yea, so that His ascension might be witnessed both by men and Angels, Acts 1.10, 11. than could not we which believe in Him, have full assurance of those heavenly joys that are laid up in store for us. 1. So the Christian faith were all in vain, and we still subject to the punishment of our sins. 2. So His Conception, Birth, Miracles, Sufferings, Death and Resurrection, heretofore proved, should have been in vain; So His own preaching, and of His messengers. 4. So the prophecies of the Scriptures which were before concerning Him, even since the world began, should be without their truth. 5. So the faith and hope of them which confess the most glorious things of God concerning His goodness and mercy toward His creature; which faith they have in Him, being taught by Him out of his word, and by the success of all things that have come to pass accordingly should be frustrate. But all these things are impossible. And therefore God is gone up on high in triumph, and our Lord with the sound of the trumpet, all the holy Angels, and the spirits and souls of the faithful joying therein, all the troops of the heavens, and the heavens of heavens attending His coming, and submitting themselves to Him their Lord and King. Open your heads, o ye gates, and be ye set open ye everlasting doors, that the King of glory may come in. Who is this King of glory? The LORD of hosts mighty in battle, even our Lord JESUS, who by the wars of His suffering and death on the Cross, and by the conquest of His resurrection, hath overcome the powers of Hell, He is the King of Glory. Amen. Notes. (a) THerefore He ascended into Heaven.] This Article hath been gainesayed by the heretics diversely. Cerinthus said, That because jesus was man only conceived and borne as other men, He was not yet risen, but should rise at last. Aug. de haer: cap. 8. And thus by consequence he denied that our Lord ascended into heaven. But this jew, both by nation and opinion, is refuted before in all, by the proof of those Articles which he denied. And because he brought nothing for the proof of his opinions, but only opinion, let them all vanish at the authority of the holy Scripture, as mist before the Sun. Carpocrates, as he had been taught by Saturnilus, said, that the soul was only saved. Epiph: haeres: 23. So that the soul of Christ only, after it was freed from the body, ascended to the Father. Epiph: heres: 27. Against this heresy you may set the reasons and authorities of the Chapter before, and them that follow in the Article of the resurrection of the body, Chap. 38. The error of Apelles you read before, Note (a) on Chap. 26. § 1. N. 3. his reasons and their refutation you have Note (a) on Chapter 27. N. 3. The Seleucians' confess that Christ, when He ascended, took with Him His manly body, and carried it as high as the Sun, but there He put it off, and left it there. But Saint Paul affirms that He ascended fare above all heavens, that is, all the visible heavens, either of planets or stars: yet they brought their reason out of the 19 Psalm. vers. 4. He hath set His tabernacle in the Sun. So the vulgar translation of the Latins hath it from the Greek, and so all the Greek copies read it, except that of Aquila, who according to the Hebrew hath it thus; In them [the heavens] He set a tabernacle for the Sun, and this helps the Seleucians' nothing. But the error which hath swayed most against this Article, and which with their sacrilege, if they could see it, hath now defaced their Church, is that of the Ubiquitaries, who because they believe that very substance of the body and blood of Christ is received with the Bread and Wine; they are compelled to say, That His natural body may be in many, and consequently, in all places at once; as His Godhead is. And therefore, that this ascensin of Christ must be nothing else but a disappearance out of the earth, or a vanishing from the sight of men. For the ground of their opinion, they urge the word of our Lord, This is my body, This is my blood, but they deny not the Bread and Wine to continue still: which if it be true, than the sense of the words must be, In this, or with this Bread and Wine, is my body and blood. But the words bear no such meaning, but prove much rather, that transubstantiation or change of the Bread and Wine into the body and blood of Christ, which the Papists would. But this opinion of the Papists, were to deny Christ to have taken flesh of the Virgin- Marry, and so to have been made of the seed of David, at least in part of His bodily being, when His body and blood should be made of bread and wine. I, but it is said, Matth. 28.20. I am with you unto the end of the world. Answer. Not by His bodily being, but by His continual providence, and the graces of His Holy Spirit, as Saint Augustine saith, Corpus suum intulit Coelo, majestatem non abstulit mundo. Tract. 50. in joh. But the Centurists cite also the auctorities of the Fathers for their consubstantiation, as of Iust. Martyr in Tryph. of Tertullian against Martion, but corruptly, and falsely; and of Origen, but a forged one, Cent. 3. cap. 10. They bring also reason; for (say they) If the Divine and humane natures in Christ be united personally, than it is necessary, that where the one nature is, there must also be the other. But the two nature, are so united. Ergo. Answer. The consequence of the proposition is not good; where one of the natures is finite, the other Infinite, as Saint Augustine saith, God and man are one Person, and both together are one Christ; every where as He is God, but as He is man, in heaven, Ep'la ad Dardanum. But this question is by many handled at large; and if you desire further satisfaction, See the Catechism of Vrsinus, a Book (I think) common, and the question is there briefly handled. See Doctor Willet, Synopsis Pap. Contr. 13. Part. 1. See also Bucan: Inst: Theol: loc: 48. quesi. 60. etc. But in sum against these, or any other heresies which may rise against the truth of this Article, take the authorities of the holy Scripture. Psalm. 24.7. etc. Psal. 47.5. and 68.18. The place and circumstances of His ascension are remembered, Mark. 16.18. Luke 24.50. Act. 1.9. Read hereto, Ephes. 4.8. 1 Tim. 3.16. Hebr. 4.14. and 9.24. And that the natural property of Christ's humane body, being now glorified, is not destroyed, so that is, may be every where, as the Godhead is; take these authorities of the holy Scripture. First it is said of Him, after His resurrection, Matth. Mark. Luk. He is risen, He is not here. And Act. 1.10. While they looked up steadfastly as Hewent, which must not be by disappearing, but by leaving of one place and passage to another; and again vers. 11. This JESUS which is taken from you into Heaven, therefore not bodily with them still; as He saith, john 16.7. It is expedient for you, that I go away; for if I go not away, that Comforter will not come; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. And therefore it is said, Act. 3.21. That the Heavens must contain Him, until the time that all things be restored. And this is spoken of His body; neither can it be true of His Deity: and if His body be contained in heaven, how can it become a piece of bread, or in a piece of bread on earth? You will say, if Christ were last of all seen of Saint Paul. 1. Cor. 15.8. how was He still contained in the heavens? for His conversion was after the ascension. I Answer. Even as Saint Paul saw in a vision, a man, named Ananias, coming unto Him, whom otherwise he saw not till afterward. Act. 9.12. and yet the sight, by vision from God, is a most certain and true sight: Or if it were so, that He were indeed in His body, taken up into the third heaven, as he makes it questionable, 2. Cor. 12.2. so might he see as he professeth of himself, in your understanding. CHAP. XXXI. ❧ And sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. THe great antiquity of this Creed, appearing to be even from the time of the Apostles, brought some writers into an opinion that the twelve Apostle, before their departure from jerusalem, to preach unto the Gentiles, gave out this form of confession of the faith, to be acknowledged of every Convert, before they might be baptised, and appointed that all interpretation of Scripture should be made, according to the rule of it, as they will understand that text in Rom. 12.16. And some will yet be more particular herein, that every Apostle brought in that Article which he thought fit to be believed: Yea, and for a need they will tell you which Article every Apostle made, and so have of necessity limited the Articles to the number of twelve. But the Scripture admits no other rule of Interpretation than itself. And so I confess that the Creed, may be a rule, in as much as it hath the foundation in the Holy Scripture. As Saint Augustine saith, lib. 3. de Symb. ad Catech. Chapter 1. Deus in ecclesia regulam, etc. God would have one perpetual rule to be in the Church, which should be simple, brief, and such as every one might easily understand, according to which the godly mighty examine all doctrine, and interpretation of the Scripture: to receive that which is agreeable thereunto, and to refuse that which is contrary. And although for your satisfaction therein, I have followed the fashion for the number of Articles, as you may see; yet it cannot be denied, but that if you take every several conclusion for an Article, there are in all 17. or 18, at least fifteen several Articles; of which, this of our Lords sitting at the right hand of God, will be one, although in that number of 12. it go as a part of the Article before, He ascended into heaven. But this is not a thing of any great importance; And therefore let us rather look to the certainty thereof, for that is necessary for us to know and believe. But it may be demanded, why in the Creed, such a Metaphor should be used, as might endanger younglings and novices to think with the Anthropomorphites, that the invisible God is like to man, with hands and bodily parts. To which we may answer, that the Christians (I speak not of wilful heretics) were not so ill instructed, but that they knew right well how to discern between Christ and a Vine, john 15. between a figurative and a proper speech. And therefore the Fathers in the Church, the Author, or Authors of this Creed, having a jealous care of the truth of God, doubted not to propose it in the words of God Himself. Therefore seeing this part of Christ's glory is so prophesied to be fulfilled, Psal. 110. cited, Heb. 1.13. The Lord said unto my Lord, sit at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool, it is so to be retained in the Article of our Creed. And although it be a borrowed speech, yet seeing it is so taken into use by our Lord Himself, and by the Penmen of the New-Testament, it is by all means most fit so to hold it. For so our Lord speaks, Matth. 26.64. and Luke 22.69. Hereafter shall you see the Son of man sit on the right hand of the Power of God. So Col. 3.1. Christ sitteth above at the right hand of God. So Hebr. 1.3. and 10.12. and 12.2. with many other Scriptures to the like purpose. The word To sit, signifies either to tarry or continue, as in Luk. 22.49. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sat, that is, abide or stay in the City of jerusalem: or else it signifies to reign, as in Esay 16.5. The Throne shall be established, and He shall sit upon it in truth. So the right hand of God signifies either power, as Act. 2.33. He being by the right hand (that is, the power) of God, exalted: or else it signifies happiness, and joy eternal, as it is said, Psal. 16. and 11. verse: At thy right hand are pleasures for evermore. And although some Interpreters make the meaning of this Article, that Christ as God, hath equal glory and power with the Father; yet all these Articles, from the second to the eight, show what we are to believe of our Mediator concerning His manhood. And as our Saviour, in the state of His humiliation, was for the greater scorn and contempt, crucified between the two malefactors, one on the right hand, the other on the left; So in this glory of His, opposed thereto, He is set on the right hand of the Majesty on high, the principalities and powers being subjected unto Him. 1. Pet. 3.22. So then the meaning of this Article is, not only that Christ in our nature (confide caro) sits at the right hand of God in heaven, but also as He speaketh, Matth. 28.18. that All power is given unto Him, both in Heaven and in earth. Unto Him (I say) is all power given to reign, and to order the state of the world, not only as the son of God, which He did, and doth eternally with the Father, and the Holy-Ghost, Pro. 18.15. but as He is the Son of man, john 5.27. as Saint Paul saith, 1. Cor. 15.28. He (that was raised from the dead) must reign till He hath put all His enemies under His feet. This glory of Christ is thus declared, Ephe. 1.20. etc. God having raised Him from the dead, hath set Him at His right hand, in the heavenly places, fare above all principality and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come, and hath put all things under his feet, and hath given Him to be the head over all things unto his Church. The manifestation therefore of this glory in the humanity and the exercise of this power is in the discharge and execution of those offices and dignities which He hath received of the Father, to be the King, the Priest and Prophet unto His Church. He then as King, doth order the affairs of the world, sometime restraining the power of Tyrants and Persecutors of His truth; sometimes suffering their rage to grow on high; yet arming the hearts of His servants and subjects with courage and constancy against their fury, that it may appear, that He reigns in the hearts of men, and turneth them whithersoever He will: Otherwhile again, giving Kings and Queens to be nursing Fathers and nursing Mothers unto His Church, that truth may flourish in the earth, as Righteousness hath looked down from Heaven. And concerning His Priesthood, this is the sum, that we have such an Highpriest, Who is set at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty of heaven, to appear in the sight of God for us, to offer up our Prayers, to plead our cause before the infinite justice, and thereunto to present what Himself hath done, and suffered in our behalf, Heb. 8.1. and 9.24. and of these two, that is His Kingdom, and His Priesthood, Saint Peter speaketh, Acts 2.36. Let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made this jesus, both Lord and Christ. The office of His prophecy is in this, that as before His appearance in the flesh, He by His Holy Spirit instructed the Prophets: so after that, when He ascended on high, He gave gifts unto men; some to be Apostles, some Evangelists, some Pastors and Teachers, for the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, Ephe. 4.11.12. And hereunto belong all those means which he hath made subservient hereunto, by His Holy Spirit, stirring up the hearts of Kings and Princes, and other noble benefactors for the establishment and maintenance of Universities or Schools of the Prophets. But as the great rivers are nothing else but the gathering together of waters from many smaller fountains and gilz: so the particular Schools; founded by charitable and well-minded men, such as the most virtuous john Colet Deane of Paul's, and founder of that School was; are the perpetual supplies, without which the Universities could not be furnished either with Prophets, or with Prophet's sons. And therefore for these also doth our Lord, now sitting at the right hand of the Father, by His Holy Spirit furnish men with the gift of tongues, and their interpretation. And therefore you my 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, knowing that an account must be made for whatsoever we have received, either of gifts, or maintenance hereunto. And although besides our endless pains, we endure the inconveniences of these ill and dissolute times, the idleness and dulness of many untoward and graceless children, the folly of some more wicked and unthankful parents; though our employment be disesteemed: yet seeing the hope of the time to come is in our pains, let us for that duty which we own to Christ, that love which we bear to His Church and our Country, endeavour the faithful discharge of our trust, and remember that our reward is laid up in heaven. Now see the reasons of the conclusion. 1. It is justice, that the lowest degree of humility and abasement, for obedience sake unto the will of God, should be rewarded with the greatest glory and honour that may be done unto the creature. But it hath appeared heretofore, that our Lord Christ, for His obedience sake to the will of His Father, became subject to poverty, that we might be rich. 2. Cor. 8.9. He endured stripes, that we might be healed. 1. Pet. 2.24. That He suffered shame and death itself, for our offence, See hereto Chap. 27. Therefore Christ is set at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. This is the argument of Saint Paul himself. Hebr. 12. vers. 2. Christ for the joy that was set before Him, endured the Cross, despised the shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. This is that argument whereby our Lord strengthened Himself against death. john 13.32. If God be glorified in the Son of man, God shall also glorify Him in Himself. 2. To the most noble and worthy person, the most noble dignities and excellencies do belong. But the person of our Mediator, according to His Godhead, hath equal glory and honour with the Father, and the Holy-Ghost. Therefore to Him it belongs also, as man, to sit at the right hand of the Father, (a) because of His union with the Godhead. For although in His Godhead He could not suffer nor die: yet because His Godhead was clouded in His humanity, the whole Person was truly said to be both humbled and exalted. And as by that humiliation and offering of His body and blood, He made a full satisfaction to the infinite justice, for the sin of His people: So did He merit and purchase, both to Himself and to His chosen, all that honour and happiness which either the one or the other can be capable of. And therefore in His humanity to sit at the right hand of God. 3. It is necessary that He sit at the right hand of power, that is, have the superexcellency of all power in Himself: by whom the perfection and happiness of the creature is to be wrought, and by whom the greatest adversary to God, and to the happiness of the creature, must be subdued. But it is manifest that our happiness is to be perfected only by Christ our Saviour: and that the works of the devil our adversary, are to be destroyed only by Him. 1. john 3.8. Therefore it is necessary that He sit at the right hand of the power in heaven. 4. It is beseeming and necessary that He should have (b) some preeminence above mankind, by whom all joy and blessedness was procured unto mankind; in as much as that blessedness belongs properly unto Him that purcha'ste it: but to him for whom it was purcha'ste, it belongs only by grace and participation. But the resurrection of the body, and ascension into heaven, belong to us, as it were in common with Christ, in as much as the faithful must rise again, and after judgement ascend with Him into Heaven. john 17.24. and 2 Thes. 5.17. Therefore to sit at the right hand of the power of God, is peculiar unto Christ alone. And although it be said, Ephes. 2.6. that we are made to sit together in heavenly places in Christ; yet that is spoken only of that abundant happiness and joy which we shall find in eternal life, as the text was cited even now, out of Psal. 16.11. Notes. (a) BEcause of His union with the Godhead. The Apostle, in the first Chap. of the Epistle to the Hebrews, proves by many arguments that the Mediator must be God: in the second Chapter, that He must be man. Among those reasons, whereby He proves that Christ is God, this is one: because it was said unto Him, Sat at my right hand. For God that gives not His glory unto another, Esay 42.8. doth not give this glory to sit at His right hand, unto any one that is a creature only. Therefore doth not our Lord sit at the right hand of God, but as man subsisting in the Person of the Son of God: neither yet as God, being one with the Father in the infinity of being and power, is He said to be so exalted, as to Sat at the right hand of God, but only as He is God manifested in the flesh. For this exaltation and glory was given unto Christ, as the reward of His humiliation, as it is said, Phil. 2.8.9. He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross: Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a Name which is above every name, etc. So that the glory of sitting at the right hand of God, is due unto Christ as the Mediator, that is both God and man in one Person. (b) Some pre-eminence above mankind: Although the graces and perfections, and consequently the glory of Christ's humanity in the Person of the Godhead be so superexcellent, as all the Angels in heaven cannot comprehend: yet doth not that glory and perfection take away the proprieties of the humane nature; nor yet His sitting at the right hand of God, take away His subjection unto God. For He is excepted that did put all things under Him: and when all things are subdued unto Him, than the Son also Himself shallbe subject, that God may be All in All, 1. Cor. 15.27.28. because that then the government and mediation of the Son is perfected in the creature, when it doth appear, that God hath loved the Church, even as He hath loved Him. john 17.23. If then Christ our Lord be still God and man; or else He ceases to be our Mediator: and if to take away the properties of His humanity, as to be contained in a certain place, be to deny Him to be man, as Saint Augustine saith; Take away place and you deny all bodily being. How can that falsehood of the being, of Christ's body, be justified? I said enough against this error, in the Note on the Chapter before: but they argue also from this Article thus; The right hand of God is every where. Christ in His bodily being, sits at the right hand of God; Ergo, His body is every where. If this be a good conclusion, then why not this? The right hand of God is eternal. Christ in His bodily being, sits at the right hand of God: Ergo, His body is eternal. But this against the Article, He was borne of a Virgin. Beside, the Assumption should be, the body of Christ is the right hand of God; but that is most false: and this is most faulty of all, to take a tropical speech, as if it did signify properly. See Log: chap. 21. N. 5. The errors mentioned, with this, in the Note on the Chapter before, need not to be remembered. Another error against this Article of Christ's sitting at the right hand of God, and making intercession for the Saints, is of them who pray to Saints and Angels, and so deny the Al-sufficiency of His mediation, and make void that text of the Scripture. 1. Tim. 2.5. There is one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ JESUS. But they have a pretty distinction for it, if it were aught worth, that the Saints are not Mediators of satisfaction; for so is Christ alone; but of Intercession only: If we should be content with this, yet all their works of Supererogation are vanished, and all their saleable treasure of their Church not worth a mite. For the merit of Christ is not saleable, but for every one that will, to buy without money. Esay 55.1. And that because it is infinite and unvaluable, as the ransom of sin must be, and no man's merit can be. Beside, the Scripture saith, That Abraham knows us not, and Israel is ignorant of us. Esay 63.16. And therefore, as a Father saith, It is the most safe adventure, for a man to commit himself only to the hands of God. A third error is of them who sacrilegiously withhold those tithes which God hath allotted for the Ministers of the Church, as you may see it proved by them who have writ to this argument, whatsoever any lying Legend hath brought to the contrary: you may read Sir Henry Spelman, james Sempal, and especially the Reverend Bishop of Chichester to this argument. And so no less are they in this heresy, who withhold, or curtail, or invert by any means, those maintenances which the founders of Schools or Colleges have appointed, as Seed-plots, for the Church. And these sacrilegious errors are the more damnable; as an error in fact, is worse than an error in opinion. And if you look unto the state of those Churches, where that competency of which they prate was first established, in France, in Germany, and elsewhere: you may see not only the contempt and beggary wherein the Ministers live; but that even the whole Churches, have ever since the time of this competency, lived under persecution. And if whole Churches and Commonwealths suffer for this, shall you sacrilegious Impropriators, you saleable Latrones, and you false feoffees, that are unfaithful in other men's wealth, unfaithful in that which is committed unto you only in trust, escape, though you be long forborn? He that shall come, will come, and will not stay, to give to every man as his works shall be, not as they are here in show, or with pretext, that I am but one. And this is the next Article whereto ye shall be summoned. Arise ye dead, and come to judgement. ARTICLE VII. ❧ From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead. CHAP. XXXII. § 1. THe word, to judge, hath many significations, in the Holy Scripture. But in this Article of our Creed, it is taken only for the execution of that eternal doom upon men and Angels, when God by Christ shall raise up all that are dead, and by the ministry of the Angels shall bring all both good and bad before Him, that every man may receive the things done in his body, according to that which he hath done, whether it be good or ill, 2. Cor. 5.10. So the resurrection of the body, is in order of time before this judgement: yet is it here set before it; because it is a part of that glory which is given unto Christ, for that abasement and blasphemy of sinners, which He endured when He was most shamefully and despitefully entreated before the Priests (when they smote the judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek, Mic. 5.1. Luk. 22.64. and after, most unjustly condemned him before Pontius Pilate) And because it is fit that they which are to be judged should behold their judge: therefore the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgement unto the Son, john 5.22. as it is said, Acts 17.31. That God hath appointed a day, in which He will judge the world in righteousness, by the man whom He hath ordained; whereof He hath given assurance unto all men, in that He hath raised Him from the dead. So the authority or power is of the Father: the administration or performance of the judgement, is by the Son, and that, as He is the Son of man in the Person of the Deity. For as by the perpetual influence of the Deity upon the soul of Christ, He is able to know the secrets of all hearts: so being man, touched with the feeling of our infirmities, as having been tempted in all points, like as we are, yet without sin, Hebr. 4.15. He shall administer justice, and pronounce His sentence with that equity, that even the damned shall confess that their condemnation is most just. But the judgement is either particular or general. For, inasmuch as the soul being separate from the body, is capable of joy or pain, therefore immediately after the departure, doth it go, either to happiness, or sorrow, as it is plain by the history of Lazarus, and the rich man, Luk. 16. and as our Lord said unto the thief, Luke 23.43. This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise. So Saint Paul desired to departed and to be with Christ. Phil. 1.23. To this purpose you may read more, 2. Cor. 5. from verse 1. to 9 For because the deeds to which punishment is due, are voluntary: For otherwise they were not sinfully sinful: and that the will is in the soul, not in the body: therefore the punishment comes first upon the soul, as it is said, Ezech. 4.18. The soul that sinneth shall die: and by the soul upon the body, at the resurrection. In the mean while (as it hath been said) the soul hath a feeling of the wrath of God, being shut out from His presence, and a fearful expectation of those torments which it shall endure, when it shall be joined to the body again. So also the souls of the Saints immediately after they are delivered from the burden of the flesh, are in joy and felicity, having the feeling of the favour of God, and the full and assured knowledge of the forgiveness of their sins, and waiting for the time of that blessed Resurrection, when they shall enjoy their bodies again, and in the mean time, this is their Paradise, this is their heaven. And thus the sentence being beforehard passed on every man particularly: that general judgement is only the publication and execution of that sentence, when the blessed shall both in body and soul receive the full accomplishment of all their happiness, and the damned likewise, the full measure of their torment in hell: And therefore is that day, Rom. 2.5. called the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgement of God. And if for the authorities and reasons brought, it be evident, that the soul immediately after it is departed, is a partaker of joy or pain: How shall we hearken to that doctrine of the Sadduces, Act. 23.8. or to that Arabian error of the Thnetopsychitae, that the soul doth die with the body? Or to our late dreamers the Psychopannychitae, who affirm, that the soul sleeps in the grave till it be awaked again with the body at the general resurrection? §. 2. Sect. 2 Now concerning the circumstances of the general judgement, it is manifest by the word of the Holy Scripture, first that, that the time thereof is unknown. For He shall come as a thief in the night, 1. Thes. 5.2. and 2. Pet. 3.10. or as in the days of Noah, Matth. 24.37. to 47. For as the hour of death, or the time of the particular judgement is uncertain to every man, and that for our exceeding benefit; that we should not through carelessness run into sin, but that we should ever be mindful to watch: So likewise is that day of the universal judgement. For seeing all mankind must stand in this general judgement, therefore it cannot be, but at the end of the world, as it is manifest, Matth. 13.40. etc. to 49. Apoc. 20.21. And therefore in His power only that made the world. And as no wisdom beside His own was in the making of the world; so shall there be no other wisdom either in the continuance, or putting an end thereto, beside His own. And seeing we know nothing of the Father's will, but by the Son; if the Son Himself knew not the time, Mark. 13.32. who may presume to know it without Him? But you will say, how could the Son be ignorant of that day; seeing by the influence of the Deity on His humane soul, He might know what He would know? I Answer. His coming was to give life unto the world, and withal, the knowledge of all those things, and them only which were profitable for His Church to know: and because the knowledge of the time of this judgement for the avoiding of security, was no way either necessary or convenient to be known, therefore our Mediator would not know that which was not fit to be revealed to His Church. For He would be like to us in all things, except our sin. And I have heretofore showed, that some kinds of ignorance are not sinful. And therefore that womanish fancy that will limit the day of judgement, to the month of February, which shall be in the year of our Lord, 1645. is very weak, and contrary to those prophecies of Scripture, which teach us to expect the conversion of the jews; And with them, the fullness of the Gentiles, and that Sabbatisme or restitution of the creature, which is so often promised both in the old and in the new Testament, as it may hereafter appear more at large. Yet as by the Spring we know the approach of Summer; so hath He given us certain signs, that we may lift up our heads, and know that our redemption is nigh at hand. For as it is a manifest sign, that the destruction of that Nation is nigh, when every man is oppressed one by another, when the Boy shall behave Himself proudly against the Ancient, the base against the honourable, Esay 3.5. yea, and be upheld therein; O times! Into what corruption of manners are we fallen? So when all charity is put only in the maintenance of idleness and begging Gangrels, being otherwise dead and cold, when the apostasy is fully revealed, and the man of sin detected, which exalteth Himself above all that is called God. Moreover when by the working of the false apostles of that apostasy, there is a daily falling from the faith, 2. Thes. chap. 2. When that ill servant hath said in his heart, My Lord delays his coming, and hath begun, and so continues to smite his fellow-servants, Matth. 24.28, 29. what wants, but only that the Tribes of Israel should be gathered to the Church; that all the wicked should be put away like dross, Psal. 119. verse 119. For the ungodly shall not stand in the judgement, nor the sinners in the congregation of the righteous. Other signs you may read in the Holy Text, and consider of them: But that sign of the Son of man, spoken of Matth. 24.30. is doubtful. Some think it shall be a cross; some a great light, Lactantius Lib. 7. Cap. 19 thinks it shall be a sword which shall fall from heaven, like the ancyle, Ovid. Fast. lib. 3. But Sibyl orae. lib. 2. saith, it shall be a glorious Star in the likeness of a Crown; except by an Enallage of number, she means a Crown of Stars, as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometime doth signify a constellation. Her Verses are these. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. A shining Star like to a Crown most sheen, In the bright heaven of all men shallbe seen For many days.— Next after the signs of our Lords coming to judgement, you may read the manner of His coming, as it is delivered in the Scripture, so fare as our understanding can conceive, to be with power and glory, Mat. 24.31. even the glory of the Father, Mat. 16.27. and all the holy Angels with Him, Matt. 25.31. In flaming fire rendering vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord jesus Christ, 2. Thess. 1.8. §. 3. But that we dwell not on these things which are either beyond our understanding, as the enquiry of the time, which is therefore hid, that it may stint our curious search, or else so plain, that we need not doubt, let us go forward to those questions which seem to offer some doubt unto us. 1. And first, if Christ our Lord shall judge the world in righteousness, Psalm. 9.8. how is it said, Matth. 19.28. That the Apostles shall sit upon twelve Thrones, and judge the twelve tribes of Israel? And again, 1 Cor. 6.2. Do ye not know, that the Saints shall judge the world? and vers. 3. Know ye not, that we shall judge the Angels? To which the answer is returned, That the Apostles, by their faith and doctrine, shall take away all excuse from the Israelites, and so judge and condemn them. For this is their condemnation, That they believed not in the Name of the only begotten Son of God. john 3.18. So the Saints in general shall judge the wicked by their faith and repentance, whose example the wicked would not follow, that they might be saved. Moreover, seeing the faithful are the members of that mystical body, of which Christ is the head, they in Him are said to judge the world, that is, the unbelievers. And seeing all the enemies of Christ, are to be brought before the Throne of Christ and His Church, in as much as Christ shall judge the world and the wicked Angels, in truth and righteousness, all the faithful shall subscribe to the judgement, as most holy and just; and so are rightly said to judge the Angels. And as the holy Angels shall then rejoice with joy unspeakable, for that glory and mercy which God shall vouchsafe unto His Saints; So the Saints likewise shall give glory and thanks to God, for that increase of glory and happiness which He shall give unto the holy angels, as the reward of their continual watch and guard which they have held about us, all the time of our pilgrimage upon earth, and at the hour of death, helping the soul out of the prison of the body, and conducting it unto the place of joy. But it is said, john 16.11. That the Prince of this world is judged already; how they shall we judge the Angels? Answer. The devil is judged already. 1. In the decree of God. 2. By the word of God, he is declared to be reserved in chains of darkness, and that hell fire is prepared for him and his angels. 3. By his own knowledge of his own estate. 4. Because his torment is in part begun. But in judgement there be two things; First the enquiry of the fact, than the award of the reward. Neither the deeds of the good or bad angels shall be enquired into at the judgement ((a) as some have thought) but the reward shall be assigned unto them both, and acknowledged to be most just by the Church (as I said before) and this is our judgement of them. Neither yet shall the senseless creatures be exempted from this judgement, in as much as The elements shall melt with heat, and the earth with the works thereof shall burn. 2. Pet. 3.10. that they may be freed from that corruption to which they are subject for the sin of man. For when man sinned, the whole bodily creature which was made for man, was thereby subjected to vanity, not of it own will, or any inclination which was therein, in respect of any weakness of state wherein it was created, For all was exceeding good. Gen. 1.31. but that the justice of God against sin might be manifest, is it subjected to the curse, Gen. 3.18, 19 yet under hope that when man is freed from his sin, the creature also shall be restored unto that liberty from corruption, wherein it was created, Rom. 8.20. etc. as it is said, Rev. 21.1. and 5. Behold I create all things new, See 1. Pet. 3.13. 2. Another doubt may be concerning the form of the sentence, whereby it may seem that the merit of works is justified: For so is the sentence pronounced, Come ye blessed, receive the Kingdom prepared for you; for I was hungry, and ye gave Me meat, etc. and on the other side, Depart ye cursed, for I was hungry, and ye gave Me no meat, etc. Mat. 25.35. to 46. Ans. It cannot bedenied, but that the sentence of condemnation upon the reprobate, is according to their works, as the deserving causes thereof; For not tobeleeve in Christ, is that great sin which is the cause of condemnation. joh. 3.18. and 16.9. Neither is a dead faith ought worth, but that faith only is accepted which worketh by love. Galat. 5.6. without which, it is impossible to please God. Hebr. 11.6. And if all things that are not of faith, be sin. Rom. 14.23. Then the wicked works of Infidels and Hypocrites, and much more their violent and wilful rebellions, must needs be concurrent causes of their condemnation. But the faithful are therefore called to possess the kingdom. 1. Because they are blessed of the Father. 2. Because they are predestinate thereto, and the kingdom prepared for them, from the beginning of the world. So their works come not as causes of their happiness, but only as the fruits of their faith. But because works only, and not faith in the heart, are manifest to the world; therefore is the comparison made only of the works, both of the godly and of the wicked, that the justice of God may be manifested in rewarding the works that are manifest to man. But you will say, if men for their ill deeds do merit hell, why should they not by their good works merit heaven? See the answer, Chap. 19 Object. 2. and 3. 3. A third question may arise concerning that which is said, Luke 21.32. This generation shall not pass, till all be fulfilled: why then was not the judgement long ago? Answer. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a generation, in the narrow signification, doth signify that multitude of men which are alive at once, and withal, that time in which it is supposed they shall all be dead, which in common reckoning is 100 years. And in this sense the saying of our Lord must be referred only to that which He had spoken concerning the overthrow of jerusalem, which followed about forty years after, and the signs which should go before that; As the preaching of the Gospel in all the world, See Col. 1.6. False Christ's, See Note (g) on Chapter 24. Wars, Pestilence, etc. But because our Lord after the answers to the three questions made by the disciples, Matth. 24.3. 1 Of the destruction of jerusalem. 2. Of the sign of His coming. 3. Of the end of the world, adds these same words, This generation shall not pass etc. verse. 34. a generation cannot be so narrowly taken in this place, but rather it must signify as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Saeculum: and so taking the infancy of the world, in the time of nature, for one generation; that middle age under the Law for another, and then this old age of the word, under the Gospel; there is no other generation or change of state in the Church to be looked for; but in this very generation, all things shall be fulfilled. And therefore Saint john saith, 1 Epist. 2.18. This is the last time. And although Saint Peter say, 1 Epist. 4.7. That the end of all things is at hand, and that therefore we should be sober and watch unto prayer; because we know not when our Lord shall call us to a particular account of our stewardship, when all things of this world are ended with us: Yet Saint Paul, 2 Thess. 2. directly affirmeth, in his time, that that great day of God should not come, till the Apostasy was revealed, which could not be till he that withheld, that is, the Imperial power that then ruled, was taken out of the way. 4. But seeing that day of God is so terrible to the wicked, as that they put it fare from them, and again so much desired of the godly, as that they cry, Come Lord jesus, Come; it may seem not altogether unfit to see some reasons of their different desires. Concerning the wicked, it is manifest, that they being condemned already in their own consciences, have great cause to wish that there were no day of judgement, no judge, no tormentors. But the faithful in Christ, who have the testimony of God in their hearts, that their sins are covered, have great reason to desire that day. First and above all, that the glory of God, His mercy and justice may be manifest. Secondly, that the merit of Christ's sufferings may appear to the glory of His grace, in them, that they may have the actual possession of that happiness which they have here only in the assurance of hope. And no less do they desire that coming, that the body of sin may be truly abolished. For which desires sake, even death itself, is here in life oftentimes desired, and when it comes, is most willingly embraced; because that thereby they are justified from their sin. Rom. 6.7. And among other causes, for which they pray that the Kingdom of God may come, this is one, that although even because they refrain from ill, therefore do they make themselves as a prey. Esay 59.15. yet in that day the truth of their innocency shall be known. And although here the more innocent and harmless a man is, the more is he subject to injuries, slanders and surmises, and that because men have forsaken the fear of the Almighty, and having forgotten that he that taketh up, not only he that raiseth a slander (which every base varlet may do) but he that believeth it, and and much more he that furthereth it, hath no part in that Kingdom, Psal. 15.3. Yet they use their tongues as if they were their own, and remember not that they must give an account of every idle, much more of every lying and hurtful word. And here there be some which doubt not to say, that the godly may desire the coming of that day, that they may see the reward of the wicked, perhaps upon that text where it is said, The Righteous shall be glad when he seethe the vengeance, Psal. 58.10. But I suppose it necessary to answer with this difference; That so fare forth as a wicked man, or men are declared the enemies of God, of Christ, of His Church, a Christian may say: Do not I hate them, o Lord, that hate thee? yea, I hate them with perfect hatred, as if they were mine enemies. Psal. 139. ver. 21.22. (the hatred must be of their sins, not of their persons) but concerning those offences that are towards a man's own self; let the same mind be in us which was in Christ jesus, who suffered for us, leaving us an example, that we should follow His steps, who being reviled, reviled not again; who being mocked and wounded, yet made intercession for the transgressors. Therefore, though thine enemy's despite thee daily without a cause; though he that eats thy bread, lift up his heel against thee; though the drunkards make songs upon thee, yet remember that there is a reward for the righteous, that thy innocency shall break forth as the light, and thy patience shall shine as the noon day. And remember that unthankful wretches are no new thing in the world, for the Orator said long ago, and I have often found it true, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. But if that Punk could say, Men' moveat cimex Pantilius? Shall he that hath experience of such monsters of ingratitude, put it in the power of a son of Belial to disquiet his peace? Therefore let the Rymer read what others judge of him. Feltham Resolu. Cent. 2. Ch. 56. Let him write a book against me; I will bind it as a Crown upon my head. And if for my love, and for my best deserts I find enemies, yet will I pray for them, Psal. 109.4. For seeing we know, that if we suffer with Christ, we shall also reign with Him, shall we not pray for them that seal unto us the assurance of this hope? Therefore shall this be among my chrefest joys, That the drunkards make songs upon me. 5. It may further be objected from john. 3.17. That God sent not His Son into the world, to condemn the world, but that the world by Him might be saved. And if He came to save the world, how shall He judge and condemn the wicked to Hell fire, seeing this is contrary to the end of His coming? Answer. First, that is spoken of His first coming only. Secondly, it is manifest by the verse before, verse 16. that the world in this place signifies only the faithful in the world, for whose sake the world is, and continueth. For to these only, God gave His only Son, that they should not perish, but have everlasting life. And as Christ was once offered for these, at His first coming; so for these shall He appear the second time to salvation. Heb. 9.28. For the last judgement being but the confirmation of the sentence of their justification, by the death of Christ, and the putting of them in the actual possession of those promises that depend thereon; their sins are so covered, as that (b) there shall not be any remembrance of them in the judgement. For the worshippers that are once purged, have no more conscience of sin to their condemnation. Hebr. 10.2. seeing the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. And therefore (as a countryman of ours saith well. Ames Med: Theol: Cap. 41) This judgement, in respect of the faithful, is essential unto Christ, as He is the Mediator: but in respect of the unfaithful, it is of power only, given Him by the Father, not essential to His mediation, but some way belonging to the perfection thereof; because the Father hath committed all judgement to the Son. Yet let me add thus much, that although the judgement of condemnation be not essential to Christ, as the Mediator of reconciliation; yet He being the great Steward of the house of God, it is essential to Him as the Son of God, to take vengeance without mercy on them that dishonour His Father, and despite the Holy Spirit of grace, which by the light of their consciences proclaims their sin unto them, which they will in no wise forsake. §. 4. Sect. 4 6. The last question is with those mockers that say either in words, or by their continuance in their wicked deeds, where is the promise of His coming? For since the days of Henoch, who threatened that judgement. jud. 14. above 4500. years are passed, and yet the world continues, and that which hath been, is even that which shall be, neither is any thing new under the Sun, Eccles. 1.9. Moreover though for your reasons against the eternity of the world, Chap. 13. it may seem the world is not eternal, à parte antè, but that it had a beginning; yet is it not clear, but that it may be eternal, à parte pòst, and continue for ever, in as much as the Creator cannot repent Himself to be the workmaster of so glorious a frame: So not to continue it in that being which it hath, and to do good unto it, as the Psalmist confesseth, Psal. 104. verse 31. The glory of the Lord shall endure for ever; the Lord shall rejoice in His works. And if all the creature being made, was exceeding good, Gen. 1. the destroying of so great a good cannot be but a very great ill, which is fare from that goodness, by which it was created. I answer. That the Text of Eccles. proves not but that the judgement shall sit at last, and the books of every man's conscience shall be open, that the judgement may be acknowledged to be according to their works. And although the time seems to us to be prolonged, that the number of the elect may be fulfilled, that the patience and long-suffering of God towards the wicked may be manifest, for their repentance, that the desire of the godly, and their longing for His coming may be inflamed: Yet to Him the time is determined, and can neither be longer nor shorter than He hath appointed: only that coming to judgement hath been proclaimed so long before, that in all ages, men remembering the judgement, might avoid those things for which they should be condemned. So for those reasons whereby you would enforce the continuance of the world for ever, it hath been answered, that it is for the greater good to man and the creature which was made for his use, that this world should have an end, that the creature might be freed from that corruption to which it is subject by reason of his sin, then that it should still continue. Neither doth that text of the 104. Psalm, prove any thing to the contrary. For as the glory of God had endured in eternity before the world: so shall it continue, when neither the heaven nor the earth, nor yet their places shall be found any more, Reu. 20.11. And as for that glory of His, which is manifest in the creature, it shall be more wonderful and excellent in that work of His recreation, which the Cabalists call de Mercava, when the creature in the world to come shall be brought to glory, and be able to consider the super-excellency of His mercy and goodness, than it is in this work, de Bereshith, or state of creation in this present world. And if the deprivation of this present being, seem to be ill, because the being of the creature was good in the state of creation: then the taking away of all this ill, and misery which is since come upon the creature by reason of sin, and the restoring of it into an estate of happiness, without comparison, better and surer than that wherein it was created, must in both respects be a far greater good, than either to have created it such as it was, or to continue it in the present being. Bring hither what you find in the 18. Chapter, §. 2. But because it seems not fully proved unto you, that this race and stare of mankind, and the world with him must come to an end, take with you a reason or two, and think on them. 1. It hath already been showed, Chap. 13. that no kind of infinity, either of continuance, of power, of number, etc. can belong unto the world, or to the creatures therein contained, from whence the present doubt is easily assoiled. 2. Also it hath been proved before, Chap. 15. that man was created innocent: and our miserable experience shows, that we are now subject to sin, and the punishment thereof, death. It hath likewise appeared, that there is a restoring of mankind to a better life than that in which man was created, which cannot be but in the perfection of the whole man, both in body and soul, as it will appear further in the 38. Chapter. But it is impossible that a finite matter, should be sufficient for infinite bodies: yet if the race and generation of mankind should have no end, than their bodies must needs be infinite, which because it is impossible, therefore the generation of mankind must have an end. 3. The generation of mankind is either by chance and fortune, and so it cannot be continual, either before, or after; or else it is natural, and so it must needs be for some end: For every motion hath an end when it is come to that period or bound wherein it doth rest; otherwise, nature should work in vain, which cannot stand with that wisdom which gave power unto nature, and prescribed unto it how it should work, and proposed to what end. But if the generation of mankind be infinite, than it is impossible that ever it should come unto that uttermost end for which it was ordained. For although these, and the millions of men that have been, and are, shall arrive unto that end for which they were created: yet they that are to come in infinity, cannot all be brought to that end which is finite and determined. Therefore the generation of mankind must needs be finite. 4. If there shall not be an end of the generation of men, than there can be no differences among them: as to be virtuous, and vicious; wise, and fools; good, and bad, etc. But this is most false and contrary to experience: yet the former consequence is necessary. For it being put (as the reasons before partly show, and partly suppose) that every man shall have his own body, and his own soul: yet if the matter whereof their bodies shall be made, be finite, it will be impossible that infinite bodies be made thereof: If it be infinite, yet an infinite number of bodies will be answerable thereto: So that if the number of Wisemen be infinite, there will be no matter for the bodies of fools: if that number of fools be infinite, there will be no matter for the bodies of the wise; if both be infinite, yet one infinity of matter cannot be sufficient for two infinities of bodies: if both be finite, then have we that we sought for, and the generation of men must of necessity have an end. 5. Nothing that is infinite, can consist of parts that are finite; for these being terms contradictory, and most opposed, cannot be the original one of another. But every particular man in this supposed infinity of the generation of men, is finite in his being, in his continuance, and in every other circumstance of his being: So this infinity in every of the parts thereof, must be finite, and measurable to a time that is finite, and so must have an end: or if to avoid this end, we must suppose that the time must be infinite, yet so an infinite measure must be necessary, to measure those parts that are finite. But this is impossible, and therefore the generation of men must needs be finite. And if the generation of mankind must have an end, than also all this creature which was made for his sake; for after him, the continuance thereof should be to no use; but neither the work of God, nor of Nature His servant can be in vain. Therefore the generation of mankind is finite. §. 5. Sect. 5 But you will say, if every man immediately after death receive the sentence of joy or punishment everlasting, what needs any such general judgement, as we understand in the Creed? Answer. 1. If the body being the instrument of all the works of the soul, should not partake with the soul in the reward to those works: then the justice of God should not be perfect. Therefore for the manifestation of the justice of God, it is necessary, first that there be a resurrection of the body, then that there be a judgement, that as men have done either good or bad in their bodies, so in their bodies they may receive their reward. And this answer shall be the first argument against those mockers, that say, where is the promise of His coming? 2. If all men must rise again with their bodies, that they may receive according to that which they have done in their bodies; than it is necessary that there be an examination of those works which they have done. And this examination of every man's works, with the execution of that sentence that follows thereon, is that which we call the general judgement. But the first is necessary, as it will appear in that Article of the Resurrection. Therefore also that there be a judgement of the quick and the dead. 3. Neither can there be any severing of the godly from the wicked, nor discerning or comparing of their different works, nor any assignment of a reward answerable thereto, but by a judgement wherein all are assembled. But all these things are necessary to be. First, that the sheep may find themselves freed from the violence and injury of the goats, who in all the time of this world have pushed them on the sides, have eaten up their pasture, and trodden the residue under their feet, Ezech. 34.18. etc. Compare herewith, 2. Pet. 2.8.9. Secondly, that the commandments of God first written in the heart of every man; then expressed in the tables of stone; and at last most lively interpreted by Christ Himself, Matth. 5. may be found to be most just, when the doers of the Law are rewarded, and the breakers punished. Neither is it sufficient that every man's deeds be discussed in the particular judgement at his death; for so neither their deeds nor rewards, nor the causes of them should be known unto all; Therefore it is necessary that there be a general judgement. 4. If there be not a general judgement wherein the deeds of all men shall be tried and rewarded, than the hope of all virtuous men should be utterly void, and their obedience to the Commandments of Meekness and Patience, without reward, See Matth. 5.43. and Luk. 6.27, 28, etc. So also the promises of Christ should fail of their truth and performance, See Matth. 5.10. but these things are impossible. So also virtue should have no advantage above vice, or rather should be no virtue at all, when there were no difference in the reward. Nay, rather virtue should be vice, and and vice virtue, and every man the more wicked, violent, and bold he were, should be so much the more virtuous and blessed, in as much as by violence and cruelty, he might without fear bring his purposes to pass, to the hurt of others, although it were only to please himself. But all these things are impossible, and utterly against the truth and justice of God. Therefore there shall be a general judgement, wherein the deeds of all men shall be tried and rewarded. 5. That which was threatened from the beginning, by God Himself, must of necessity come to pass at the last. But the judgement was threatened to Adam, the common father of us all, and in him, against us all, because we were all in him originally; that upon the breach of the commandment of God, Gen. 2.17. we should be liable to death, both of body and soul. Neither was this only threatened at the beginning, but ever since written as it were by the finger of God in every man's heart, their own consciences accusing or excusing them in the day when God shall judge the secrets of all men by jesus Christ. Rom. 2.15, 16. Therefore there shall be a judgement. 6. It is necessary, that the judgements of God done in this world, do appear to be just: For shall not the judge of all the world do right? Genes. 18.25. But many of His judgements are yet hid, and unknown, and of them that are known, yet the faithful do not always see the reason thereof, and so the praise which is due unto God for His justice therein is lost. But it is necessary that the equity and justice of God be manifest to all, that His works may be magnified and He acknowledged to be just in His words, and pure in His judgements. Psal. 51.4. Therefore it is necessary, that there be a revelation of the righteous judgement of God in the world to come. 7. No perfect judgement can be made of any thing, till the full end thereof do appear: so that although the life of man be ended, and a particular judgement passed upon him; yet because many things succeed in the time to come, which depend upon those things which he hath done in his life; therefore it is necessary that there be a final judgement at the last day, when those dependences also shall have an end. For in respect of these dependences, a man may be said to live after his body is dead, and that in divers respects; As in his fame, either good or bad, which oftentimes is very false, but at the last judgement the truth shall appear: then in his writings, as the holy Prophets and the Apostles live in those Oracles which the Holy-Ghost gave out by them. So Arius and other Heretics live yet in those venomous opinions which they broached, and other vain people do hold after them. So parents live by the example of their life, to the instruction, or corruption of their children (Maxima debetur pueris reverentia) So by their correction and precepts to them, in the fear and nurture of the Lord, or by the neglect thereof to their destruction. Do you not hear me, ye foolish and wicked parents? know you not yet that you shall answer for that wickedness of your children, which they shall do through your default? And if there be any other way whereby a man may be said to live, as in the furthering of good laws: So a man lives in his buildings, or in the havoc of that estate which his Ancestors disposed to the use of his children, in new fashions daily devised worse and worse, and if there be any other thing which remains for example, either good or bad, after death, it is necessary that it be enquired of, and rewarded in the last judgement. 8. If there be not a general judgement, in which the blessedness of the faithful, both in soul and body shall be perfected, than the sufferings of Christ, and those glories that followed thereon, should be to no end, seeing He being in Himself God blessed above all, neither suffered nor did any of all that which was wrought in His manhood, for any increase of happiness to Himself, for that was impossible, but that the benefit thereof might be manifest in us. But this cannot be till the general judgement: For then shall the wicked see that there is a reward for the righteous; Then shall they know that there is a God that judgeth the earth. Psalm. 58.11. Read hereto, Wisd. Chap. 5. 9 All the dignities of God, have heretofore been proved to be infinite, therefore also His justice; which should be defective, if it had not given a perfect rule, according to which, all judgements ought to be guided: and if it did not examine all judgements, thereby to ratify or cancel them. And because not only the administration of public justice is with judgement, but also every particular action whereto the will doth consent; therefore it is necessary that there be an universal judgement, wherein all judgements and actions of men shall be examined and rewarded. From this justice also it followeth, that it ought to be well with the good, and ill with the wicked. And because for the most part, it falls out contrary in this life, therefore it is necessary so to be in the life to come. See 2 Thess. 1.5, 6, 7. 10 And because judgement is not fully executed according to justice in this world upon many offenders, in great and grievous, and hidden sins, and that especially on great persons, who live as they list, oppress others, and hold themselves beyond the compass of all laws: And moreover, because in this state of mortality, man is not able to endure that punishment which is due to His sin; therefore is it necessary, in the justice of God, that such sins being not repent of, should be openly and fully punished in the world to come, as it is said, Esay 30.33. Tophet is ordained of old: yea, for the King it is prepared: He hath made it deep and large, the pile thereof is fire and much wood; the breath of the Lord, like a stream of brimstone, doth kindle it. Therefore there shall be a general judgement. 11. And if you will admit of an argument inductive, it may easily be admitted, that there shall be a general judgement at the end of the world, by that severity which God hath so often showed, and doth show, against sinners, to put men in remembrance of that great day; As the drowning of the world, for their cruelty, in the days of Noah; The overthrow of Sodom, for their unnatural lust; The captivity of jerusalem by Nabuchadnezzar, for their idolatry; And at last, the utter casting off of that nation for their unbelief; The public calamities of Plague, Wars, Earthquakes, and overflowings of Waters, to the overthrowing of Cities and Countries, famine and death, every hour, attending on every man in his greatest security, are so many summons to every man to think on that day. For as the pilgrimage of Israel in the wilderness was the type of our pilgrimage in this world; so their punishments were types unto us. 1 Cor. 10.11. But there is no type but of some thing which is to be indeed: So that the destruction of the people in the wilderness, were both to them, and especially to us on whom the ends of the world are come, an assured argument of this great judgement at the last day. And as the carcases of them that were disobedient, fell in the wilderness, whereas the rest enjoyed the promised land; So all those punishments that were remembered, bring to the faithful an assured hope that God will deliver them. For Noah and Lot were saved from destruction. Ebedmelech and Baruch had their lives given as a prey. Ezechiel, Daniel, and they that were signified by the basket of good figs, jere. 24.5. were carried away for their good. The Christians likewise were safe at Pella, in the destruction of jerusalem. Euseb: Ecclesiast: hist: lib. 3 Cap. 5. So He delivereth from the noy some pestilence. Psalm. 91.3. etc. and in the days of famine, those that wait on Him shall have enough. Psal. 37.19. So these things are testimonies unto us, both that there shall be a judgement, and that the godly shall be saved, and the wicked condemned. 12 And as if nature if self had imprinted the acknowledgement of this judgement in every man's mind; so there was never any man (c) that confessed the resurrection, but did withal confess this general judgement. And therefore, though every other Article of our Creed have been impugned by some heretic or other, yet never any gainsaid this, I mean since those errors were stilled in the Apostles time. See 2 Thess. 2.1, 2, 3. But whether it be, that every man acknowledging the justice of God (as no man can confess him to be God, whom he doth not believe to be just, and a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him) Hebr. 11.6. or whether it be that the testimonies of the holy Scripture are so clear in this point, as that they have stopped the mouths of all heretics; the thing itself is most certain to be, as it may appear by the texts of Scripture already cited, and by these also that follow, Psalm. 9 vers. 8. The Lord hath prepared His Throne for judgement: He shall judge the world in righteousness, He shall minister judgement unto the people in uprightness; And Psalm. 50. vers. 3, 4, 5, 6. God shall come— A fire shall devour before Him— He shall call to the heavens from above, and to the earth, that He may judge His people, etc. Psalm. 96.13. The Lord cometh to judge the earth, He shall judge the world with righteousness, and the people with His truth: As it is also Psalm. 98.9. Eccles. 11.9. Rejoice, o young man, in thy youth, etc. but know, that for all these things God will bring thee unto judgement: And Eccles. 12.14. God shall bring every work into judgement, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be ill. Read hereto, 2 Pet. 3. Chap. from vers. 7. to 15. and Reu. 20. Chap. from vers. 11. to the end. § 6. Sect. 6 Thus it being manifest that the judgement shall be, it must also appear, that our Lord jesus must be that judge. Whereto, though I have said that which may be sufficient, at the beginning of the Chapter; yet because it is our special hope and comfort, that He shall be our judge, that was our Creator, that hath so dear bought us, that hath been our Mediator, that doth evermore preserve us from the power of the enemy; let us both begin and end with this, lest the conscience of our own sins, and the remembrance of that fearful time, should cause us not to long for that coming. For if God be very terrible in the assembly of His Saints, Psalm. 89.7. how much more in that gloomy day, when He comes to render vengeance with devouring fire before Him, and to repay His adversaries to their face? and to pass on them, that fearful sentence, that shall (d) never be reversed, and from which there is no appeal? But lift up your heads, you that are little in your own eyes, and tremble at His words, for that is the day of your redemption, and God Himself will come and save you. And because He is God, He knows the secrets of your hearts, and sees your reverence and your fear before Him, and your acknowledgement of your own unworthiness: And because He is man, and hath had experience of sorrows, and passed under the burden of unjust and cruel judgement, and hath for us endured the Cross and shame, that we might be delivered from the wrath to come: therefore lift up your heads, and receive the reward of your faith and patience; and the end of your hopes, the eternal salvation of your souls and bodies. 1. For if our Lord having suffered such things for us, and having overcome in all His sufferings, having ascended into heaven, to be our continual intercessor for us, should not then give unto us that everlasting life which He hath purchased for us; His sufferings and intercession should be altogether in vain, and our faith in Him, which He hath wrought in us by His holy Spirit, should be utterly void; and those promises which He hath given us in His holy Word, should fail of their truth and performance. But all these things are impossible. And therefore our Lord jesus shall come to give reward unto His servants, both small and great, Revel. 11.18. and to cast out the unbelievers out of His kingdom. 2. In things that are orderly disposed for an end, nothing may be omitted of those things that are necessary for the attainment of that end. The end of our Lord's incarnation and sufferings concerns either God or man. Concerning mankind, everlasting life in all happiness and joy, is that great end for which our Saviour was incarnate, died, and rose again, and shall raise us up at the last day; And by His judgement of mercy and compassion on us, shall deliver unto us the seizure and possession of that eternal happiness. Therefore our Lord jesus shall be judge of the quick and the dead. Concerning God, it is necessary that in His love to His Father and zeal to His honour, He take vengeance on them that have offended the infinite justice, and despised that mercy and pardon which hath been offered unto them, and still have continued in their sin, and followed it with greediness. Therefore in this respect also, our Lord jesus Christ shall be the judge of the quick and the dead. 3. And seeing our Lord jesus hath undertaken that honourable enterprise utterly to destroy the works of the devil, it is necessary that He leave nothing unperformed, which doth belong to the accomplishment thereof. Therefore He shall judge those Angels which are reserved in chains of darkness unto that day, and bring upon them that destruction which they sought to bring upon all mankind; And shall also reward those servants of His, which have continued faithful in His service, whether they be Angels or men. 4. None is so fit to judge between two, as he that hath interest in both parties, and knows the worthiness of them both, and that not only in his understanding, but also by his experience of them both. But mankind is to be judged for that which he hath done contrary or according to the will of God. Therefore seeing our Lord jesus is very God and very man (as it hath been proved) He shall be the judge of the quick and the dead. 5. In every orderly and just judgement, both the judge and the sentence ought to be manifest and known to all them that are to be judged. And because mankind is to be sentenced to joy or pain eternal, both in soul and body: And that if either the Person of the Father, or of the Holy-Ghost should judge, otherways than by the Son, as they are no way to be apprehended by the bodily senses of the wicked: so neither could the judge be seen, nor the sentence heard; Therefore it is necessary that our Lord jesus do execute the general judgement, as being the Mediator between God, and His creature, And that the performance of that judgement be by Him in His manly being, as it is said, john 5.27. 1. For seeing the exaltation and glory of Christ is the reward of His humility, Phil. 2.8.9. it is just with God, that He that was most unjustly judged, should be the judge of all the world. 2. Moreover, seeing He hath received power to raise the dead, for that which He performed in His manhood, it is fit that the judgement should be by Him in His manhood. 3. And seeing in His manly being, He taught the way to everlasting life; it is fit that He in His manly being, should require of us an account of the practice of His precepts. 6. None is so fit to judge the world, as He in whom the perfection of justice, and compassion on mankind are accorded. Our Lord jesus because He is God, is infinite in His justice: and because He is man, and knows man's weakness, better than man himself; therefore can none be so merciful and compassionate on man as He, especially, having Himself been oppressed by the most unjust judgements of the Priests, and of Pilate. Therefore our Lord jesus shall judge the quick and the dead: For being pronounced innocent, and yet condemned, john 18.38. and 19.6.16. He hath power to acquit them that are condemned in themselves, and to give them His innocence, that it may be available to them, which was not available to Himself. 7. This is that doctrine which He left unto His Church, as it is said, Acts 10.42. jesus of Nazareth commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is He which was ordained of God to be the judge of the quick and the dead. So Saint Paul, Rom. 14.10, 11. saith from the Prophet Esay, 45.23. We shall all stand before the judgement Seat of Christ. For it is written, as I live saith the Lord, every knee shall how to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. 2. Tim. 4.1. The Lord jesus shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing, and his Kingdom. And. Rev. 1.7. Behold, He cometh with the clouds, and every eye shall see Him, even they that pierced Him, and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him; Even so Amen. Notes. §. 1. (a) AS some have thought.] Sect. 1 Divers unnecessary questions have been moved about this general judgement. Some concerning the fignes, and circumstances that go before it; As whether that fire which goes before the face of the judge, be it, by which the Heaven and earth shall be purged. Some concerning the adjuncts of the judgement, as concerning the place, whether it shall be in the valley of jehoshaphat; For which they bring joel, 3. verse 2. and 12. And reason that He shall judge there where He was judged, and despitefully entreated. For this valley is between jerusalem and Mount Olivet, over which our Lord was led to jerusalem, after He was taken in the close of Gethsemane, which valley some suppose to be named of jehoshaphat the King; and that because he gave thanks there with his Army, after his spoil of the Ammonites, 2. Chron. 20. But the circumstances of the history accord not well with this, but rather that that valley of Barachah, where the King gave thanks, was in the Tribe of juda, near to the wilderness of jeruel, as Adrichomius describes it from jerom, Brocard, and others. But this being put, that the Lord shall descend from heaven to judge; wheresoever He shall judge, according to the interpretation of the Name lehova is judge, there is the valley of Ichoshaphat, which the Prophet therefore mentioneth, because that valley was the usual place where they buried the Israelites that died at jerusalem. So they move question here, what causes and persons shall come into judgement? And the consequents of the judgement they inquire, what manner of fire the fire of hell is; and supposing it to be bodily, to torment the bodies of the damned, how the devils, which they suppose to be purely Spirits, can be tormented by a bodily fire. And hereupon also, they move doubt about the qualities of the bodies which (according to the opinion of the Stoics concerning the souls, Lactant. lib. 7. cap. 20. to the damned they think, shall be base and subject to passion, to the blessed contrary; with many such curious questions, as you may see in Tho. Aqu. in Sent. lib. 4. Dist. 44.5, 6. etc. of which, perhaps you may find some answered here, as far as it stands with the clearing of this Article. 1. And first because the ill angels were utterly given over for their sin, and they by their malice confirmed only in ill, their actions being ever unanswerable, and they beforehand condemned, therefore it may seem that there shall be no enquiry of their actions, but only the sentence of condemnation is to pass upon them, and accordingly the execution: So the good Angels, because they have been kept from sin, and confirmed in goodness, are exempted from enquiry of their actions, being only good: so they shall have the sentence of approbation. 2. Concerning Infants, there is much more question. For some will have all the Infants of infidels to be damned: others put to them the infants of believers also that were never baptised: And this hard sentence is passed on them, because their original sin was never washed away in baptism: But seeing original guiltiness in Infants is only by the stain of nature, that the whole world may be guilty before God, and so be the subject of His mercy, Rom. 3.19. may it not stand as well with the mercy of God, that the faith of their Parents should be imputed to them for their justification unto life, although they were not baptised, as it doth stand with His justice to condemn them, because they are tainted by their Parents? For the children of the faithful, see the judgement of Saint Paul, 1. Cor. 7.14. For the Infants of infidels, I say only this, What hast thou to do to judge another man's servant? Hierax and his followers are accounted heretics, because they condemned the Children that died before they had knowledge; yet brought he a show of authority for his opinion, out of 2. Tim. 2.5. No man is crowned except he strive. But I answer, that Christ in His agony did strive for them, and His merit apprehended by the faith of the Parents, brings them within the compass of the Covenant made to Abraham and to his seed, as Saint Paul argues, Rom. 4.16. Gal. 3.6, 7, 8. and 1. Cor. cited before. Epiph. Haer. 67. adds hereunto auctorities which make the case most clear, especially for the Infants of the faithful, as that in Psal. 145.9. His tender mercies are over all his works: and Matth. 21.16. Out of the mouth of Babes and Sucklings hast thou perfected thy praise, Matt. 19.14. Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven, and argues that although the Children of Bethlehem had not knowledge of Him, for whom they suffered; yet can it not be, but that they should be partakers of glory for His sake for whom they suffered. Hereto you may take that in Matth. 18.14. It is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish. 3. But the Doctors square most about them, that lived both to know and to do both good and ill: For some think that all such must come into judgement for all their works, their words, and thoughts. But others say, that neither the Infidels, because he that believeth not is condemned already, john 3.18. nor among the believers, they that are perfect shall come into judgement; because there is nothing in them for which they should be condemned (But if the infidels never heard, how could they believe, Rom. 10.17. and is there any among the believers that can say, his heart is clean?) Therefore the great business in the judgement will be (as they suppose) about them that knew God, and loved in His Religion, whose works, good and bad, being examined and compared together, if the good be moe, and overbalance the bad, the doers shall be justified unto eternal life: but if the ill deeds exceed, they shall be condemned to punishment. This seems to be the judgement of Lactantius lib. 7. cap. 20. to whom as siding with him, john Voss. De extr. jud. Pte. 1. Thess. 4. writes. jerom. August. Greg. the Great, and Isidore of Sivil. But Lactantius hath many things concerning the world's restoring, and the last judgement, which to many of this age would seem strange, which perhaps we may see hereafter. jerom and Augustine are by and by brought by him into the number of them that think that all sins indifferently shall be brought into judgement, though not by way of enquiry or examination, yet of condemnation, as jerom speaks, impios & negatores non judicabit, sed arguet condemnatos. And thus you see how the Saints already have judged the world. But let us see how fare it is fit to approve, or reprove their judgement. §. 2. Sect. 2 First concerning the faithful in Christ, because they (as I said before, §. 3. num. 5.) at the hour of their death are admitted into a degree of everlasting happiness, and are put in the full assurance of the perfection thereof, at the resurrection of their bodies: their sins are assuredly pardoned, and the pardon by those graces is sealed unto them. And after their sins fully pardoned, to bring them again into remembrance at the general judgement, seems too inconvenient. Therefore they shall be partakers of that blessing, which is, john 5.24. never to come into judgement. And Psal. 32. verse 1.2. that their sins shall be forgiven, fully covered, and no way imputed untothem; and in this respect are they equal unto the Angels, because their sins shall be forgotten, as cast into the bottom of the Sea: but the good deeds which God hath wrought in them, and by them, shall be remembered, that they may be rewarded: and thus far we follow the Doctors. But because their judgements are otherways contrary to the rule which is, 1. Cor. 4.5. judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come who will both bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the Counsels of the hearts: Let us first see what the Scripture faith of the infidels whom they so cast away, as that they hold them not fit to be judged: then let us look on that which they speak concerning the comparison of good and ill works together, for eternal life, or eternal punishment. 1 For the first, it is manifest by Saint Paul, that the works of the Gentiles, whom they call infidels, shall come into judgement, where he saith, Rom. 2. verse 14, 15, 16. That the Gentiles doing by nature the things contained in the Law, show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts accusing or excusing them in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by jesus Christ. Now this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, this written word of the Law, is the knowledge of sin, Rom. 3.20. And seeing every man, whether Christian, jew, or Gentile, hath the knowledge of sin in himself: therefore is every mouth stopped thereby, and all the world is become guilty before God, and consequently, subject to judgement, as Saint jude saith, verse 14. and 15. Behold the Lord cometh to execute judgement upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them, of all their ungodly deeds, and of all their hardspeeches. 2. Moreover seeing we do not put all sins to be equal, as the Stoics, but do believe and know, that the judge of all the world will do right, and that the greater sins shall have the sorer punishment; if all the Gentiles or infidels be not equally sinners, it is necessary that the award of their punishment, and so the execution thereof be also different and unequal, as it is said, That every one shall receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or ill. Upon which ground we may safely conclude against them of the contrary opinion, that every man's deeds, of what Nation or sect soever he be, (except before excepted) and especially the deeds of the reprobate, shall be particularly examined, that the cause of their condemnation may appear to be most just. 3. Thus our Lord speaks of the Queen of the South, and the men of Ninive that shall rise in judgement and condemn that hardhearted generation: thus of Tyre and Sidon, that should more favourably be dealt with, than those wicked Cities where his glorious miracles being wrought had no power to turn them unto God. But no such condemnation of the one by the other can be, but by comparison of their works. Therefore the works of the Infidels must come into judgement. That which they bring for proof, that the Heathen shall not be judged in His sight, hath no sure ground, as that in Psalm. 1. The wicked shall not rise again in the judgement, as the greeks translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lo Yakyma 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which had been better 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Kom, here signifies not only to arise, but to stand firm and sure, as they that are risen and stand upright. So the meaning is, They shall not stand or be established, that is, not justified in the judgement. So they bring that in the third of john verse 18. He that believeth not, is condemned already; but that is not spoken of the Gentiles that never heard of Christ: but of such Infidels as were in the Church of the jews that knew Christ to have suffered, and believed not in Him, as it is manifest by the 14 and 15. verses: And these having the conscience of their sin, and refusing the means of satisfaction to the justice of God, must be condemned in themselves. Neither do they say any thing to the contrary, who object that a long time must be needful to the examination of the wicked men's deeds, words and purposes. For the book of every man's conscience shall be opened, and they shall at once be made to see the whole story of their sinful life. Neither shall words be needful, where the deeds are manifest. But what time soever is taken thereto (as there is a time for every thing) it will neither seem long to the blessed, nor long enough to them that are damned. And thus I think it is plain, that the works of the Gentiles shall come into judgement. 4. Moreover, seeing the Gentiles, though they have not the Law written, yet are a law unto themselves; And seeing God, the just rewarder of all men, renders to every man, whether Jew or Gentile, according to his deeds; to them that by continuance in well-doing, seek glory and immortality, eternal life; What brazen faced hypocrite art thou, who contrary to the commandment of God Himself, Mat. 7.1, 2. and Rom. 14.4. dost presume to judge; yea, and that being so threatened, that with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged? If God be no accepter of persons, but that in every nation he that fears God, and worketh righteousness, is accepted of Him, (for the prayers of Cornelius, Act. 10. and his alms came up for a memorial before God, before he heard the Gospel preached by Peter) why shall we presume to judge them that are without, the judgement of whom belongs only unto God. 1. Corinthians 15.13. How shall any one be able to move the sure foundation of God? or be so bold as to break His seal? The Lord knoweth who are His! I say not of the heathens, Pythagoras, Heraclitus, or the rest, as justin Martyr Apol. ad Antonin. said of Socrates, that he walked with God, as Abraham and Elias; yet he had this hope, that after death it should be better to them that had lived well, then to the wicked, Plat. in Phaed. And certain it is, that he died by the sentence of the unjust Athenians for this, Because he taught that there was one only true God, which I doubt these busy censurers would hardly do. But this I say, That seeing Christ is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world. 1 john 2.2. Let no man inquire how this satisfaction of Christ is made effectual unto them, seeing He is found of them that sought Him not. Esay 65.1. Neither let the Christian, that one sheep of an hundred, which the good Shepherd hath sought and brought home, be so uncharitable as to give those ninety and nine left alone in the wilderness of this world, as a prey devoted to the roaring lion. But shall we not follow our Guides? and what is more usual with them then Esau the reprobate, Saul the reprobate: So Ishmael, Pharaoh, and who they please beside? Yea, and Solomon that glorious Type of Christ, in the Church restored, is somewhat doubted of. It is well that he was a Prophet, and so by the word of Christ in the Kingdom of Heaven, Luke 13.28. for the rest you may understand the teachers according to their true meaning. Concerning Ishmael and his mother Hagar, the allegory is expounded by Saint Paul, Gal. 3.22. etc. that he signified the Church of the jews, and their servitude under the Ceremonial Law, and lastly their rejection. But yet he himself held the worship of God as his father taught him, as it is manifest in Gen. 18.19. and 28.6, 7, 8, 9 And though Pharaoh were a figure of the persecuters of the Church that were to come; though Saul were cast out from the kingdom, because the eternal kingdom was to be set up in juda, Genes. 49.8, 11. though Esau was a type of the present apostasy, yet doth it not thereupon follow, that they were damned. And although Esau the profane, prized not his birthright, the gift of God, as he ought, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.— His glorious gift ought not to be set light by: nay, though it be said of him, Mal. 1.3. Esau have I hated, yet ought we not from thence to judge, that this was to eternal damnation of him and his for ever: but because the promised seed was to come of jacob, not of Esau: because not only worldly preferments, as that the posterity of jacob should rule over the Edomites, but that the giving of the Law also, and the succession of the Church was to be continued in the posterity of jacob, till Christ came; therefore, in comparison of jacob, Esau, after a sort, that is, for such degrees of preeminence, might seem to be hated: yet held he and his the true Religion; for both jobab, or job, and his three friends, Eliphaz, Baldad, and Zophar, are all accounted Edomites, See Lam. 4.21. and the addition to the book of job, in the Greek translation. Object. But they are held accursed that say, that every man shall be saved by that law, or sect, which he professeth, seeing the Scriptures affirm, that there is no name given under heaven, by which men may be saved, but only the Name of jesus Christ. Article Eccles. 8. Answer. And most justly are they to be held accursed: For it was showed, even now, that there is no Law which brought not with it the knowledge of sin, and therefore enforceth the necessity of a Mediator, which we according to the Scripture have manifested, in Chap. 24. to be our Lord jesus Christ, apprehended by a true faith, which is wrought in us inwardly by the Spirit of God, and outwardly by His Word read and preached; And beside this, in the visible Church, there is no means of salvation: But because the Gentiles have not this knowledge of Christ, and yet whosoever is saved among them, cannot be saved by any other means then by His mediation, and satisfaction: therefore this being among those secret things which belong unto God, Deut. 29.29. We must leave it unto Him, as to choose among them whom He will take to Himself, So also how He will make the Saviour known unto them. § 3. Now concerning that sentence which is to pass upon them that are to be judged by the balancing of their works, good and ill, as was showed before, I affirm as our holy Church hath taught me out of the holy Scriptures, Art. 12. That good works can neither put away our sins, nor avail us any thing, for satisfaction for our sins towards God; much less merit eternal life; no nor endure the severity of God's judgement, if He should examine our best works: yea even our prayers are not without sin, according to the rule of His justice. And therefore to teach that we shall be justified unto everlasting life, if our good works shall be moe, and more heavy than our ill; or if our ill exceed, we shall be damned, is a line of heresy, contrary to the wholesome words of the holy Scripture: as where our Lord saith, Luke 17.10. When ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, we are unprofitable servants, we have done that which was our duty to do. Saint Paul also saith, Rom. 3.24. We are justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ jesus. Read further what you find to this purpose, to the 15. verse of Chap. 4. Moreover, seeing in many things we sinne all, how can it be thought, that the works of a finite creature, can any way be accepted for satisfaction of sins against an infinite justice? I answer. That it doth. I, but we are commanded to work out our salvation. Answer. This argument, with other to the like purpose, you may find with their answers, in the end of the 19 Chapter. One text of Scripture there is, 2 Cor. 5.10. which is directly to this Article of the last judgement. And because it troubled me for a long time, and may perhaps trouble the minds of others that have as little understanding as myself, I will willingly help them, as I was helped; The words are, We must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ; that every man may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. Why blessed Paul (quoth I) what new Gospel is this? Is the merit of Christ so vanished, that we must be justified according to our works? If so, then certainly Christ did die in vain. I imparted my doubt, but found no satisfaction; then I remembered that this second Epistle was as it were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an addition, or further explication of such things as the Corinthians had enquired, and to which he had answered in the former, as you read, Chap: 7.1. And so I took this text, to stand as a proposition for further prose of the resurrection; thus, The Law of justice requires that every man should suffer in his body, according to that which he hath done, be it good or bad. Therefore the body shall rise again. At last, conferring with my reverend and learned friend, Master R. S. about this text, he taught me the true understanding thereof, with more joy to me, then if he should have given me the wealth of an Alderman, or the honour of a great Lord, to wit, That the faithful being received into everlasting life, for the merit and satisfaction of Christ, which is made theirs by faith, and so the penny given, Mat. 20. their obedience also shall be crowned according to the difference of their works. And thus the Saints in the resurrection shall differ, as one star differeth from another in glory. And as it is in the reward of the Saints, so shall the difference be in those punishments which shallbe awarded unto the wicked, as it is said, Lu. 12 47, 48. The servant that knew His Lords will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to His will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. And therefore thou that art called by that glorious name of a Christian, see that thy works be answerable to thy profession: for it is not the bare name or profession only, that shall avail thee any thing. Non honour est sed onus, species laesura ferentom, unless thou dost walk according to the rule of Christianity. Let every one that calleth on the Name of the Lord, depart from miquity, otherways it will be easier for those Pagans and Infidels, whom thou dost condemn, then for thee. (b) There shall not be any remembrance] See the Note (a) before § 2. (c) That confessed the resurrection] Some twenty sects of heretics may be reckoned that denied the resurrection of the body, and all these are bound to deny the general judgement, in that sense as we understand it. But john Vossius De extr: Iud: Thes. 1. writes out of Philastrius, but leaves it to your courtesy to believe it, That 4. sects of heretics did in particular deny this Article. But Philastrius walks alone; for neither they that writ of heresies before him, as Irenaeus and Tertullian, nor Epiphanius in his own time, nor Augustine after him, mention any such thing. Concerning the Borborites and Florinians, whom he accuses, they held nothing to infringe this Article, either directly, or by any consequence. But Proclus, because he denied that Christ was come in the flesh, denied it in our meaning, but not absolutely. The Manichees were indeed fare from hence; not only because they said, that Christ redeemed only the souls of men, but especially because they denied the resurrection of the body. How much better thought the heathen, who though they knew not the resurrection, nor the general judgement, as we; yet they held a particular judgement, as it appears by Acacus, Minos and Radamanth, and so joy in Elysium, and torments in hell, as you may read in Plato's Phaedon, in Virgil Aeneid. lib. 6. and elsewhere. Quàm penè furvae regna Proserpinae, Et judicantem vidimus Aeacum? etc. (d) Never to be reversed.] Sibyl, toward the end of her second book, seems to dispense with the rigour of this sentence, and to lean to that heathenish fancy of purgatory, not that of the Papists; but that when the damned have in hell paid thrice so much punishment as their sins came to, then at the entreaty of the Saints, they shall be freed from thence into Elysium. For if you read her verses that go before, and after, they will sound so much. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— Another thing th' Eternal God unto the Saints will grant, When they shall humbly pray unto His sacred Majesty, To save men from the scorching flame, and endless misery. But can a finite creature make triple satisfaction for an offence against an infinite justice? or if it could, can perfect justice require it? or can a man be more merciful than God, or pity the creature more than He? or is His just doom to be dispensed withal? or dare any Saint undertake for one condemned, who without mercy were in the same condemnation? But it seems she speaks as she had learned by tradition, or (which is confessed by most) that her Oracles have been corrupted; And it seems that some men have been of this mind, as you may see in Thom: Aquin: in Sent: lib. 4. Dist: 46. q. 4. Yet if the question were rightly stated, and examined according to reason, the affirmative might seem more probable, than that opinion which they father upon Saint Origen, that the devils also shall be saved at last. But because it is not fit in this grammar of Christian Religion, to trouble the vulgar ears with paradoxes, you may perhaps find this question handled in that book which is entitled, Arithmetica sacra. In the mean time, he shall further me much therein, that shall truly teach me the true and uttermost meaning of the jubilee. ARTICLE VIII. ❧ I believe in the Holy-Ghost. CHAP. XXXIII. § 1. THe word Ghost in English, our true speech; is as much as athem, or breath; in our new Latin language, a Spirit. The metaphorical use of it, as it signifies a quality, as we say, the Spirit of meekness, of jealousy, of pride, or that spirit of 7. devils, which troubles and overturnes the state of the world, which God doth hate above all other, Psal. 10.3. I mean the spirit of covetousness hath no place here: nor yet the word, spirit, as it may mean any being elemental, as we speak of the wind, or any subtle steam raised from a moist body: nor yet as it signifies those created ethereal spirits, which we call Angels: but only as our Lord speaks, john 4.24. God is a Spirit, which as it is spoken of the Godhead essentially: so here we confess that we believe in the Holy-Ghost, or Spirit, that third Person in the glorious Trinity, our God, our Sanctifier, our Comforter, eternally one with the Father, and the Son, unto whose faith and service only we are baptised, as our Saviour commanded, Matth. 28.19. Go teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, the Son, and of the Holy-Ghost. As fast as our heavy-footed reason can follow our faith, I have in the 10, 11, and 12. Chapter, and Notes thereon, already shown the distinct substances of the three Person in the unity of their essence, so that it seems there is nothing in this place needful to that point, but only to bring those Scriptures which do directly prove the Godhead of the Holy-Ghost, and that He doth proceed from the Father and the Son. For the first, you may take these Texts, 1. john 5.7. There are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. Acts 5.3.4. Why hath Satan filled thy heart, that thou shouldest lie unto the Holy-Ghost? Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. Mark. 3.29. He that shall blaspheme against the Holy-Ghost, hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation. Therefore the Holy-Ghost is God. Take hereto texts brought, Chap. 11. §. 3. num. 9 By all which Scriptures it is manifest, that the Holy-Ghost is God coessential with the Father, and the Son, and therefore to be worshipped and glorified with the same glory with them. And that He doth proceed from the Father and the Son, these texts do make it plain, john 15.26. When the Comforter is come whom I, will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth which proceedeth from the Father, He will testify of me. And john 16.7. If I depart, I will send the Comforter unto you. Rom. 8.9. He is called the Spirit of God, and the Spirit of Christ. Gal. 4.6. Because ye are sons; God hath sent the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying Abba Father. See Rev. 5.6. and john 20.22. He breathed on them and said, Receive ye the Holy-Ghost. By which it is manifest, that the Holy-Ghost proceedeth from Him. And this is that Holy Spirit that dwelleth in us, and that not only by His graces, and gifts in us; nor only as God every where present, that worketh all in all; but also as in those Temples which He hath sanctified for His perpetual dwelling, as it is said, 1. Cor. 6.19. Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy-Ghost, which is in you? Neither doth the Holy-Ghost only dwell with them whom He hath sanctified unto Himself, but together with Him, both the Father and the Son, as it is said, john 14.16. I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another comforter, even the Spirit of truth, that He may abide with you for ever; And again, verse 23. If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. And thus is the Tabernacle of God with men, and thus doth He dwell among them. Therefore let us remember that precept. Eph. 4.30. Not to grieve that Holy Spirit (by our wilful sins) whereby we are sealed to the day of redemption: For if any man defile the Temple of God, him will God destroy, 1. Cor. 3.17. This is the seal and pledge of our eternal hope: For if the spirit of Him that raised up jesus from the dead doth dwell in us, He shall also quicken our mortal bodies by His Spirit that dwelleth in us, as I shown more fully, Chap. 17. §. 4. num. 2. Neither indeed were it any assurance of hope or comfort to know and believe that God the Father created all things by jesus Christ, and that Christ the Son of God died for the sins of men, (for so much the devils acknowledge) except we did also know and believe that the fruit and effect of that redemption did belong to every believer in particular, and that in the eternal purpose of God, we were created unto this hope. And this faith and knowledge is wrought in us only by the Holy-Ghost, as you may read, john 16.13.14. and Eph. 1. from verse 17. to the end. Neither yet could we have sure consolation in this witness of the Holy-Ghost unto our hearts, except we did certainly know that this Holy-Ghost which witnesseth these things unto us, were God, who cannot lie. Whereof we have full proof by those graces which He worketh in us; as first the knowledge of the truth; then faith to believe it; then as living water, doth he wash our consciences from sin; then (as another Evangelist speaketh) doth He as fire, inflame our hearts with the love of God, a hatred of sin, and a desire to walk in newness of life: and although we be daily assaulted by the world, and the devil, to whom we are often betrayed by our own wicked imagination; ye doth He not forsake us for ever; but when we see ourselves to have no strength of ourselves, to stand in the least temptation, and so have learned not to trust in ourselves, but in the living God, and to desire His help; then doth He return and comfort us in all the troubles of our mind, and even in death itself, makes us more than conquerors. Oh what is man, that thou shouldest take such tender care of Him, or the son of sinful flesh! that thou shouldest so visit him? Now it is impossible that any created Spirit, at one time, in all places of the world, and that ever since God created man upon the earth, even unto the last man that shall be borne, should work these different effects in the hearts of all God's children: And therefore the Holy-Ghost is God. And His witness in our hearts that we are the sons of God, is an eternal truth, and such as hath neither falsehood nor doubt, nor double meaning. §. 2.1. But you will say, Sect. 2 if the word Spirit belong essentially to all the Persons of the Godhead, and that they be all holiness itself, as it is said, Es. 6.3. Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of Hosts, how is it here appropriated to the third Person? Is not the difference of Persons taken away hereby, seeing every one is a Holy Spirit? I answer. That in this place, as in many other texts of Holy Scripture, the words, Holy Spirit, are taken relatively or Personally, as they mean that third Person of the Holy Trinity, with that relation of procession which He hath from the Father and the Son, as it was showed Chap. 11. Re. 8. 2. But it is said, john 7.39. That the Holy-Ghost was not yet; which takes away His eternity, and so His Godhead. Answer. Tropes and figures are usual in every language, though not minded by the vulgar sort. So here is a Metonymia, or taking of the author for the gifts of divers tongues, miracles, prophecy, and such like, and these gifts were not yet given, as it follows in the text, because that jesus was not yet glorified: that it might appear to all, that these were His gifts, who was before crucified. Compare herewith, john 16.7. Ephe. 4.8. and 11.1. Cor. 12.8, etc. 3. (a) If the procession of the Holy-Ghost be perfect from the Father, then doth He not proceed from the Son; or if it be necessary that He proceed from the Son also, then must there be in Him something of composition, of superaddition, or the like, whereby his being should not be most simple, which were to deny Him to be God. So also the procession from the first principle not being perfect, would argue a defect therein. Answer. This is as if you should reason thus. If the way between Thebes and Athens, be the ready way from Thebes to Athens, then can it not be the way from Athens to Thebes. But I say that the procession, emanation, or outflowing of the Holy-Ghost from the Father, is most perfect infinite, and eternal, as from that being from which the procession is actively, as the action of understanding is in, and yet from the mind which doth understand, as from the active principle. But the procession, or emanation of the Holy-Ghost from the Son, is likewise infinite, and eternal, as from the passive principle, as the understanding is from that object which is understood. And so the procession of the Holy-Ghost is perfect, infinite and eternal, both from the Father and the Son. And because all this is in the Godhead only (for I speak not now of those graces and mercies which are from God upon the creature) therefore it is necessary that the Holy-Ghost be God blessed above all, infinitely and eternally, one being with the Father and the Son. You will here ask me what the difference is between generation, whereby the Son is from the Father, and procession, whereby the Holy-Ghost is from the Father and the Son? If I confess that I can neither speak nor conceive it, you must hold me excused: For in those things that are not lawful, nor possible for the creature to know, it is not fit to inquire. But you may remember that heretofore, although we concluded according to the rule of truth, the Holy Scripture, that all the Persons in the Holy Trinity, were in their absolute being one; yet by the same rule, and the enforcement of reason we were compelled to yield unto the Father, as concerning His Personal being, the precedence of original, as being that fountain of life and glory, from which the other Persons do proceed. And because our Lord jesus is the express Image of the Father, Heb. 1.3. whose procession or going forth is from eternity, Mich. 5.2. and He by the stile of the Holy Scripture, called the Son of God, Psal. 2.7. therefore do we attribute unto Him, as concerning His Personal being, the word of generation, or being begotten; yet in respect of His absolute essence, wherein He is one with the Father, He is also called the everlasting Father, Esay 9.6. But because all things in the Godhead are in the infinity of perfection, and that the being of the Holy-Ghost is alike both from the Father and the Son; and that no perfect being hath two Fathers, therefore is His personal being said to be rather by procession then by generation. § 3. And because this Article is the last in our Creed, Sect. 3 whereby we confess our faith in the holy Trinity, it will not be unfit to take up in brief, that which we have spoken hereunto at large. It is manifest unto all reason, that nothing can be a cause, and yet not be; for that would bring a contradiction, which the understanding of the fool of fools, I mean the Atheist, could not endure, that a thing that hath no manner of being, should be of such powerful being, as that it should cause, either itself, or another thing, to be. And because we see that divers things are, which could not cause themselves to be, when they were not; it follows necessarily, that there were causes of their being, and that all their causes did work as they were ordered and moved by their first cause: which (seeing it is the cause of all beings) must of itself not only be; but also have power both to be of itself, and also to move all other causes to work to their determinate ends. And this most excellent and first being, the cause of all other, is that which we call God, in whom (you see) the first thing which we can understand, is, to be: but that eternally, because there is nothing before Him which might give Him His being; and infinitely, because there was nothing which could put any bounds to His being. The next thing that we can understand of God, is, that He hath power both to be and to work; but no work or action can be, but in that which hath both actual being, and also power to work. And if from hence I should conclude a Trinity of Persons, in the unity of that one powerful and active being; the whole creature would say, Amen. For as every effect is answerable to the cause, and by that voice which it hath, shows what the cause was; so you shall find that every created being hath in it matter, or that which is proportionable thereto, which is as the simple being thereof; then form whereby it hath power to work, and lastly working according to that property which ariseth from the matter and the form. For as Saint Paul saith of mankind, so is it true in every thing, That, In Him, or By Him, we move, that is, our action, and Live, that is the power from whence our action ariseth, and Are, that is the foundation of both the other. But because this argument would be but inductive, therefore I refer you to the 11. Chapter before, for further proof of the Trinity of Persons in unity of the Godhead. Return then to where you left. GOD is the first of beings, and therefore eternal à part antè, for otherwise something should have been before Him, which should have caused Him to be: but we consented to the contrary before. And if He be the first of beings, than nothing made by Him, can be greater than He, by whose power He might be brought to nothing; And therefore He is eternal à parte post, to endure for ever eternally. And if God be the first of all beings; than it is necessary that His being be most simple and pure, as having nothing therein of any dependence of another, unto whom either matter, form, composition, accident, or any possibility to be either more, lesser, greater, or other than He is, can any way belong. And if God be eternal, it follows necessarily, that He have infinite power to continue eternally. But an infinite power cannot be but in an infinite being, therefore His being is infinite. And because nothing can be in His most simple being, but that which is essentially Himself; therefore infinity must be His being, and His being, infinity. And if God be infinite in His being, than it is impossible that any perfection of being should be wanting to His being, for so His being could not be infinite. And therefore, Wisdom, Goodness, Truth, Glory, and all other excellencies of being, are in Him infinitely, perfectly, and eternally. And because no abatement, want, or littleness can be in infinity, therefore is it necessary that all those perfections which are in God, be also active or working in Him, for otherwise they could cause no joy or happiness unto Him, so should they be unto him in want and defect, and not in infinity. Therefore it is necessary that all those perfections that are in God, be not only active in Him, but also as infinite in their action, as they are in their being, lest a twofold being, one in the greatness of being, and another in lessenesse of action should be in God, which is utterly impossible. But because no action can be where there is no object to work upon, nor no infinite action where there is not an infinite object; therefore it is necessary that there be an infinite object of all that glorious action which is in God, whereby He works infinitely and eternally. And this infinite object, is that glorious Son of His love, the image of Himself, wherein all His perfection is actuated and expressed: and that infinite action whereby the Son is Characterised, Hebr. 1.3. Form, See Esay 43.10. or brought forth eternally, is the Holy-Ghost. And because there can be no action, where either the agent or object is wanting, therefore is the Holy-Ghost most truly said to proceed from the Father and the Son. And because I speak only of that incommunicable action which is in God Himself, from whence the difference of the three Persons doth arise; therefore you must understand, that as the action, so the Persons also are in the Godhead essentially: and that not only because the action is according to the purity and perfection of the Divine being; but also because all the terms thereof, that is, the Agent, the object, and the Action itself are infinite and eternal; which cannot possibly be found, out of the Godhead. And thus in brief you see it manifest, not only that God is; but also that His being is infinite and eternal, with all the perfections both of being and working, and how from the infinity of His glorious and eternal working, the Trinity of Persons in the unity of the Godhead is concluded, and consequently that the Holy-Ghost is God, eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son. For further understanding and proof of all which things, you may, if you will, as cause is, read any of the 12. first Chapters at the beginning. Notes. (a) IF the procession of the Holy-Ghost.] The heresies which have been about this Article of our Creed, have been many and great. For the more necessary any truth is to be known and believed, the more damnable heresies hath the devil raised thereabout. But as the heresies that were about our Lord Christ; so these here may be brought to three heads. The first concern the person of the Holy-Ghost, § 1. The second His being. § 2. The third His properties. § 3. § 1. Concerning the person of the Holy-Ghost, Simon that eldest son of Satan, would be all in all. For he said, that he gave the Law to Moses, in mount Sina, in the person of the Father: that in the days of Tiberius he suffered in show, under the Person of the Son: and that after he was that Holy-Ghost that came upon the Apostles in the show of cloven tongues. Thus saith Augustine Haer: 1. But Epiphanius Haer: 21. saith, that he called his Punk Helena, the Holy-Ghost; for whose dear sake he transformed himself, that he might come to her thorough all the heavens, unknown of his angels. But this fellow presuming too much on the power of his devils, while he took upon him to ascend into heaven again, he died of the fall, and so the neck of his heresy was broken. Manes, a Persian, the father of the Manichees, erred the same heresy with Simon the Witch, and gave out himself for the holy Spirit: but being slayed alive by the King of Persia, he found himself to be a body, and not a spirit. Hierax an Egyptian Monk, affirmed that Melchizedek, of whom you read, Gen. 14. was the Holy-Ghost. Some there be that writ concerning Montanus the Phrygian, that he took upon him to be the Holy-Ghost. But Eusebius lib. 5. cap. 14. and Augustine Haer: 86. affirm that this heresy was only thus much, that he had received that Comforter which was promised john 15.26. in greater measure than the Apostles; and in this his followers, the Cataphryges', and with them Tertullian himself, as it appears by some of his writings, did consent to him. But Epiphanius, in that 48. heresy, citys the words of montanus thus; I came, neither Angel nor Ambassador, but I am the Lord God, even the Father. Neither have these heretics of old time, only so madded themselves; but with us of late, Wrightman gave out himself for the Holy-Ghost, as Hacket before him would needs be Christ. But the discipline of Bedlam, or Bridewell, is fittest to teach such senseless people, not to set their mouths against Heaven. 1. But that which all these heretics affirm, concerning the Holy-Ghost, is utterly beyond all faith and possibility of being. Of faith, I say, because neither jews, nor Turks, which cannot believe a Trinity of Persons in unity of the Deity, can never be brought to think that two of these Persons should be incarnate, when they will not receive Him that was approved of God by so many miracles, to be God with us. Neither can the Christians be brought to believe that the Holy-Ghost should be incarnate, when there is not one word in the Holy Scripture whereupon they may ground any such Article of their faith. 2. Beside this, that which they affirm is utterly impossible. For nothing is possible to be in the Trinity, which brings in any confusion or disorder. But if the Holy-Ghost should be incarnate, then should there not be one Son of God incarnate, but two sons: but that were confusion, and no way necessary, and therefore not possible. Compare herewith, Chap. 12. Reason 1. and the Reasons of the Chap. 23. 3. Moreover, the works of the Holy-Ghost are the works of a most pure Spirit, whereto a humane body can no way give any furtherance, as to renew the mind by Repentance; to give faith; to teach and comfort the soul; to make it love that which is good, to hate that which is ill, and the like; All which, and whatsoever else the Holy Spirit doth work, it worketh only spiritually. Therefore it is necessary, or meet that the Holy-Ghost should take on Him the body of man. 4. That argument which Epiphanius, Haer. 66. used against Manes in particular, may serve in general against all the rest. If Manues, saith he, were that Holy-Ghost whom the Lord promised to His disciples, than that promise had been in vain, seeing that this heresy of Manes was not heard of till 247. after the suffering of Christ: who also performed that gift of the Holy-Ghost, within ten days after His ascension. Neither was that heresy of Montanus heard of, till about 140. years after Christ's ascension. And whereas the disciples were commanded not to departed from jerusalem, but to wait there for the promise that was to be fulfilled not many days after: This heresy of Simon was not broached will after the disciples were scattered from jerusalem, by reason of the persecution that arose about Stephen, as some writ in the sixth year after the suffering of Christ. Concerning Melchizedek, it is manifest that he was a Priest of the most high God; so was not the Holy-Ghost: For He only bears witness unto the faithful soul, of Christ's eternal Priesthood. The madness of Mahumed, you shall find, Chap. 34. § 5. N. 8. § 2. Sect. 2 Thus the doubt concerning those persons, who were pretended to be the Holy-Ghost, being answered, it follows next to examine those errors that have been about His being. Among these, the chief was that of Arius, who taught that the Son was the first and chief creature made by the Father, of that which was not. And that the Holy-Ghost was a creature of this creature. But because the great question with Arius was about the Son, this heresy is imputed to Macedonius, a light fellow, fit for his trade, which they call the Feathermakers. From that he became a Priest, and after, the Bishop of Constantinople. Of him some write, that he held the heresy of Arius whole: othersome, that he held the true faith, concerning the Father and the Son; but erred concerning the Holy-Ghost. For some write that he held that the Holy-Ghost was not a Person subsisting in Himself; but that the Deity of the Father and the Son, was that which we call the Holy-Ghost. Other writ, that his heresy was this; That the Holy-Ghost was the minister of God in the creature, or a certain power created of God in every creature; because it is said in Amos 4.13. That God createth the Spirit. where, although it be manifest by that which goeth before, He hath form the mountains, that it is spoken of the mind; Yet that adulterate Synod at Lampsacus, from thence justified that error of Macedonius, that the Holy-Ghost was a creature. For this heresy, his followers were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or fighters against the Holy Spirit. And although others were before him in this heresy, as the Originists, the Arians, and Semiarians; yet because he was a savage and a fierce man to them that thought not with him; therefore this opinion became as it were his peculiar. His arguments were only such as Arius used, and therefore answered as they that were brought by him against the Deity of the Son, as 1. from that in john 17.3. The Father is acknowledged the only true God. Answer 1. I have heretofore said, that by the name of Father all the Persons of the Trinity are understood: and to this Father, that only Mediator between God and man, the Man jesus Christ, confesseth in this place of Saint john, See 1. Tim. 2, 3, 4, 5. and Eph. 4.6. Answer 2. Moreover, Saint Paul saith, Ephe. 3.14, 15. That of the Father of our Lord jesus Christ, the whole family in heaven and earth is named. So our Saviour here to take away the opinion of more gods than one, acknowledgeth that God His Father is that eternal Fountain, from which both the Son and the Holy-Ghost doth proceed, as I have said before: but yet seeing the being of the Father is most simple, and one; that which doth proceed essentially from that simple and pure being of His, must necessarily be all one and the same with Him. And therefore both the Son and the Holy-Ghost must needs be God. 2. Objection. All things were made by Him, john 1.3. Therefore the Holy-Ghost also was made by Christ, and so as the Arians speak, He is a creature of a creature. Answer. Those words, All things, are interpreted by that which follows, without Him was not any thing made which was made. For if those words, All things, should be taken in that sense as the Heretics urge them, it should follow, that both the Father also, and the Son Himself were made by Himself, which are things impossible. 3. Objection. He that receives of another, is inferior to Him of whom he doth receive. But the Holy-Ghost doth receive of Christ, to show unto His Church. Therefore He is inferior unto Christ, and consequently a creature. Answer. The proposition is false: For great Princes receive Presents of their subjects, Lords of their Tenants, Masters of their Scholars, who account it a favour, and an honour done unto them, that their offers are accepted. Moreover, that taking of the Holy-Ghost from the Father and the Son, spoken of in that text of john, 16.14. is not of grace, but by nature: neither is it any other thing than this. That as the Father from all eternity had decreed to reconcile the world unto Himself, by the death of His Son, and that the Son accordingly performed this in due time, by His death upon the Cross: So the Father and the Son, by that Holy Spirit which proceedeth from them both, doth sauctifie the hearts of the elect, and assure them that this reconciliation, with all the fruits and effects thereof, was for their eternal comfort and salvation. For that peculiar manner of subsistence in the Divine nature, which He taketh from the Father and the Son, whereby it is most necessarily concluded that He is God, is not here spoken of. 4. Objection. The Holy-Ghost is not where called God in the Scripture. Therefore He is a creature. Answer 1. He is no where in the Scripture called a creature, or mentioned among the creatures in Psal. 148. or elsewhere. Therefore He is God. Answer 2. The proposition is false, as it appeared by the texts cited out of Acts 5.3, 4. and Matth. 28.19. where He is equalled with the Father and the Son, and 2. Cor. 13.14. And john 5.7. Moreover, no sin doth make a man liable to an infinite punishment, but that which is against an infinite being. But the sin against the Holy-Ghost shall not be pardoned, neither in this world, nor yet in that which is to come, Matth. 12.32. Therefore the Holy-Ghost is God. Take hereto, Acts 28. verso 25. and 27. with Rom. 11.8. and 1. Cor. 3.16. And as these texts of Scripture are sufficient, to show the falsehood of this last objection: So do they manifest the vanity of all the rest, and confirm abundantly the truth of this Article, that the Holy-Ghost is God. To bring the consent of Fathers, and Councelis to these Scriptures, were as to increase the light of the Sun by a burning candle: yet because it was so plainly declared in the first general Council held at Nice, by 318. Fathers, in the year of Christ, 325. you may remember it, if you will. In that Council, this Article was thus declared in that form of confession, which was framed by Hosius Bishop of Corduba. As the Father and the Son, so also the Holy-Ghost, subsisteth with them, of the same being, of the same power of which they are. And a little after. We ought to confess one Godhead, one being of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy-Ghost; not teaching any confusion or division of the Persons of the unspeakable and blessed Trinity. But according to the integrity of that faith and doctrine which was heretofore delivered by the Lord Himself to His Apostles, and hath been sincerely taught to us by our holy Fathers, who kept it pure and entire, as they received it from the Apostles: we believe and confess the undivideable Trinity, which cannot sufficiently either be conceived in the understanding, or expressed in words; that is, the Father eternally and truly subsisting, a true Father of a true Son; and the Son eternally and truly subsisting, a true Son of a true Father, and the Holy-Ghost verily and eternally subsisting with them. And we are ever ready by the power of the Holy-Ghost, to prove that this is the truth, by the manifold testimony of the holy Scripture, Histor. Gelasij Cyzie. Act. Conc. Nic. lib. 2. cap. 12. This faith was approved of all; but because the present business with Arius was especially about the Son: For he held that the Son was not of the subsistence of the Father; nor yet very God. That they might meet fully with that error, they agreed to that form wherein it is confessed, that the Son is light of light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, etc. Thus having ended the controversy about the Godhead of the Son, they come to the question of the Holy-Ghost: against whom Phaedon a Philosopher, and patron of Arius his cause, objected thus. It is not where written in the Scripture, that the Holy-Ghost is a Creater, and therefore He is not God. To which, the Council opposed that which is in job 33.4. The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life. And that in Psal. 33.6. By the word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the hosts of them, by the Spirit of His mouth. To which they added that of Saint Paul, 1. Cor. 12. verse 4, 5, 6. where the Holy-Ghost is called both Lord, and God; And so concluded that all the three Persons, that is, the Father, the Son, and the Holy-Ghost, were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consubstantial, or of the same substance, Lib. Cit Cap. 25. Likewise, when this heresy of Arius concerning the Holy-Ghost, was again revived by Macedonius: the second general Council held at Constantinople, in the year 381. condemned the heresies of all Arians, Apollinarists, and Macedenians, confirmed the faith professed in the Nicene Creed, and for further explanation of the truth in this point to that clause, We believe in the Holy-Ghost, they added, the Lord and giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father— who with the Father and the Son, together is worshipped and glorified, etc. And this is sufficient for the declaration of the truth in this point, by the authority of general Counsels. All the orthodox Father's consent hereunto. Among whom, if you desire to be further acquainted with the arguments and objections on both sides, you may read the writings of that most noble Champion of the truth of the holy Trinity, Athanasius, and in special, that sermon of the humane nature, taken by the Word, the oration against the ging of Sabellius, and the first and second Epistle to Serapion, and his first dialogue against Macedonius, with him Macedonianus. See also Greg. Nyss. vol. 2. pag. 439. edit. Paris. 1615. you may also (if you will) take these objections, and their answers, brought by Epiphanius, to this question, Haer. 74. and with them, those in Thomas Aquinas, Contra gentes Liber 4. Cap. 16. and their answers, Cap. 23. Another error against the being of the Holy-Ghost, is that which they call of the later Greeks: and yet is not only of the Grecians themselves, but of all those Nations and Peoples, that are of the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople, which if you leave out the Countries of the poor Painims in the East, and West Indies, is far greater than the pretended universality of the Bishop of Rome, both in Europe, and in Asia, See Brerew. Enq. Chap. 15. and besides them, the Melchites, or Christians of Syria, the Armenians, and Maronites hold the same heresy. All these, though they confess that the Holy-Ghost is God, the third Person in the Trinity; yet they say, that He proceedeth only from the Father, not from the Son. But although they account this but a later error among the Greeks', perhaps because the stirs thereabout after the Council of Florence, in the year, 1439. grew more hot than they had been before, and that because the Greeks' then present in that Council, in hope to draw them of the West into their help against the Turks, did seemingly yield to that truth which these Churches in the West, do hold in that point: yet it appears, that in the time of Damascen, about the year, 750. it was their received opinion: For thus he writes, Orthod. fidet. lib. 1. Cap. 13. He is the Spirit of the Son, not proceeding from Him, but from the Father by Him. For the Father only is the cause. Nay, if you look yet higher, in that explanation which the Council of Constantinople, spoken of even now, made of that Article of the Holy-Ghost in the Nicene Creed, that clause, and from the Son, is left out; so that this error seems not new, but falsehood is as ancient as the devil's apostasy, and no antiquity can make it truth. And if you look to the authorities of Scripture, brought before to this point, in the Chap. §. 1. and consider well the reasons in Chapter 11. you shall see how rotten this opinion is, and how justly the clause, And from the Son, was added by the Latin Churches, as they declare it in that Council of Florence, spoken of before. So that falsehood which some writ to Paulus of Samosata, that the Holy-Ghost is not any divine subsistence, but only the working and grace of God in the hearts of men: and that which they writ of Servetus, that it is only a certain vigour or strength whereby every thing created is moved naturally; at the sight of the same authorities and reasons, will vanish as mist before the wind. Those childish fantasies of the Elleasites, or Sampseans of which you read in Epiphanius, Haer. 30. and Haer. 53. would trouble your hearing. § 3. So the only heresy which is yet remaining, Sect. 3 is that which concerns the propriety or working of the Holy-Ghost. Concorning whom, some affirmed, that He was not given sufficiently to the Apostles, and that therefore, further revelations were necessary to be made by them that had greater measure of that gift. The Cataphryges' or disciples of Montanus, and the Manichees must needs be chief herein: For if they had held that the gifts of the Holy-Ghost had been given to the Apostles sufficiently, their fancies of their new Comforters, to teach them more than was needful, had never been hatched. And among these, Tertullian was most too blame, who having once detested the Montanists, di afterward both follow their error and defend it. But if that Holy Spirit should lead the Apostles into all truth, yea, and show them the things to come, as the promise was, john 16.13. What further sufficiency would these Heretics require? They might say, the Disciples were ignorant of many things after the Holy-Ghost was come upon them: for Peter accounted the Gentiles unclean, Act. 10. Answer. But they were not ignorant of any thing that was needful for the Church to know, as S. Paul saith, Acts 20.27. That he had declared unto them all the Counsel of God: so according to the dispensation of the times which God had appointed, the Gentiles were taken into the fellowship of the Faith. For though they were commanded to preach repentance and forgiveness of sins to all Nations, yet the preaching must begin at jerusalem, Luk. 24.47. from Esa. 2.3. Therefore they preached not to the Gentiles, till the time was come, and then Philip was sent to preach to the Eunuch, Acts 8.26. and 29. and Peter to Cornelius, Acts 10. and Barnabas and Paul, every where, but with this condition, first to offer the word of reconciliation to the jews, and after to the Gentiles, because the Children must first be fed. See Mark 7.27. and Acts 13.46. So concerning the declaration of things to come, Agabus foretold the famine, Acts 11.28. that the Church in time might provide for due relief: So the prophecies of Saint Paul, 2. Thes. 2. and 1. Tim. Chap. 4. of Peter. 2. Epistle Chap. 2. and 3. and john: Rev. all, are no less lights for the knowledge of the true Doctrine, and Church of Christ in these days, than the prophecies of old were for the knowledge of Christ, when He should come, and the benefits which the faithful should receive by Him, unto the Church which was before His manifestation in the flesh. And if the Providence of God be upon all His creatures, His special mercy and compassion upon His chosen; so that He never leaves them destitute of that which He knows to be fit for them: can any but Pepuzians, and such frantics think, that God will be careless of His Church, for whose sake He gave His only Son to die? Or can any man be such an Infidel, as to think that the instruction of the Holy-Ghost, who is God blessed above all, is not sufficient to guide the Church according to the rule of truth, the Holy Scripture, in the right way to everlasting life? Therefore follow that rule, and pray for that guide, and let the follies of these Enthusiasts for ever vanish. The second supply; Of that inestimable gift. of God, the holy Scripture, which He by His holy Spirit hath given to the Church. CHAP. XXXIIII. THough for Adam's sin God did hid His face from man, except, when either in justice He did punish his sin, or in mercy declare the means, and give assurance how he should be freed therefrom, as it appears in Adam, Cain, Abraham, Moses, and the Prophets, until the time came, that the promise of the redemption was fulfilled: Yet by His holy Word hath He so fully provided for the direction and comfort of His Church, and every one of His children therein, that there is nothing in the whole course of man's life, whether in things that are to be done, or left undone, or in things that are to be believed, or not to be believed; in whatsoever it is fit for us to expect any direction or comfort from God immediately, wherein He hath not most particularly declared His holy will. It was a wonderful grace and favour, beyond all other men, unto Moses, that whensoever he went into the Tabernacle, he might talk with God, face to face, as a man converses with his friend: Is not the same grace vouchsafed to us, who not only in the Churches, but even in our private chambers, or in the open fields, may talk with God, and receive His answer in His word? And lest any man may pretend ignorance, or want of skill, how to present himself unto God, all manner of forms of thanks, of of praise, of prayers, are set out in the Scripture, and all summed up in that form which our Lord hath taught us. And that we may come boldly unto the Throne of Grace, and be assured to find help in the time of need, we shall in His Word not only receive His own Answer, but likewise see by examples, how holy and devout men have sped in the like cases. Thus we may speak to God, and hear His speech to us, in all places, at all times, either alone or with others; the holy Angels joining in our conversation, and ourselves never destitute of the fruit thereof. And because the holy Scriptures are the foundation of all our faith, therefore it must first appear, That these Scriptures are the very Word of God Himself. §. 1. Then how necessary it was and behooveful for the Church, that God should vouchsafe thereto the know ledge of His Word. §. 2. Thirdly, to show what these Scriptures are. §. 3. Fourthly, to justify their perfection or sufficiency. §. 4. Fiftly, to show that they are come unto us in the integrity as they were at first delivered to the Church. §. 5. Then to speak of their easiness to be understood. §. 6. And lastly, of their interpretation. §. 7. §. 1. Sect. 1 Concerning the first, it is an irrefragable argument, that the Scriptures were given of God, because the Prophecies in them which were beforehand concerning things to come, were such perfect declarations of them, as that they may rather seem to be Histories than Prophecies. Take for instance that promise to Abraham, that his seed should possess Canaan after 430. years, and accordingly in the self same day, Exod. 12.40, 41. were they brought out of Egypt: Or the promise of judah's Kingdom foretold by jacob, Gen. 49.8, 9, 10. Of josia, and Cyrus, prophesied by name, the one above 300. years, the other above 100 years before he was borne: Of the captivity of that nation, and destruction of jerusalem, foretold by Daniel. For seeing God alone is infinite in His wisdom, and that all His works are foreknown to Him alone, therefore can He alone declare from the beginning what shall come to pass at the last, as He saith of Himself, Isa. 42.9. whereas the Angels being finite both in their wisdom and knowledge know nothing of things to come, but either by special revelation, as Gabriel foretold the birth of john Baptist, or by the Prophecies of the Scripture, or by observation of natural causes in their long and subtle experiences. And therefore it came to pass that all the devils that mocked the heathen by their Oracles, were so uncertain in their answers, except they were informed by some of the means spoken of: As the devil gave a certain answer to Alexander, concerning his expedition against Darius, because he knew what the Decree of God was, by the Prophecy of Daniel, Chap. 8. 2. Another Argument that the Scriptures were given by the Holy-Ghost, is that admirable consent of all the Doctrines contained therein, which are delivered with that certainty of Truth and Knowledge, with that authority and power over the soul of the faithful Reader, and that in so simple and plain a manner of writing, as no other: whereas in men's writings, the unsettledness of their judgement, their ignorance, and doubtful suppositions, especially when they speak of their own (as seldom they do) justifies the holy Text, Rome. 1.22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, professing to teach, they show their folly. 3. Moreover, the Argument, or things contained in the holy Scriptures, doth manifest the Author thereof, the Writers for the most part showing their Commission, Thus saith the Lord: and, Paul an Apostle, not by man, but by jesus Christ, and God the Father: Then the purport, or intent of the Commission, We are Ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us, we pray you in Christ's stead to be reconciled unto God; And this under such conditions, as none but God alone is able to perform: of acceptance, eternal life; or refusal, eternal fire. 4. The glorious and mighty works which Almighty God gave, especially to the first Writers of the Law and of the Gospel to do, and those miracles whereby He continually justified the truth thereof, the wondrous preservation and deliverances of the professors, as of Daniel, etc. And the baleful confusion of the adversaries of the Truth, contained in the Scriptures in all ages, approve that God alone is the Author thereof. 5. The hatred of the devil, and his continual endeavours, either utterly to deface the Books of the holy Scripture, or upon pretext of obscurity and danger of Heresy, not to read them. And again, the providence of God, in preserving those Books, and the love and delight which He hath begotten in the hearts of His Saints to read and understand them, are no less proof, that these holy Scriptures are the Word of God, and the Testimony of His eternal Truth. 6. The extraordinary calling of many of the Penmen of the holy Books, and the enabling of them, being simple and unlettered men, to write and to preach those high Mysteries, which none of the Princes of this world did understand; as of Amos among the Herdsmen, of Peter, james, and john, and the other of the twelve Apostles; show that the Author of that Truth and their Books was God alone. 7. The great 1. Antiquity of the Books of the Law preserved so long uncorrupted: for in comparison of Moses, almost all the writings of the heathen, all their religions, and many of their Gods, are but upstarts, and things of yesterday. 2. The great simplieity and sincerity of the Writers, who sought not their own praise, nor concealed their own faults and imperfections. 3. The consent of the Church, which received the Scriptures, as the word of God. 4. The consent of foreign Histories, writing of the same things with such uncertainty and untruth, as time and hearsay use to bring into History; as of Berosus, Herodotus, Strabo, Trogus, and others, are a manifest proof that the true records of the same things are the writings which God Himself did dictate to Moses, and the Prophets which followed after him. For none but God did truly know the creation of the world, and none among men did certainly record the universal flood, the Tower of Babel, the acts of Abraham, jacob, joseph, Moses, joshua, and others: So that if the devil might vaunt as he did, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I did indite, and Homer did write. In the perfection of truth might the Holy Spirit of God say as it is recorded, 2. Tim. 3.16. All Scripture is given by the inspiration of God: And, 1. Pet. 1.21. Prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy-Ghost. 6. And if we believe that the writings of Historians, and Poets, and other profane Authors, are indeed theirs under whose names they go: shall we not much rather believe that they are the writings of God Himself, that go under His Name? especially seeing we know that He is a jealous God, and neither would suffer His authority to be abused to falsehood, neither would He give His Church to be ever seduced by liars and false prophets. §. 2. Sect. 2 And these holy Oracles, God of His Goodness and Mercy, would have to be written; from whence, by their excellency, above all other, they are called Scriptures, or Writings. 1. First, that we through patience and comfort of these Scriptures, might have firm and sure hope in God and His promises, Rom. 15.4. 2. Secondly, that nothing through man's infirmity might be forgotten, of all that which ought to be in continual remembrance. 3. Lest by the wickedness of men, and the subtlety of the devil inciting them thereto, the holy Doctrine of God might be corrupted from the native and true meaning: and so new Doctrines, and new Religions brought in, in stead of that Service which we own only to God, and that according to His own revealed Will and Word. 4. No man knoweth the thoughts of a man, but only that spirit of a man which is within him: much less can any know the things of God, but only the holy Spirit of God. The things of God, of which I speak, are either such as concern Himself; or us: Himself; as that in His being, He is a Spirit Eternal, infinite in Wisdom, etc. In essence one; in Persons three; in His dispensation towards us, that in the fullness of time the Eternal Son should dwell in the Tabernacle of our flesh; that in our nature, and for us, he might make satisfaction for our sin, that we might be restored again to the favour of God, which we had lost by our transgression, and so have hope of the full enjoying of those benefits which come unto us thereby, as the resurrection of our bodies, and eternal life both in body and soul. And because it was impossible for us to understand those things, except God Himself had revealed them unto us, therefore it was necessary that He should vouchsafe the certain and immutable knowledge of them by His Holy Word. 5. No Kingdom can be ordered according to justice, wherein the Laws are not manifest, and to be known of every subject that will know them. But Christ is that King that is to reign in justice, Esay 32.1. Therefore it was necessary that the laws and ordinances of His Kingdom, which peculiarly is His Church, should be so published, that every one, both small and great might take knowledge of them. 6. No punishment is due but for some offence, and where no law is, there is no transgression. Rom. 4.15. So no reward is due, but either in justice for some merit above duty, as the merit of Christ on our behalf: or else in mercy by promise, for the careful performance of that which is due. But neither duty, nor punishment, nor merit, nor mercy, can either appear, or be such where no law is. Therefore it was necessary that God by His Word should both show what duty He did require of us, and what punishment was due to the breakers of His law, and what reward was due to the observers, as the law declares. And moreover, because no man in this state of corruption by original sin, is able to perform the law of God as he ought, in perfect righteousness, Therefore it was also necessary in this impossibility on our parts, to make it known how we might be delivered from the punishment, by the mediation of another, as the Gospel shows. 7. And because so great a benefit as the deliverance of mankind from the thraldom of the devil, was never to be forgotten: therefore it was necessary, not only that the Church should be prepared unto the expectation thereof; and daily put in mind by such lively signs as the sacrifices were, the true meaning of which they were taught by the Prophets: but also when the time came that the promises should be fulfilled, that the Church should be throughly informed and confirmed in the truth thereof, by the powerful doctrine, and glorious miracles which were done both by the author and finisher of our faith; and by those who were eye-witresses of all things which they testified to the world. Therefore it was necessary, that both before the coming of Christ, the Church should be catechised unto Christ, by the doctrine of the Law, and the Prophets; and after His coming be fully instructed by the Apostles and Evangelists, the Holy-Ghost evermore working in the hearts of the elect, that the things which were taught, should be believed. §. 3. Hath it indeed been the practice of the devil by his principal agents the persecuters of the Church, to deface the Holy Scripture, and to put out their remembrance among men? Histories affirm it. Neither can the Father of lies hate any thing so much as the truth: nor the enemy of mankind, endeavour any thing so earnestly, as to defact that, by the knowledge whereof man may find the way to eternal life: yet great was the truth, and prevailed. Then by heretics he would corrupt it; but yet the truth prevailed. Then he would keep it from us in an unknown tongue; but yet the truth appeared, and every man may read in his own tongue the wonderful works of God, English and Germans, and French, and the rest: yet the devil had one trick more in his budget; that seeing he could neither deface, nor corrupt, nor conceal the books of Holy Scripture in a foreign tongue, whose vulgar use is vanished among men, he would shuffle in other books among them, that so we might not discern the true Mother from the false. And if any question grew about the Child; traditions which we must receive with equal affection of piety, must decide it. Strange Divinity! Did the Church deal thus of ancient time? For you only are wise, you only will be the people: Show the custom of the Church: you claim to Fathers: show it from them. Saint Athanasius in Synops. divides the books of the Old-Testament (as we) into Canonical, and not Canonical. The Canonical, he accounts all as we, save Esther: the not Canonical, he accounts the book of Wisdom, Esther, judith, and Tobit. The books of the New-Testament all Canonical, he numbers as we; the four Gospels, the Acts, the seven Catholic Epistles, fourteen of Saint Paul, among which following, Saint Peter, Second Epistle 3.15. he puts that to the Hebrews; and the Revelation: Epiphanius also, Lib. de Mens. & pond. accounts the Canonical books as Athanasius; but puts Esther among them: he accounts Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, to be apocryphal, jerom. in Prol. Gal. accounts the Canonical books of the Old-Testament as Epiphanius, and as the manner of the Hebrews was of old, they count the books according to the number of the Hebrew letters, 22. as the knops, nuts, or almonds on the golden candlestick, were 22. for the Lamentations was one book, with the prophecy of jeremiah; and the 12. small prophets made but one Book, and as five of their books were double, that is, jude and Ruth. 2. of Samuel. 2. of Kings, and 2. of Chron. Ezra and Nehem. in one book; so are 5. of their letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the end of words are thus written, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But in Sum, they speak of their books altogether, the Law and the Prophets, as Luk. 16.29. and 31. and 24.27. Aceses 24.14. and 26.22. and 28.23. And yet somewhat more particularly, the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms; and this division of the books of the Holy Scripture, our Lord also allows Luke 24.44. But in this last division, the books are numbered 24. first of Moses 2. Four of the former Prophets, as they call them. joshua, judges, Samuel, and Kings 3. Four also of the later Prophets, Esay, jeremy, Ezechiel, and the Book of the 12. small Prophets. 4. The Kethubim, or holy writing, contained 11. books: the 5. Poetical, that is, the Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, job, and the Canticles: three, which they called Megilloth, volumes or rolls, Ruth, Lamentations, and Esther, among which, the book of Canticles is sometimes accounted; and 2. half Chaldee, which were last written: Daniel, Ezra, with Nehemiah and the Chronicles. And these holy writings they divided from the other prophecies, because they were not given either by dream, or by vision, or by hearing a voice, or in any ecstasy, but were inspired by the Holy-Ghost immediately. And according to this order of the books of the Holy Scripture, divers Hebrew Bibles have been lately printed: as one by Plantin in Oct. another by Hutterus in Folio, and others. Now concerning the books of the New-Testament, Saint jerom ad Paulin. reckons them as we. And are not these Aramites struck with blindness, that print the Bible, the decree of Trent, and those prologues of jerom before it, that it may appear how they set the Fathers at naught? But for the full decision of this question, let us look unto the undoubted truth of the Scripture, & by the Scripture itself, let us learn what is Scripture, or the word of God. 1. Therefore concerning the books of the New-Testament, M. Luther accounted the Epistle of S. james to be aridam & stramineam, dry as a Kix, and his followers give their reasons against it; 1. the seeming opposition which is between him and S. Paul, in the question of justification by faith, and by works. 2. because he teacheth not, but supposeth only that which is the sum of the Gospel, that is, the redemption of the world by the death of Christ, as some men speak for Athanasius concerning the book of Esther, that none of the names of God are mentioned therein: to which others answer that the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mimmakom acher, in Chap. 4. v. 14. is for sense in that place, equivalent to any of the names of God, which the prophet did there forbear to remember, because he would not that any of the names of God should be profaned among the heathen, with whom he lived: So also Luther held, the Revelation to be the writing of some well-meaning honest man, but not Canonical. Wherein I think the wonderful wisdom and mercy of God appeared; to hid the meaning of that book from him, lest he should be destroyed with pride, when he should see himself and his ministry so alluded to therein. But let Luther and his followers in this question think by themselves: between us and the Church of Rome there is no difference, both parties holding all the books of the New-Testament to be canonical. The only doubt is about the books which we call Apocryphal, of unknown and obscure Authors, or strange doctrines delivered therein. In which question, the Canon or rule of the New-Testament is for us. For concerning all the books of the Old-Testament, the reason stands thus. 1. All the oracles of God or Canonical Scripture, was received in the Church of the jews. But none of the Apocryphal books were received in the Church of the jews. Therefore none of the Apocryphal books are the Oracles of God. The proposition is Saint Paul's, and he accounts it (as well he may) the first and chief preeminence of the jew, that unto them the Oracles of God were committed, Rom. 3.2. The assumption is manifest: for the Apocryphal books were extant only in Greek, which language the jews never used in their holy services. And although the book of Ecclesiasticus were begun by the grand father in Hebrew; yet was it augmented and finished in Greek by the grandchild. And although the first book of the Maccabees were extant in Hebrew; yet was it not therefore Canonical, no more than the second that was written in Greek. So the conclusion stands sure. And if neither the Church before Christ received those Apocryphal books: nor the ancient church since His suffering, accounted them Canonical (for the Author of the Sophisticate Cannons of the Apostles, we receive not) upon what ground then should the Fathers of Trent presume to do that, which neither the Primitive Church, or Fathers attempted before? 2. Such another argument you have from Luke 24.27. where it is said, that Christ beginning at Moses, and all the Prophets, expounded unto them all the Scriptures, the things that were written concerning Himself. So all the Scriptures are understood by the Law and the Prophets (as I shown before) and yet for further explication, it is added in verse 44. the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms. For of all the Cethubim, the book of Psalms was first, and by a Synecdoche, is put for all the rest. Now to which of all these will you bring the Apocryphal books? By the Law you understand the five Books of Moses, which the Samaritans, and all the sects of the jewish Religion, except the heretics called Nasacheans, did receive. The sects of the Sadduces and Samaritans rejected the rest; but the Church of the jews held all the Prophets, both former and later, with all the Kebuthim to be holy Scripture, but the Apocrypha are reckoned with none of these. 3. A third argument from the holy Scripture against these apocryphals is from Revel. 19.10. The testimony of jesus, is the Spirit of prophecy. But in these apocryphals which the jews received not, there is no prophecy, no evident testimony of jesus that was to come. Therefore they are no witnesses of Him, no word of His. And although in the fourth book of that supposed Esdras, there be mention of jesus Christ, Chap. 7.27, 28. yet the false narration of things never done, and other fictions, See Master Brerew: Enq. Chap. 13. have discredited those books so fare, that the Papists themselves do not mention them in their new Canon, and vouchsafe them a place in the end of their Bible's only, lest they should be lost. Object. But the Fathers themselves call these books Canonical. Answer. And our Church yields they are so, in the meaning of the Fathers, that is, serving for rules of good life and virtue; but not of faith, as the holy Scriptures; and that is the question between us and Trent. § 4. Sect. 4 That the holy Scripture is abundantly sufficient to teach all things that belong to faith and godliness, is manifest by the reasons brought for the proof of the second question. That it was necessary for us, that God, by His written Word, should vouchsafe unto us, the knowledge of His will. 1. For how could either our hope and comfort in God be firm and sure, if they were not grounded upon His holy promises that never fail? 2. And if no man know the things of God, but only the Spirit of God; how could we believe that which is to be believed of Him, or hoped for, ourselves? as the Trinity of Persons, the Incarnation of the Son, the resurrection of the body, etc. but by the instruction of His holy Word? 3. How could we have the true knowledge of sin, and the punishment thereof, but by His Law; whereby He hath taught us what duty we own to Him, to our neighbour, and to ourselves? And if the holy Scripture doth thoroughly instruct us in all things that we ought to do or to believe, is not the sufficiency and perfection thereof able to teach us how to be perfect in every good work? See 2. Tim. 3.16, 17. 2. And if it might with due reverence unto God be supposed, that the holy Scriptures have not sufficiently instructed us in every thing; Yet who is he, or what is that Church that may presume to add to His word? Proverb. 30.6. Lest if they teach things that are not to be believed, or command that which is not to be done, our faith be found to be foolishness, and our obedience become, if not sin, yet without reward, as the Prophet saith, Esay 1.12. Who hath required this at your hand? 3. As the man is, so is his strength, Iud: 8.21. as his wisdom is, such are his words. And seeing it is evident by the Scripture which is given, that it was the good will and pleasure of Almighty God, to give instructions unto His Church; and that it hath already been proved, that the Wisdom, Chapter 5. and the Truth of God, as all His others dignities, are infinite, Chapter 7. if the instructions and directions of the Scriptures were not in every respect perfect and sufficient for the Church, to that end for which they were written; then the Wisdom of Goodness of God should be defective in that which was necessary for His Church to know. But that is impossible. Therefore the Holy Scripture is sufficient. 4. If God have not sufficiently and perfectly instructed us by His word what we ought to do, and to believe; then can He not in justice punish those defects which shall be found in our Faith or obedience, especially seeing we are not bound by any precept in His revealed will, to hearken to any traditions with that reverence as to His word, but rather are every where commanded to hearken to His word, and that without any adding thereto or taking away therefrom, Deut. 4.1, 2. and 5.32. Esay 8.20. sends us to the Law and to the Testimony; and if any one shall speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them. So our Lord sends us to the Scriptures, john 5.39. Therefore the holy Scriptures are perfect and sufficient to teach all things that belong by way of divine revelation, to faith and godliness. All the Fathers run this way, and the most learned among the Schoolmen, and later Papists; as you may see them cited by Master G. Langford Enquiry after verity. § 2. Of Traditions. Object. 1 Against this doctrine of the sufficiency and perfection of the Scriptures, Object. 1 doubts are raised two ways. First from the necessity of Traditions: Secondly, for that it is supposed that some books of the holy Writ are lost. For the first, it is manifest, even by the reasons that are brought for the sufficiency of the Scripture. For if it were always necessary, that the service of God in His Church should be according to His own commandment, and direction; it must follow necessarily, either that the Scriptures should have been given even from the beginning of the world (for the Church of the redeemed began in Adam) or else that the service of the Church, was only according to tradition. The first is apparently false. For Moses was the first inditer of any Scripture, and that after the deliverance out of Egypt, which was after the Creation of the world 2513 years. Therefore the second follows of necessity, that Traditions were necessary. Answer. This is a wilful mistaking of the question, which being about the sufficiency of the Scriptures, must needs be limited to the times since the Scripture was given. But Moses was not the first inditer of the holy Scripture; but God Himself, who had first written His Law in man's heart, did secondly write it in two Tables of stone, with His own hand, in mount Sinai. And thirdly again when the Tables of the Covenant were broken; this was the first of all that which we call holy Scripture. After which time God taught Moses the Original of the world, the sin, and redemption of mankind, the order of times, and whatsoever was necessary for that people to know, and to do. And although it be most true, that the faith and services of the Church before the law, was only according to tradition; yet because those traditions were not kept as God had taught them, God brought upon the world of the ungodly, the Flood. Yet even within four hundred years after the Flood, by the craft of the devil, and his new revelations, the best among men became Idolaters, as it is manifest in Iosh. 24.2. And therefore God gave Ordinances and Laws by Moses in writing, to the observation of which, the whole Church of Israel was bound, without any addition thereto, or taking away therefrom. Deut. 12.32. Object. 2. But traditions may be necessary for the Church, Object. 2 as well since the Scriptures were written, as before; as Saint Paul 2. Thess. 2.15. exhorts them to hold the Traditions which they had been taught, whether by word or by Epistle. So the Council at Trent, Sess. 4. Can. 1. commands them to be received as the holy Canonical Scripture. Answer. The word Tradition there, is doubtful. For either it may signify at large, any thing that is delivered, either by word or by writing; and that may be any fundamental truth, according to the holy Scripture; as Saint Paul means in that place: as Saint Athanasius, Epist. ad Adelphium, & de Incarn. Contr. Samos. calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an Apostolical Tradition, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the faith delivered by tradition, that God was manifest in the flesh: or else it may signify any canon or rule, for the ordering of things indifferent in Ecclesiastical policy, wherein all things ought to be done in order. And in these two senses traditions are to be held: the first in obedience to God and His truth, as we receive the Apostles Creed, and as you read in the Note on Chap. 33. § 2. N. 4. how Hosius speaks of the coessential Persons of the Trinity, as a tradition from Christ to His Apostles, and from them to us; the second for peace, and avoiding of divisions in the Church; as to kneel at the holy Communion, rather than to fit, or to stand, though none of all these gestures be essential to the Sacrament. In the third place, Traditions may signify any rule thrust upon the Church, as necessary to be believed or observed quite besides, or contrary to the word of God, for conscience sake toward God; that Priests and Nuns may not marry: which things, though they be brought in as Apostolical, or Ecclesiastical Traditions, yet by the rule of Saint Paul. 1. Tim. 4.1, 2, 3. they seem rather to lean to the doctrines of devils, believed by such as speak lies in hypocrisy, and have their consciences seared. No part of Holy Scripture lost. Object. 3. ANd if Traditions might therefore seem to be necessary, Object. 3 because it is yielded by some of the Fathers, that some of the Canonical Scriptures are lost; by whose reasons, or authority, some of the later writers have strayed after them; yet this will nothing at all support those unwritten verities. For it is utterly denied, and that according to reason, and the word of God, that any part of the holy Scripture is perished. 1. For can we think that it stood with the goodness of God, to give His Word to His Church, for comfort and instruction; and stood it not with His providence to preserve that Word, that it should not perish, but accomplish that thing for which it was sent? Esay 55.11. But divers objections are brought hereto, as you may see in the author G. Langf. forenamed in the 4. §. 1. The book of the wars of JEHOVAH, is mentioned, Numb. 21.14. but not extant. Therefore some part of the holy Scripture is perished. Answer. It ought first to be manifest, what this book was: but in brief, the books of the Chronicles of the Kings of judah, and of the Kings of Israel, are often mentioned in the books of Kings, and Chronicles; yet were not those books therefore holy Scripture, written by the Prophets, but rather by the Recorders or Secretaries of state, appointed for that purpose; as the histories of other kingdoms are, or aught to be written; and of this rank may that book mentioned by Moses, seem to be. For it is not necessary that all writings mentioned in the holy Scripture, should be holy Scripture. For the Poets, whose writings Saint Paul mentions, were but Heathens: and jannes' and jambres (as profane writers call him Mambres) are not where mentioned in holy Scripture, but only 2 Tim. 3.8. 2. A second doubt is from that which is in joshua 10.13. and 2 Sam. 1.18. where mention is made of the book of jasher; whereto, though some according to the interpretation of the word just, or upright, will have the sense of that text of joshua, Is it not recorded by him, whose writings are upright and true? as it is said, john 21.24. This is the Disciple that testifieth these things, and we know that his testimony is true: yet because the book is mentioned in times above 390. years distant, it seems to me rather to be some Liger, or book of record, wherein such memorable things were written by the appointment of their Synedrion; as might serve for remembrance to future ages; for that Synedrion, or great Council of 70. Elders, instituted by God under Moses, Numb. 11. never failed so long as their state lasted. 3. The writings of the Prophets themselves, as of Nathan, and Gad, mentioned in 1 Chron. 29.29. of Ahia, and Iddo, 2 Chron. 9.29 of jehu, 2 Chron. 20.34. are utterly lost. Answer. Not so: For as it is manifest, that all the things written in the 2 of Sam were done after his death: so likewise may we very well think, that both the books of judges, and Ruth, 2 of Samuel, and the two books of Kings (for some give the Chronicles wholly to Ezra) were written by divers Prophets, whom God raised up in all the ages of that Church, to be inditers of His Word, and were as Saint Luke saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, eye-witnesses of the things which they recorded, and these Prophets here mentioned, with others, were the Authors of those books. 4. But some texts are cited in the new Testament, which are 1. not found in the old, as that in Matth. 2.23. He shall be a Nazarite: or else are, 2. not found in the Author cited; by which we may think, that some book of his is lost: as that which S. Matthew citys out of jeremy, Chap. 2.17. is not found in all that book, 3. Moreover S. Paul remembers the word of our Lord, Acts 20.35. which is not where extant beside. 5. And the Epistle to the Laodiceans, mentioned, Coloss. 4.16. is utterly lost. For that schedule which is found here and there, is rejected by every one, as unworthily to be remembered by the Apostle. 5. jude likewise citys the prophecy of Henoch, which is not found except in the Talmud. Answer 1. Some refer that of Matth. 2.23. to Esay 11.1. The Branch that should grow out of the root of jesse. But it is more fully verified in that which is written jud. 13.5. Where Samson the Figure that should begin to save Israel, is a Nazarite unto God, and He much more which is separate from sinners, and should perfect the deliverance of all the Israel of God, and the text cited by the Evangelist may not only intent both these, but whatsoever else, either the Law or the Prophets understand by the figurative snow-white purity of the Nazarites, Lam. 4.7. and is therefore cited in the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all the Prophets. 2. The other citation in Saint Matthew, where one Prophet is named by another, doth not prove that any book of jeremiah is lost: neither was it of any ignorance or forgetfulness in the Evangelist; or yet mistaking of them that have copied out that book; but because that the seed of the Woman, so long expected, was now to come into the world, it may be that Zachariah, by interpretation, Remember the Lord, is now, jeremiah, exalt the Lord, who never ought to he remembered without his praise, especially in the performance of that inestimable benefit for mankind. 3. Concerning that which is cited by Saint Paul, Acts 2.25. If he had that which he citys by the suggestion of the Holy-Ghost, as we may well think: or that the saying of Christ was in fresh remembrance with them that heard it: it is not therefore to be concluded, that S. Paul citys it out of any book now lost, seeing he might receive it from those Disciples which had heard it. 4. And as to that Epistle to the Laodiceans, it is but a common error, that S. Paul makes mention of any such; but he persuades the Colossians for the better understanding of some passages in the Epistle written to them, to read the Epistle sent from Laodicea to him, and that they of Laodicea, should read that which he sent to the Colossians, as containing doctrine and instruction fit for both the Churches to know and do. 5. And if Saint jude were taught of God, that Henoch had so prophesied, though the prophecy were never written; or if he cited it from any book which went under the name of Henoch, if nothing in the book were Henoches beside this prophecy; Saint judes' citing doth not make the book Canonical Scripture, no more than S. Paul's citing the heathen Poets: or if S. jude had it only by tradition that Henoch had so prophesied, how doth it make for the question? For it is not said, that all things are false which are delivered by tradition: but that in the matiers of the faith and doctrine of the Church, those traditions have no force or credit, which are contrary to the truth of God, revealed in His Word. 5. But it is yielded, that though some part of Scripture be lost; yet that which remains, is sufficient, and contains all things necessary. Answer. Our Lord saith, Luk. 10.42. That one thing is necessary, which in john 17.3. he confesseth to be this, To know the Father the only true God, and jesus Christ whom he hath sent; and according to the necessity of this one thing, the 3. Chapter of Gen. with the 53. of Esay, and any one of the Gospels might seem sufficient. And in this sufficiency only we dwell hither-unto. But because S. Peter saith, 1. Epistle 1.11. that the inquest of the Prophets was not only concerning the salvation of the soul, but likewise what times, and what manner of times they should be, wherein the sufferings of Christ should be fulfilled, and the glories which should follow thereupon: and because both the sufferings of Christ, and his glories are to be accomplished, not only in Himself, but also in His Church, as they were prefigured in all the types that were of Him, in the Church under the Law: and that God the Lord doth nothing, but He revealeth His secret unto His servants the Prophets, Amos 3.7. when we shall grow past milk, and be able to digest stronger meat, when we shall understand how the Law and the Prophets are to be fulfilled, to every jod and title contained in them, Matth. 5.17.18. when we shall be able to apply every text to the proper time and meaning, according to the perfection of the uttermost understanding thereof: then shall we see that the Law of the Lord is a perfect Law, and His Statutes and judgements are sweeter than honey, and the honey comb: then shall the Church see and know, that nothing in the whole body of the Holy Scripture is either superfluous, or that any word, letter, or prick therein might be missing. § 5. Sect. 5 That the Scriptures are come unto us as they were at first delivered to the Church by the Prophets and Apostles, that were the Penmen thereof; it may be manifest by those reasons which are brought for proof of the former question. 1. For if God, who is praised for His truth, in that He hath magnified His Word above all His Name, Psal. 138.2. hath not preserved His Scripture, entire from the corruption of man, from the alteration, addition, or taking away that they might make: what comfort or certain instruction can we have thereby? What assurance of hope by those promises of which we are not sure whether they be the promises of God, or the imaginations of men? Thus the end for which God of His goodns gave those Scriptures should be frustrate; and man in that incertainty nothing furthered toward eternal life. Thus the Church should fail in the duty and faithful performance of that trust which she owes unto God, in preserving that treasure which was committed to her charge and safe keeping. But these things are not to be granted. And therefore the Scriptures are come unto us in that integrity or purity in which they were at first delivered to the Church: they of the old Testament in the Hebrew tongue; they of the new in Greek. 2. The constant consent of all the doctrines and promises contained in the Scriptures, the efficacy and power of that Spirit which is manifest in the delivery thereof, are evident proofs, that the Scripture is still in that purity in which God gave it unto the Church. And although God in those Scriptures have vouchsafed to apply Himself to our understanding, and as a nurse, to lisp with her infant; yet so much is the foolishness of God wiser than man, and the weakness of God stronger than men, 1. Cor. 1.25. as that it is still manifest in the whole body of the holy writ, that nothing of humane dross is mixed therewith; but that His Word is still as before, pure as silver, that hath been tried seven times in the fire. 3. This fire is that dampish smother-fire of heresies, which the devil did kindle among his brands: among whom, though some rejected the authority of sundry books of Holy Scripture, as Martion and others: some corrupted the sense thereof by Allegories, and foreign interpretations, as the Origenists, See Augustin de Gen. ad literam: others by wresting it from the native sense, to the supportance of their own heresies: yet the Church which continued faithful in the doctrine of God, constantly withstood all these attempts, and ever maintained the sincerity, as of the doctrine, so of the Holy Scripture, on which it was founded. And because the Scripture is either of the old, or of the new Testament, it is fit to speak to each of them in particular. 4. And first, concerning the old Testament, it is manifest that the Church of Israel, whose hope was set on that Messiah that was to come, had no cause to corrupt the text of the holy writ; but according to the promises which they had in the Law, and in the Prophets, the expositors thereof, so to hope, that He should be such a deliverer and Saviour, as was promised, by which hope they were bound to preserve the Scripture in all integrity, that they might see the full accomplishment thereof when He was come. 5. Beside the Priests, whose lips should preserve knowledge, and at whose mouth they should seek the Law, Mal. 2.7. there was from Samuel unto the days of Ezra, a perpetual succession of Prophets, who could not in any ways have endured so great a corruption uncontrolled, as that the Word of the Lord should be changed or depraved. And although the Scriptures before the time of Ezra had been corrupted, yet he being a Prophet, a Priest, and a perfect scribe of the Law of the Lord, and of the Statutes of Israel; that had prepared his heart to teach the Law of God, and His statutes and judgements, Ezra 7. who changed the form of their Chaldean, or Samaritane letters, for those which are now in use: he (I say) would have taken away all such corruptions or changes, as had come to the Holy Scripture, if it might be imagined that any could come in the time of the Prophets that were before; as far as the diversity of Copies gave them light. Of the Israelites care in writing the Scriptures, and of the Masôreth. 6. MOreover that exceeding care and diligence which the Scribes were to use in writing, is sufficient proof that the books of the old Testament are come to us in that purity in which the Church received them: which care, how great it ought to be, you may see by that which their Doctors have recorded. Henry Ainsworth Advertisement, n. 3. citys out of Rambam, Sopher Torah, Chap. 7. and 10. thus much. If the book of the Law do want but one letter, or have one letter too much; if one letter touch another; if the form of any letter be corrupted; if the word which is full, be written defective; or that full which is defective: if the word of the margin be written in the line, or that of the line in the margin, the Book is not allowable to be read in the Synagogue, neither hath it the holiness of the Book of the Law at all; but is a book on which Children may learn. To this purpose you may take that which you read in Shickard. Prodrom. in Bechinah happerushim, Disp. 1. cited out of the book Sopherim. Chap. 1. Halach. 1.4, 5. by which you may see with what a superstitious care (if any care could be too much) they regarded the writing of the Book of the Law, wherein nothing might be blotted, nothing scraped out, neither might they write it in any Parchment or Velam, but such as was of the skins of clean beasts: in Parchment one the fleshy side; in Velam, on that side which had the hair; And if this ordinance were changed, they read not in it. And this was the manner: Because the lines being written in length, according to the breadth of the skin, as in an Indenture, might be troubleous to find; they divide the skin into certain pages, which in jere. 30.23. are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dlathoth, which we interpret, leaves, because they were like the leaves of a door, and may fitly be termed pages: neither was it lawful to write it with a coal, or with Ink wherein was either Gum or Coperas, and all this (say they) by the Tradition of Moses on mount Sin ai. Then with what respect they used the Book, being written, you may see in Oseh Torah. Chap. 3. Halach. 10. and in Anthony Margaritha a converted jew, in his book of the jewish faith, and others. They touch it not but with washed hands; neither do they take the roll by the midst, but by the margin, and that only with the right hand, for which they bring Deut. 33.2. At His right hand was a fiery Law. No man may lay it on His knees, nor lean upon it when he reads, nor read it as other writings, etc. lest the holy Books grow into contempt; no man may sit upon the form or bed on which it lies, nor lay it towards the bed's feet, nor lay other books upon it; and their reason, for that the whole Law is holy, and that every letter therein, contains infinite wisdom; and that God hath more care of the Letters and Syllables of the Law, then of the stars of heaven. And that this care was not only of the books of the Law, but likewise of all the holy Scripture of the old Testament indifferently; you may know by that infinite diligence of the Masôrites, who to the intent, that the purity of all the holy Text might be preserved intier, numbered in the whole Bible, the Verses, the Words, the Letters; and of them, the common, and the final; and what verse, what word, and letter, was the midst of every book: and among the Letters, they noted how many times every one was found in every book; if any one were bigger, or less than the due proportion, or higher than the rest; or pointed extraordinarily: what holem was with vau, and what without it; what hirick was written with jod, and what not; what space was more, what less, between the paragraphs: when two words were to be read as one; when one as two: when the letters in the midst of a word should be transposed, and that which was in the end of one word, to be put to the beginning of another, with many such observations which you may read in Shickard cited before De Masôreth pag. 45. etc. So that no corruption or alteration could come into the text of the old Testament, but by these rules of the Masôreth it might be easily detected. Neither is this Masôreth wonderful only, for the infinite diligence and pains that was used in the compiling thereof, but also venerable for the Authors, which by the authorities of the Hebrews, were Ezra, and the Prophets of his time, which were called the men of the great Synagogue, or more truly, the great men of the Synagogue, Haggai, Zachary, Malachy, Daniel, Hananiah, Misheel, Azariah, Nehemiah, Mardoche, Zorobabel, and of the most wise and learned among the rest, to the number of 120. For this could not be the work of one man, or of one age. And although the succession of the Synagogue still continued, in some sort; yet by reason of the many wars and troubles, after their return from Babylon, even until the last ruin of their nation by Adrian, about the year after the death of Christ, one hundred, this work was often at a stand, and not fully finished, till about the year five hundred and ten, after the Incarnation. Whereupon, those Masôrites are by some, unduly thought to be the first Authors of that work. 6. Also the whole Art of the Kabalists, in high esteem among the Hebrews, above all others; without this purity of the holy Text, were either nothing worth, or rather in itself, nothing at all. But the argument from hence, to prove the purity of the Scripture, among the common sort, for whom I writ, would not be easy to be understood. Therefore I refer them that are desirous to know further hereof, to the author forenamed, pag. 60. etc. to john Reuchlin, and others that have written of that Art. For by this which I have already said, I think it is clear, to him that is not wilfully blind, how fare it was from the Church of the jews, to offer any sacrilege to the Book of God; who with such infinite pains and care, have walled in that holy ground, lest beasts should break into it. 7. 1. And for further proof, that the Hebrews were the faithful Library keepers of that book, as Saint Augustine calls them; you may take the testimony of Saint Paul. 1 Tim. 3.15. where he calls the Church, the pillar and stay of Faith: not that in an implicit and ignorant faith, we should hold it sufficient to believe as the Church believes; but because the Church had evermore, truly and faithfully, preserved and followed the truth of God, revealed in His Word, as it had received it from Him at the first. And if this be true of the Church in general, it must needs be most true of that most ancient and public Church, first chosen from all nations, by whom the Name of the Lord should be called upon, from whom the word of the Lord was to proceed to other nations, Esay 2.3. whereas the Church of the Gentiles was then so lately called, as that it could give no proof of itself, to be worthy of such honourable titles. 2. Moreover, in the second Epistle to Tim. 3.15. he saith, That the Scriptures are able to make a man wise unto salvation, through the faith which is in Christ; But how shall we be assured of this, if we be not first persuaded, that they are free from corruption? 3. And why should our Lord send us to search the Scriptures, which were then only the Old Testament, there to find eternal life, if in stead of the truth of God, we should there find the falsehood of men? See Luke 16.29, 31. and john 5.39. 4. And that which is above all proof, is, that testimony which our Lord Himself gave to the teachers of that people, who are accused of such treason against God. For He reproving their faults, and showing how the Law did bind the thoughts and intents of the heart, as you may read Mat. 5. Lu. 6.27. and elsewhere: yet doth neither He, nor any of His Apostles, at any time, lay this sin to their charge, that they had corrupted the Word of God, otherways then by their traditions, or by their perverse interpretation thereof: but rather commands His hearers, to follow that which they taught sitting in the Chair of Moses; that is, teaching according to the Law as Moses delivered it: which they could not do, if it were corrupted from that purity which it had at the first. And they that are acquitted by such a judge ought certainly to be held free, by all them that reverence His judgement. 5. Now among these were many who did believe, besides many thousands of other jews which were obedient to the faith, as it is manifest Act. 6.7. and 21.20. And moreover, the Christians of the Gentiles, having with that glorious gift of the Holy-Ghost, received the gift of tongues, as you may read Ast. 10.45. and 19.6. and 1 Cor. 1.7. were able both to understand the Scriptures in their native language, the Hebrew tongue, and also able to judge if any falsifying of the Text had been made: by all which it is manifest, that neither the believing jews would have offered, nor the Gentiles have received any man's forgery, for the truth of God: and so it is manifest, that the jews were the faithful keepers of those holy Treasures. Objections, against the purity of the Old Testament; of Keri and Cethib; and by the way, of Mishna and Talmud. Object. 1. But it is plain, by Galatinus, lib. 1. cap. 8. that many corruptions, which they call ticcun Sopherim, Object. 1 or corrections of the Scribes, have crept into the Hebrew Text. Answer. The Sopherim named of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Saphar; which signifies, to tell, or number, doth especially mean, those Masôrites of which I spoke even now, for their exceeding diligence in numbering the Letters, as I spoke. And this objection is brought in by two or three of those later jews which they call Talmudijm. For there be three sects of them; that the greatest, who, beside the Scriptures, hold the doctrine of the Talmud, to be authentical. The second is of them, who hold all the Scriptures of the Old Testament only, to be of full authority; The third, who hold only the five books of Moses to be held and believed, as I spoke before of the Samaritans. What this degenerate brood of the Talmudists hold of the Scripture, you may perceive by their homely comparison, cited by Shickard, pag. 6. The text of the Bible is like water; the Mishna, as wine; the Talmud, as condite: and again, see the like blasphemy. The Law is like salt; the Mishna like pepper, and the Talmud like spices, and blessed is he that spends his time in the Talmud, so that he do not utterly forget the Bible, nor the Mishna. And of these worthies are they that make the objection; who as they hate our holy Faith, and inly envy that knowledge which the Christians have whereby to uphold it against their impudence; so would they shake the foundation thereof, by making the Scripture to be full of uncertainty. Object. 2. Object. 2 I, but some learned among the Christians, side with them. Answer. 'tis true, that to make the vulgar translation only authentical, and that subject to the Pope's correction, that he might be Lord of our faith, and bring in a new gospel more profitable for him, as he endeavoured by the Francifcans, See ja. Usher de success. Eccles. cap. 9 Galatinus Lindanus, and some other Papists, sway with the degenerate Apellits; but others, more learned than they, in the Roman Church, hold with us, the integrity and purity of the holy Scriptures, in those languages wherein they were writ, as you may read in G. Langford, § 5. But wherein is this corruption? Galatinus loco citato, brings it to three heads. The first is the changing one letter for another; The second in changing the pricks, or vowels; The third in their Keries, or marginal readings, for the Cethib, or word written in the line. And these changes they make (say they) not out of any ill meaning to corrupt the Text, but to clear the meaning thereof to their understanding. But can any meaning be worse, then to adulterate the truth of God● you may see what he means in the rest, by the first example, which he brings in Mal. 1. vers. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hippachtem otho; ye snuffed at it, that is, you grudged to offer that which was good for a sacrifice: where some, for otho, at it, would have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 othi, at Me, saith the Lord, because God Himself was grudged at, when for the good, they offered that which was naught. But cursed be the deceiver, which hath that which is good, and offers that which is naught to God. And thrice cursed be the ravenous impropriator, that takes away all, and leaves nothing for God. Of the change of words, by reason of the vowels, he brings only two examples; one out of 2 Sam. 16.12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beeini, which Pagnin translates, ad afflictionem meam, or mine affliction, as Hutterus makes it of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 anah, to afflict; but Montanus, of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ain, an eye, and turns it, in oculum meum, upon mine eye, as the Targum translates it, the tears of mine eye, and this is the Keri, or reading in the margin, for that in the line, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beeuni: but nothing of this will serve Galatinus, but he from his Talmudists, will have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beeino, The Lord will look on his affliction, quite contrary to David's meaning, when Shimei vaunted over him. But both this, and the other example which he brings, are of those Keries, or marginal words, which are read in stead of the words in the text: so his division should have had but two parts. Of these Keries (as Elias Levita saith, he told them more than once or twice) there be in all the Old Testament 848. of which, many belong only to the first grammar of that language: as if in English you should write, When you be come together, and in the margin, writ, Ye are. 2. Some words are for cleaning the sense, and are as short commentaries upon the Text. 3. Some for avoiding of words harsh to the ear; as when the Prophet in indignation, or mockage, or tied to relate another's speech uses such terms as seem needful to be sweetened by other more usual words. You may take an example of both these, 2. Kings 18.27. where the Prophet as a faithful Historian repeating the words of Rabshakeh, hath that which he spoke, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 leecoleth chorathan, ulishtoth eth Sheyenayehem immacem: which our English translates, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you: the word choraiham, their dung, hath the derivation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chor, that hole from which it comes out: and the word Sheyenaiyehem, their changes, of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shanah, to change, means, their urine which they should drink, and piss out, and then drink in again; whereby the railing Rab-scaeb, would be as bitter as he could. But for the first of these, the margin hath a more mannerly word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dzoatham, that which comes from them; and for the second, by way of exposition, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meimei raghleihem, the water at their feet, and these are read for the words in the line. Translators have little or nothing to do with the Keries of the first kind; in them of the last, they usually take the word in the margin: In the second kind, they take the word in the line, or that in the margin indifferently; because the Keries or marginal words are both of the ancient jews, and learned Christians, held to be of divine authority, as they in the text; as you may see it made manifest by Henry Ainsworth's Advertisement, n. 7. where by sundry examples he shows, that the word which in one Prophet is put in the margin, is by another put in the text. Moreover the most ancient translators, even from the 70. which were almost 300. years before Christ (if that which is now extant be any remnant of it) and that Chaldee of jonathan, who is said to have been the disciple of Hillel, which lived, as some writ, 100 years before Christ, and all that have followed after these, have translated sometime after the margin; sometime after the line, & oftentimes have noted both, as you may see in many instances in the place cited. And that which is above all, the Penmen of the new Testament use in some places, the word of the margin for that in the line. So that Galatinus with his late Rabbins, may still sleep upon the pillow of their own dream. For nothing of the Talmud was gathered together till about the year of Christ, 150. when one Rabbi judas compiled into one volume, the expositions on the law and the Prophets, which other Doctors had written, some before, some after Christ, which Book he called Mishna, a copy, or second reading, and divided it into Six Sedarim or orders. Some 200. years or more after him, Rabbi johanan, or john, gathered the Talmud, or Doctrinal of jerusalem, out of the writings of such Rabbins, as wrote after the other: and this Talmud is but a commentary on the former Mishna. After him likewise, about the year of Christ, 500 Rabbi Ass made a further collection of the Babylonian Talmud; of special use among the jews. Both these Talmuds are full of fables and idle fictions, to the depravation of the truth of God: But about the year, 1200. Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, thence called Ramires M Basilius M, and Maimoni, gathered out that which was good, and any way available for understanding the rites and ceremonies of the Law, and left out those fooleries of which the Talmuds were full, and therefore Postellus said rightly of him, that he is Instar omnium. For further knowledge of which things, you may read Galatinus, H. Ainsworth, Shickard, P. Ricius, and others. Now if neither the Talmud, nor the Mishna were extant of so long time after Christ, how could the writings there cited, being in private hands, bring in any public corruption into the text of the Scripture, which long time before that, had been delivered safe and entire into the hands of the Church of the Gentiles? But although it be yielded unto, that either the Masôrites, or the Talmudists, or the Cabalists by any private notes of theirs, or their expositions, have corrupted either the text, or native meaning thereof; yet doth it not therefore follow that the Nation of the jews have accepted these corruptions, much less that they hold them of divine authority, as they do the marginal Keries; and yet much less can it be made to appear, that the Translators of the Christians have at any time accepted of any such notes, no more than we heretofore accounted the notes on the Geneva Bibles to be Canonical Scripture. But you will ask, when those Keries, or marginal readings (for they are always read for the Cethib, or word written in the text) came to the Holy Scripture? Answer. The most voices are for Ezra, that he having care of the Ecclesiastical policy, and especially of the integrity of the Holy Scripture, in conferring the copies, and the differences among them, noted such as he thought fittest: and that the Copies might not differ any more, began that Masôreth, of which I spoke. But Galatinus, Lib. 1. Cap. 8. saith, that this is a lewd lie of the later jews; for than they should not have been called corrections of the Scribes, but of Ezra; yet he confesseth that they were long before the time of Christ, seeing jonathan the Author of the Chaldean translation, doth oftentimes translate, according to the margin; yet will he not have Ezra the Author of them, for than he durst not (I think) so saucily refuse them, or for them the Cethib, as errors and corruptions of the text, as he doth. But Shikkard, as he citys the common consent of the ancient Hebrews, puts it constantly upon Ezra. That with much care and diligence he got divers copies of the Scripture, compared them with those that were authentical, and noted them as you heard. 1. But if there were any copies that were authentical, what needed this superfluous diligence? 2. Beside, what could 70. years of the captivity do to corrupt so many copies, when they had in the captivity so many Prophets? As Daniel, Ezechiel, Ezra; beside so many worthies as you read of in Daniel and Ezra: and jeremiah among them that were left at home? Especially seeing a copy may continue many seventy of years, as you read in Rambam of one of 700. years, in his time, and Cunaeus citys the Chronicle called juchasin, concerning a Bible written by Hillel, between whose times were 900. years; and yet more, the learned Patrick Young, assures us of a beautiful Copy of the whole Scripture, written by Tecla, in the time of the first Council of Nice, at this time extant in his Majesty's Library, Praef. in epist. Clementis ad Curinthios. 3. And that which is most of all, to prove that Ezra was no Author of the Keries, in the Books of the Scripture, written before his time, is this. That as almost none of the Scripture written before him; so none of the Books after the captivity, except perhaps Malachi, are without them: Did not Ezra, Daniel, Zachary, Haggai, know their own meaning? Were they not able to express it? Yes. You will say then, what needed those Keries in their Books of the Chronicles, and those that bear their own names, written by themselves? I speak not this to uphold that fancy of Galatinus, that these corruptions of the Scripture (as he the admirer of himself, ignorantly terms them) were made by the jews after Ezra, and before the time of our Lord: for could such treason be wrought against God and His truth, as to pervert His strait ways, and His words, and would not His Son, who ever honoured the Father, and did that which was pleasing in His sight, so much as reprove it, not once say, sinne no more? Nor do I say it to contradict them who could find no Critic of the books of the Bible before Ezra: but to justify the truth: That the Prophets by the revelation of that Spirit by which they wrote, were every one of them the authors of those Keries or notes in their own books, as the Doctors, in Talmud Babeli in Nedarim, or treaties of vows, Chap. 4. fol. 37. b. affirm. The word read, and not written, (that is the Keries which are read from the margin, and not written in the text) and written and not read, are the tradition of Moses from mount Sinai, and they explain it so: Moses received in Sinai, and so delivered it to Israel. An example or two by the way will guide us well. It is said, Gal. 3.19. That the Law was ordained by Angels: as ministering Spirits (by the divine appointment) to Moses the Mediator of the old Covenant. He received it by voice, and although the ear doth judge of words, as the mouth doth taste the meat; yet where the meaning of the words was doubtful, there is was necessary for him so to write, as in Exod. 21.8. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lo not. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lo, to himself, have no difference at all in found, but only in sense. Our last translation follows the margin, If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her unto himself: others thus; If she be ill in the eyes of her master, that he doth not betrothe her, etc. The sense is every way excellent, and the Law most just: and who shall presume to understand the Law better than Gods own Secretary that writ it, or to alter that he hath written? So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 jeish in Gen. 36.5. and 14. is in the margin, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 jeush, and is so written in the line, verse 18. In verse 40. Duke Aluah is in 1. Chron. 1.51. Duke Aljah, and Aluah in the margin. I brought before the reasons which are alleged for the marginal readings, and now you call for a reason of the difference in the text. For if (say you) the text be not faulty, what needs the words in the margin? If the margin be right, then mend the text. Answer. Neither the one, nor the other is faulty, but both of God: and if matter of knowledge, or instruction, or comfort, be in one, which is not manifest in the other; why should God want of His praise? Or the Church be deprived of that benefit which it might receive by both, when God shall vouchsafe to make the meaning of both to be fully known? Moreover the letters of the Hebrew tongue are all numeral letters, and He that in His infinite wisdom made all things in number, weight, and measure, doth also govern all things in number, weight, and measure, to bring forth every thing in their appointed times and places. And seeing He doth nothing which he doth not reveile to His servants the Prophets, and that it is necessary that the Scripture be fulfilled in every perfection, as of the things to be done; so of the numbers of times, and persons whom they do concern: Therefore although we cannot yet see how these things should be, yet when the time is come that every secret shall be known, Matth. 10.26. Then shall the Church glorify God in this behalf. The number of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 390 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 386. So the words with their consignificant numbers are taken into their places, as they fit the prophecies there intended. And for this cause as Menahem declares it, it is not lawful to write the books of the Law, which are for the use of the Synagogue, which with so great solemnity are shown to all the people on expiation-day, with the vowels or pricks, because all possibility of understanding and interpretation may be conceived by the substantial letters of the words, which by the vowels might be tied to one only meaning. If you see this explained by the Scripture itself, you will both believe & understand it better. Take then that word of Ps. 16.10. Thou shalt not give thine Holy one to see corruption: which text in Act. 2.27. and elsewhere is brought to prove the resurrection of Christ, before His body should be corrupted in the grave; and is applied unto Him peculiarly, as to the Prince of our peace, and the Author of our full redemption from sin and death, and therefore is the word with the vowels only of the singular number. Yet because therein (as Plantin and the best printed copies express it) is a jod ● which without the vowels may be read as a plural 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chasideica, thy holy ones, for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chafideca, thy holy one thereby is secretly a hope given to the faithful, that they shall not for ever dwell under corruption, but that by the virtue of His resurrection they shall rise again, as Saint Paul saith, Ephes. 2.5, 6. That God hath quickened us together with Christ, and hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places, in Christ jesus. And again, 1 Thes. 4.14. If we believe that jesus died, and rose again, even so them also which sleep in jesus, will God bring with Him: For the dead in Christ shall rise first, vers. 16. but the rest of the dead, in Saint john's vision, Revel. 20.5. lived not, till the 1000 years were finished. And this I think is sufficient to show, that the Scriptures of the Old Testament are come unto us as they were at first delivered to the Church in the Hebrew tongue. 8. Concerning the integrity of the New Testament, less question will be, if we shall first put that which must needs be yielded unto, that through the diversity of copies, and carelessness of the writers, divers differences are found: But although in that book, set out in folio by Robert Stephan 1550. the differences (I think) are not fewer, than the divers readings in the Old Testament, yet are they not such as make any change of the sense at all, except such as all will confess to be the fault of the writer, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 12.11. and these are very seldom found. Then concerning that which some others bring, for the vulgar edition of the Latin to be authentical: if upon better view, they will be content, where it is faulty or doubtful, to examine and correct it by the Greek copy, we shall not need to spend any time about it. So the only opposition is from Mahumed, who although he speaks more than can be looked for from an adversary, concerning Christ, and commends His disciples, and other penne-men of the New Testament, as men, Holy, True, and Faithful followers of their Master: yet he saith, that the Christians which were after them, corrupted their writings. And that it may appear what spirit set this mutinous soldier a work, he denies that which is the ground and foundation of our redemption, saying, That Christ was neither the Son of God, nor yet that He was crucified for us. See Cusa Cribr. Koran lib. 1. cap. 3. I have already proved, that our Mediator must be God, Chap. 21. And likewise that our Saviour was crucified for us. Chap. 27. N. 2. And if the reasons there delivered, be of force to prove the conclusions, then do they sufficiently refute this falsehood of Mahumed: and if this Forger had wit to understand it, we say no other thing of Christ, when according to the Scriptures we call Him the Son of God, then Mahumed himself saith, when according to the self same Scriptures, he calls Him the word of God: For though Son in the Scripture, be of large signification; As sons of the quiver, for arrows, Lam. 3.13. Sons of Zion, that is, citizens' there, Psal. 149.2. Sons of the wedding-such chamber, that is, the bridegroom's friends, Matth. 9.15. and many such like, in which the word may seem to be used metaphorically: yet is the word properly and truly spoken of every effect that is homogeneous, although there be no generation between a male and a female, as the branches are the daughters of the Vine, Gen. 49.22. and the sparks are truly called the sons of the coal, job, 5.7. So in that which the mind or understanding of man doth view, the name thereof, the word, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the ratio under which it is conceived, and the expression thereof is likewise the Son of the understanding; and much more in that eternal and infinite understanding of God, in the view of His own being, shall the character, or actual expression of that infinite being, be truly called the Word, or Son of God. 1. But it cannot be true which Mahumed saith, concerning the writings of the Apostles, that they are corrupted. For (as in all other) so in the particulars, the Testaments do both agree; and it hath been proved before, that the books of the Old Testament do still remain in their integrity. 2. Neither can the truth in these two points, concerning Christ, which had been professed 600 years almost, before Mahumed was borne; which so many Christians, in all their persecutions, had so constantly sealed unto, with so many thousands of their bloods, shed in every corner of the world, be defaced by a new devised forgery of Mahumed. 3. Moreover, what can be more absurd, and witless, then to say, or think, that the Christians would falsify the Scriptures in these two points, for which above all other things their Religion was hated by the Infidels, and themselves so deadly persecuted, because they held Him to be God, that had died as a man? and affirmed that He had risen again, whom they confessed to have died on the Cross? Neither doth he accuse the Christians in these two things only, but also that they had defaced his name and memory out of that promise which our Lord made to His disciples concerning the Holy-Ghost. For Mahumed would be he by whom they should be led into all truth. Mars. Fie. de Christ. Rel. cap. 36. and out of him, Hugo Grocius de Rel: Christ. lib. 6. But Mahu, you never declared what things should come, as the promise of the Holy-Ghost doth stand; For as you disclaim miracles, so where you speak beside the text of the Scripture, you utter only your own errors. 2. Moreover this promise was made to the Apostles, and to be fulfilled in them, especially by whose ministry the word was to proceed from Zion among the Gentiles; which was never promised to be preached by Mahumed, or his thiefs of Arabia. 3. Beside that glorious gift of the Holy-Ghost, the manifestation whereof, by speaking with tongues, and working miracles, had ceased in the Church long before Mahumed was borne, insomuch that Aug. 200 years before him, had professed that he that would not then believe without a miracle, Magnum ipse miraculum est. And therefore that trick of the whispering Dove, the lie of the Camel that spoke to him in the night; and that piece of the Moon that dropped into his sleeve; as they came too late, as they were to no end, and without witnesses; so are they against his own profession, that he came not with miracles. 4. And again, if our Lord had made any such promise as might concern him; the Christians, who ever reverenced His word, were bound by that promise to reverence the memory of Mahumed, and to expect what further light or manifestation of the truth he would bring to the Church. But his doctrine brings in again those weak and beggarly rudiments of the law; circumcision, and the difference of meats, directly contrary to Christ, and the doctrine of His Apostles, who teach the fulfilling, and utter abrogating of all these ceremonies by Christ. And yet in those ceremonies of meats and drinks, there is such a dissension about Wine, as that his followers cannot agree unto this day. His doctrine of many wives, though tolerated for a time by Moses, in in that hardhearted people of the jews; yet is contrary to the doctrine of the Prophets, Mal. 2.14, 15. & of Christ, and His Apostles. By all which things it may appear, that Mahumed run when he was not sent: which he himself (if his senseless followers could see it) doth confess, in that he doth utterly forbid them to question any thing in his Koran, or to dispute about his religion, but to follow it in blind obedience. And whether the wares be counterfeit, which you must buy unseen, every man may judge. And these reasons against Mahumed in particular, with the rest that are against Simon Magus, and his competitors, in the Note on Chap. 23. § 1. are sufficient to prove, that our Lord made no such promise of Mahumed to come, as he did dream, and therefore that the Scriptures of the Apostles are not corrupted, either to forestall his doctrine, or to deface his memory. 9 And yet more particularly, to free the writings of the Apostles from this Mahometan slander, take that word of God Himself, which is in john 17.20. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me, through their word. This word of the Apostles cannot be understood only of that word which they spoke unto the people; but much more of all the Scriptures of the New Testament, which should be left in writing to the Church; by which, in all ages of the Church, since their time, children were to be begotten unto God through a lively faith, by which they should apprehend the satisfaction of Christ, and so have an entrance unto God by Him. And seeing that in all ages since the Apostles, we find the effect of our Mediators prayer, that their writings have been that Word by which the faithful have believed on Him; and so hath done, and still doth, that work for which it was sent: thereby are we sure that it is their word, their own word, as they delivered it, not corrupted, or sophisticate by any device of man, for any purpose or intent, as that false prophet doth pretend. And that you may see how great the truth is, and how it prevails, take out of Ficinus, in the said 36. cap. what this Mahumed confesseth of himself: whereby you may see, how between his arrogance, and his ignorance, the truth doth show itself. He confesseth that he neither had done any miracle, nor none could do. That he was pure man, and no more. That he could give no pardon for sin: That he would not be called upon, or worshipped. And although in his madness, he pretended himself to be a messenger sent from God, and inspired by Him, and that he was the Holy-Ghost; yet when his raving fit was off, he confessed that he was ignorant of many things, and that there were somethings in his books, of the truth of which there might be doubt, and whosoever shall worship one God, and live honestly, whether he be jew, Christian, or Sarazen, shall have mercy from God. What is then the preferment of his Koran before the holy Scriptures? or why shall we forsake our most holy guide, whom he confesseth to be the breath and word of God, and to have the next place unto God in heaven; that we may become circumcised, and abstain from Swines-flesh and wine, and enjoy fleshly pleasure with many wives, if nothing of all this give us any furtherance to eternal life? 10. To end this question, I will bring this only argument, which for substance is indifferent to both the Testaments, the circumstances only differing. If the writings of the holy Scriptures be corrupted, either those corruptions must come in by little and little into the copies of the Scripture, while they were dispersed by writing: or else all at once. If they came in by little and little, than the books that had been written without those faults, might be patterns to correct the fualty by, and so the text might be still preserved pure, as we find it was done when Printing flourished under the managing of learned men; in those copies of the Greek Testament, printed at Compludo, and at Paris. To suppose they came in all at once, is against all reason and possibility of experience. I have showed that till the time of Christ and his Apostles, the Old-Testament was pure: and can it be supposed that all the Churches of the jews in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, 1. Pet. 1. nay, all the twelve tribes in the Cities of the Medes, in places so distant, should conspire to such an act for which they were persuaded they should go down irrecoverably to hell? Can the imputation of a base jew or two in a thing of so great importance, to the disgrace of their own Nation, without any proof of the thing, naming of the place, time or Persons, against all possibility of truth, stick so fast, as that no nitre can be able to wash it off? To say that the Christians of the Gentiles, ever endeavoured to corrupt the Hebrew text, hath yet more impossibilities. For during the time of the gift of tongues, no such crime might touch them; and after that, none among them, no not the Fathers themselves, except perhaps Origen, or Hierom, had so much skill in Hebrew, as to be able to corrupt it. Beside, the whole nation of the jews would have opposed it; and as they detest our religion and faith, so had they had just cause to brand us with infamy, for that endeavour; and to proclaim our folly, which should corrupt that, in the sincerity of which alone, is the assurance of our hope. So the Hebrew text remains intier. And concerning the New-Testament written in Greek, it was so suddenly dispersed among the converts of the Gentiles, and that while some of the Apostles were yet living, that there could be no possibility of any corruption to come unto the text by any common consent. And because that our Lord was to be made a light unto the Gentiles, and a salvation unto the ends of the earth. Acts 13.47. Therefore were the books of the New-Testament also Translated into many languages, even in the birth and infancy of the Church of the Gentiles, as you may read in Aug. de Doctr. Chr. lib. 2. Cap. 5. in Chrys. hom. 1. in john: who also translated the Scriptures for the Armenians, as Hierom for the Dalmatians his countrymen. I said many languages, because they name the Indian, Ethiopian, Persian, Syrian, Egyptian, Sarmatian, Scythian; but Theodoret De Graec. affect. cur. lib. 5. saith, into all languages which were in use. And if it might be put that the Greek copies were corrupted; yet these Translations being our of them while they were entire, would detect the corruption. But all these Translations among the Christians, though differing in some points one from another, as the Nestorians, Euticheans, etc. do still agree in the substance of the meaning, and show the purity of that fountain from whence they flowed. And there is none of these translations, or Fathers here named, but were before Mahumed of a Christian became a renegado at least 200. years. All which things being put together, it will be manifest that neither the falsehood of the jews, nor the forgery of Mahumed have any show of truth, but that the Holy Scriptures both of the old and new Testament are still in their purity, as the Church received them. Of the Scriptures easiness to be understood. §. 6. THat comparison of the Prophet, Psalm 36. that the judgements of God are like a great deep, was by a Father fitly and wittily applied to the Scripture, to be as a sea, in which the Elephant may swim, but yet with Shallows, in which the Lamb may wade. And although David prayed that God would teach him the wonderful things of His Law; yet he honours it for this, that it is perfect, that it hath power to convert the soul, that it is sure, that it makes the simple wise, Psal. 19.7. And therefore are they not the messengers of Christ, but rather the ministers of Satan, who under any pretext of falling into heresy, of hardness to be understood, or the like, withhold the laiety from the reading of the Scriptures. It is not denied, but that many things therein are hard to be understood; yet that one thing which is needful, Luk. 10.42. That mystery of the knowledge of Christ, which was kept secret since the world began, is now made manifest by the Scriptures of the Prophets, to all Nations, for the obedience of faith, Rom. 16.25.26. 1. For seeing the instruction of God must be of all such things as are above our knowledge; and yet of such things as are most necessary for us to know: if nothing be more necessary for us to know, than the means of our delivery from sin and death, by the merit of Christ, it is necessary that one needful thing be made manifest unto us by the Scriptures of God, that every one may know and come freely to the fountain of living Waters. But what helps a fountain that is sealed up? Therefore it is necessary that our redemption by Christ be clearly, plainly, and for every man's understanding taught in the holy Scriptures. 2. Most of the arguments of §. 2. are easily brought to prove that the Scriptures are easy to be understood. 1. For what comfort or hope could we have by them, if we understood them not? 2. How is our memory helped, by that we know not? 3. How are we confirmed in our most holy faith and religion, by that we understand not? 4. How should we understand those high mysteries, so fare beyond our apprehension, as the Trinity of Persons in Unity of the Deity, etc. but that the Holy Scriptures have made them easy unto us? 5. How should we know the danger and punishment of our sin, or the reward of our obedience, if the Scripture did not fully instruct us therein? 6. You may also bring hither the reasons in §. 4. I need not repeat them, nor teach a child how from the sufficiency of the Scripture, he may prove their easiness to be understood. See there. Object. 1. But doth not Saint Peter, 2. Epistle, 3.16. say, that in Saint Paul's Epistles, Object. 1 as in the other Scriptures, there are some things hard to be understood? Answer. Though some things be hard; yet the fundamental points of our Religion, as the articles of our faith, and the rules of a Christian life, are plain and easy to be understood therein: and these are the things, by the knowledge and performance of which, we may hope to have everlasting life. Object. 2. But it is not the word of the Scripture, that the unlearned and unstable, Object. 2 wrist the things which they understand not to their own destruction? Nay, did not the Heretics, though many of them learned, pervert the Scripture to the supportance of their damnable Heresies? And were it not better that they had never read the Scriptures, than that they should read them with so great danger, both to themselves and to others, as it hath appeared by the heresies that have been sown in the Church? Answer. If I seem to give you a sullen answer, yet reprove it not if it stand with the truth. It is said, 1. Pet. 2.9. That Christ is a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence to the disobedient; but to them that obey the truth, elect, and precious. But should Christ therefore not have come to redeem His Elect, because some shown themselves unworthy of eternal life? Therefore, if the Gospel be uneasy, or hid, it is hid to them that are without, whose eyes the God of this world hath blinded, that they should not perceive the truth. Therefore as Christ redeemed the elect, prays for the elect, not for the world, but for them whom God had given him out of the world, john 17.9. So the benefits which are peculiar to the Church, of which the true understanding of the Scripture is one, belongs to them, who with an honest and pure heart, receive the word, and bring forth fruit with patience. But it is true, that even to those many things are yet unknown, and some things doubtful, and this by the dispensation of God. 1. To avoid weariness in the reader. 2. To stir up our diligence, and further inquest. 3. That we may ask wisdom of God, and not trust to our own understanding. 4. That in the high and great mysteries of God, we should hold ourselves contented with that knowledge of them which God hath vouchsafed to give us in His word, and such conclusions as do necessarily follow thereupon. But if the Scriptures be able indeed to give wisdom to the simple, to make Children wise to salvation through faith in Christ, if they give instruction in righteousness, and make the man of God perfect, and throughly furnished to every good work, 2. Tim. 3.16.17. then doubtless are they for every man's reading: for the perfect, and him that is throughly furnished; for children, and for the simple for all ages of men and women. Ho, every one that thirsteth come to the waters; Come, buy Wine, and Milk without money or price, Es. 55. verse 1. Of the Scriptures Jnterpretation. § 7. ANd if the Scripture be for every ones reading, then certainly for every ones interpretation, privately to his own understanding, according to the measure of his capacity. For the interpretation of any word, or writing, is nothing else but the declaration of the native and true meaning thereof; whether it be literal; and that either simple or figurative: or mystical, and that either allegorical, moral, or anagogical. But that ought not to be taken for the true meaning of the Scripture, which every one according to his private fantasy, is able to wring out: but that only is the true and lawful interpretation thereof, which doth offer itself according to the meaning of the words, with due consideration of the argument or purpose of the text: which is gathered by that which goes before, and that which follows after. And this interpretation is especially to be hoped from them, who having knowledge of the Hebrew and Greek, wherein the Scriptures were originally written, have made it all their study and delight truly to understand them for their own soul's health, and the instruction of others. But that we be not overswayed by any opinion which we may have of their learning, or mightiness in the Scriptures, let nothing be taken for a true interpretation of the Scripture, which is dishonourable to God, contrary to any Article of the faith, or any of the ten Commandments, or the petitions of the Lord prayer, or any received doctrine, which is plainly taught by other places of Scripture. Secondly, nothing which is contrary to common reason and understanding, or repugnant to civil custom, and good manners. 3. No man knoweth the things of God, but only the Spirit of God; therefore, in the interpretation of doubtful places of Scripture, the Spirit of God, whereby it was written, must give also the true understanding, or interpretation, thereof: and this Spirit, and the meaning thereof, is most easily found in the holy Scripture. Therefore the surest, and best interpretation of Scripture, is by Scripture itself. 4. The Scribes and Pharises were to be heard, sitting in the Chair of Moses, that is, teaching the Law, according to the true meaning of Moses. Therefore the interpreters of the New-Testament also, are to be heard, speaking the voice of Christ. But His sheep will not hear a stranger, for they know not the voice of strangers, john 10. Therefore the interpretation of the Scripture is chiefly by the Scriptures. And by the Scriptures only, every question of faith and doctrine to be decided, not by the Church, or any humane voice, except they speak according to the word of the Scripture. 1. For seeing the Holy-Ghost is the chief judge in all controversies, on whose infallible sentence we may safely rely, and that the Scriptures are His immediate word, therefore from thence are we to expect His immediate answer; whereas the Church speaks not from God immediately, but as a mean, conveys unto us the voice of the Scripture. 2. Beside this, the Church may err, the Scripture cannot err. 3. The Scriptures shine by their own light: the Church by the light and Doctrine of the Scriptures. 4. The Scriptures are always at hand to be resorted unto, the Church never all assembled, nor a Council scarce once in an age, and they that vaunt most of the name, for the most part have least of the true Church. And therefore the Prophets send us to the Law, and to the Testimonies, and our Lord, to search the Scriptures. See 2. Peter 1.19. Object. 2. By this means, making it lawful for every one to read, and interpret the Scriptures, you set open a door, to all manner of heresies to enter into the Church, and make every private spirit a judge, and an interpreter of the sense of Scripture. Answer. Though every one may, and aught to read the Scripture for comfort and instruction; yet the interpretation of the harder places, belongs especially to the Pastors and Doctors appointed by the Church thereto: and if any private man do interpret according to the former rules, yet cannot that interpretation be said to proceed from a private spirit, although the man be private. For the holy Spirit is the common author of all light and understanding. And the means whereby He useth to teach, is, the holy Word, the common light of all the faithful. And this may seem sufficient to have spoken of the Author, and use of the holy Scriptures, and what they are: then of their sufficiency, purity, easiness, and interpretation. And blessed is that man that meditates in them day and night, that he may find by them, the full assurance of his hopes, and live in obedience and thankfulness to the Author and finisher of his faith. ARTICLE IX. ❧ I believe in the holy Catholike-Church. CHAP. XXXV. A Certain jew, famed for his riches, was once asked by a great lord of the Turks, how it came to pass, that the Turks, the Christians, and the jews, did so peremptorily hold every one their own faith, that they could not be withdrawn therefrom? The jew suspecting his wealth to be aimed at, answered, as their manner is, by a witty parable. A rich man (quoth he) had three sons that observed him with great respect, because of his wealth: he, to hold them all in their obedience, oftentimes professed among them, that he should be the heir of all his estate, to whom at his death he should bequeath a ring which he used to wear: But in secret he caused Mammurius the Goldsmith, to make for him, two other ring's, so like it, as Numaes' ancylias were not one more like another. At his death he called each of his sons apart, and gave to every one of them, one of these rings and withal, the possession of all his goods: so every one holds his claim (quoth he) and it is nor yet known how the controversy will be ended. This is the present state of the Church; not only among these three sects, named, but likewise among all the sects of Christianity; yea, of all religions whatsoever. For there is none among the Pagans, but he hath this hope, that his soul shall be happy, if he serve his god as he ought. And having determined those questions which concern God, and our Mediator; it follows, that in this second part of the Creed, we consider those benefits and privileges which belong unto the Church, by that which our Saviour hath done and suffered for it. But that we mistake not, we shall best be guided by the holy Scripture, both for the use of the word, and for the knowledge of the thing. The word Ecclesia, as it signifies in the original, the house of religious exercises, or a tumultuous assembly; as in Act. 19.32. or a combination of wicked men, as in Psalm. 26.5. hath no use here; but more properly it signifieth an assembly, or multitude of people, professing the true worship of God, such as were the Churches of Corinth, Ephesus, and others planted by the Apostles, and Apostolical men in a City or Kingdom, as we think that joseph of Arimathea planted the faith in this Island, and so established a Church here. Every faithful family is likewise a Church, Romans 16.5. and the Church representative, as the Synedrion among the jews, is also so styled, in Matth. 18.17. But because among all these Churches, there may be hypocrites, unholy, and carnally minded men, which we cannot count within our Creed, and believe that they are the holy Church, therefore the Church may be taken, not only for the visible, but also they, whose Mediator our Lord Christ is, unto eternal life, as he saith, john 17.9. I pray for them, I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me. From whence it will easily appear, what this holy Catholic or universal Church is, which here we do believe, to wit, that number of holy men which God out of all nations of the world, hath predestinated unto eternal life. If we clear the sense of the words, and answer such doubts as arise thereabout, we shall afterward easily approve the Article. And first concerning the title of holiness given to the Church. Object. 1. It may be objected, that seeing it is said, Psal. 14. that among all the Children of men, there is none that doth good, no not one; how can any Church among men be called Holy? Answer. Not by any inbred holiness in themselves; but because the righteousness of Christ their Saviour is imputed unto them for their justification before God; as it is said, 1. john 1.7. The blood of jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin: then because the Spirit of sanctification dwells in them, and makes them zealous of good works, that they also may be holy, even as He which hath called them is Holy, and that according to the Law, or rule of a sanctified life, according to which they ought to live, and count it their present misery, that they are still subject unto sin, and so in their spirit they serve the Law of God, though in their flesh the law of sin: See Rom. 1.25. But so many of this Church as are already freed from this bondage of corruption, in the assurance of eternal bliss, wait in hope for the redemption of their bodies, so that both in body and soul they may serve the living God. Object. 2. But why do you call them holy men? Object. 2 Can neither Women nor Children be heirs of eternal life? Answer. As the word Homo in Latin signifies any of the race of mankind, as homo nata est, She was borne man, Seru. Sulp. ad Cic. So is man often used in English; and therefore by the title of the most worthy, the whole race of mankind is here understood: So that not only they which are within the virge of the visible Churches, and have the ordinary means of faith, that is, the word and sacraments, are comprehended hereby, but also such as have not those means, as they that live in the Countries of paynims, and Gentiles; yea, and of the Pagan's themselves, all such as the Lord our God shall call. Neither may we presume to forbid them to come unto God, who seem denied of the outward means of knowledge, as the deaf, the blind, the Idiots, in as much as God, the God of the spirits of all flesh, Numb. 16.22. can by His Spirit guide the will, and inform the understanding as it pleases him, Prov. 21.1. See further hereto, Note (a) §. 2. n. 4. on Chap. 32. And thus you understand what is meant by men, and withal, why the Church is called Catholic or Universal, namely because it holds the number of Gods chosen, which have been or shall be called out from the rest of all the men of the world, from Adam unto the last man that shall be borne, as this Church confesseth unto Christ, Rev. 5.9. Thou hast redeemed us unto God by thy blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and Nation, and people. The last circumstance is concerning the predestination of them that are in this Church: for seeing none can be glorified, but they that are justified in Christ: neither can any one be justified but such as are called and predestinate, Rom. 8.30. and seeing that to the infinite wisdom of God, all his works are known and determined, Act. 15.18. it is impossible that any one can be a member of this Church, but only such as God out of His eternal love hath predestinate thereunto. Object. But there is one God and Creator of all, Object. 1 whose mercy is over all His works and He hateth nothing that He hath made: And therefore it may seem that all are equally predestinate unto eternal life, if all do equally lay hold thereon. Answer. As the creature could not cause itself to be: So neither being corrupted by original sin, can it change that being wherein it is, See Art. Eccl. 10. and seeing God alone doth work in us, both to will, and to do of his own good pleasure, Phil. 2.13. it is not in any man of Himself to lay hold on eternal life, nor to endeavour any thing thereto; no not so much as to will or desire it, without the special work of God in him, who worketh all things according to the counsel of His own will. Ephe. 1.11. So man, though made upright, yet being originally corrupted, and left to the hand of his own will, cannot cease to sin. And although God permit him to follow his own ways; yet that permission is no cause of any man's sin, nor puts it any thing in the reprobate, why he should sinne. But in the predestinate it is not so; For he renews them in the spirit of their mind, unto sanctification, converting their will, and making them ready unto every good work. 2. Object. Object. 2 If then predestination be not of all men unto eternal life, and yet that all men are in one and the same state of nature corrupted, by the sin of Adam; It may seem that God did predestinate and choose out of the mass of mankind, those only, whom He did foresee that they would be excellent for their good works, and so for their future merits sake, adopted them to be heirs of eternal life. Answer. God is debtor to no man, and where he that gives is no way bound, the gift can no way be accounted, but only of his free will that giveth: so Predestination hath no other original but only the mere freewill of the Almighty God. But if our works foreseen, were any cause of our predestination. 1. How then could it be of His mercy only, Rom. 9.16? 2. How could it be according to the good pleasure of His will? Ephe. 1.5. 3. How were it to the glory of His grace; if the worthiness of our works foreseen, had any right therein, Ephe. 16? 4. How were our boasting excluded, Rom. 3.27. if they were the cause of our happiness? 5. And if our works foreseen be the cause of our predestination, than also of all the consequents thereof, as of our election, calling, justification, and glorification. But this is most false, See 2. Tim. 1.9. Therefore also the former. 6. Moreover, what good works can be in man, which God Himself doth not work in us, as the Prophet saith, Esay. 26.12. O Lord thou hast wrought all our works in us. 7. If God have created good works, that we should walk in them, and good works acceptable to God be found only in them that are predestinate, and chosen to life, it follows that good works are foreseen in us, not as the cause, but as the fruits and effects of predestination. For if they can be no other than the effects of God's grace in us, they cannot be foreseen as a cause of His grace towards us. This objection is laid to them of the Roman Church; but as fare as I have any acquaintance with them, I find no such thing by them. Tho. Aqu. contr. Gent. lib. 3. Cap. 163. teacheth the contrary, and gives his reasons. The grace of God (saith he) is an effect of predestination, and goes before all humane merit. 2. The Divine will and Providence, are the cause of all other things: For of Him, in Him, and for Him are all things. Neither can it be accounted the doctrine of their Church: for in the 7. Can. Sess. 6. Cone. Trid. where all the causes of the justification of man in the state of Nature, are reckoned up, efficient, final, formal, instrumental: the meritorions cause is put only, the suffering of our Lord, who thereby made full satisfaction to God, and merited justification for us. And if we be justified only by the merit of Christ, and not by any merit foreseen in us, then are we called chosen, and predestinate only in Him through the mercy of God, who gratuitò, of his own free will doth wash, sanctify, and seal us by the Holy Spirit of promise, who is to us the pledge of our eternal inhoritance: this is the effect of the Canon. Object. 3. But how is this Church Catholic or Universal, if any man be shut out of it? Or how is it said by S. Paul. 1. Tim. 2.4. That God would have all men to be saved, if there be few that shall enter in at the strait gate? Answer. The common answer to that text of Timothy is; that it is spoken not the singulis generum, but de generibus singulorum, that is, that some of every Nation and degree amongst men shall be saved; not every man of every degree. But I suppose that it is rather spoken in respect of the ordinary means, which in the Church is the Word read and preached, and the Sacraments, by which all men are called to repentance, and faith in Christ: which if they refuse, their condemnation is just. Also out of the visible Church, nature calls in a softer voice, upon all nations and people of the world; and upon every one in particular to fear God, and to give Him glory which made the heaven and the earth, and all therein. And moreover, the light of every man's conscience accusing, or excusing him, for those things which he doth contrary, or according thereto, is the witness of God in every man's heart, to excuse or condemn him. And in respect of these means, God may be said to will, that all men should be saved, in that he doth offer his mercy to all, and call upon them to turn unto Him, that they might be saved; if they want not grace to accept it. Object. 4. The want of that, is not imputed to any man, which is only in the power of another to give; and seeing that without repentance, faith, hope, and perseverance in virtue, no man can attain to happiness; which virtues of repentance, etc. are only in God to give, as the Prophet saith, Lam. 3.21. Turn Thou us unto thee o Lord, and so shall we be turned: it may seem, that the want of these things, ought not to be imputed to any man. Answer. If any man refuse a good thing when it is offered, the want of that shall be imputed to himself, as to the wicked, that saith to God, Depart from us, for we desire not the knowledge of thy ways, job, 21.14. and these are they whom God is said to harden; because they have hardened their own hearts through the custom of sin, that they cannot repent. Therefore, though the predestinate, that the mercy of God may appear, are converted by the inward and effectual calling; their hearts being renewed by repentance, to follow him that calleth; yet that the order of justice may be observed, they that forsake their own mercy, are still left to the punishment of their sin, both original, and actual, because they neglect the outward calling, and wilfully shut their eyes against the light of their natural knowledge and conscience, See Rom. 9.21. etc. And according to this sense, is it, that in Scripture the hardening of man in sin, and the preserving man from sin, seems to be attributed to God both ways; as where he is said to harden Pharaohs heart; and to Abimelech, (a) Gen. 20.6. I have kept thee from sinning against me. § 2. Sect. 2 And thus it being manifest what this holy Church is, and of what persons it doth consist; it follows first to prove, that there is such a Catholic Church, as we say we do believe to be; then to see the differences which are between this Catholic Church, and other particular Churches and Congregations. 1 If there were not a number of holy people, which God hath chosen unto eternal life; then the end of Christ's sufferings for us, were all in vain, and the whole race of mankind should have been created only to destruction: So the mercy of God toward His creature, that had sinned, should be without effect: Neither should His glory be magnified, in saving that which was lost. So the devil, the enemy of mankind, might magnify himself against God, in that he had destroyed His creature irrecoverably. But all these things are impossible. Therefore there is a holy Church, chosen of God unto eternal life. And if this holy Church, in the parts, or members thereof, had not continued in all ages, since God made His promise of a Saviour to Adam, than faith had failed from among men, and the promises of God, being either not believed, or forgotten, the sons of God, begotten by the immortal seed, had failed. So the throne of Christ, when there was no faithful heart wherein He reigned, should not have been established for ever, contrary to the promise, Psalm. 89. ver. 4, 29, 36. and Luke 1. ver. 33. So the seed of the enemy only had flourished in the earth, contrary to the disposition of that wise husbandman, Matth 13.30. Let both grow together until the harvest. But these things are impossible. Therefore the holy Church is also Catholic, or continuing from the beginning, to the end of the world. For your better understanding, you may take these arguments apart. 2. If the goodness of God, being essentially one with His infinity, were not diffusive, or spreading itself upon the creature, for the succour and aid thereof, in the greatest misery, then should it be exceeded by the malice and wickedness of the devil, which though it be the greatest that may be; yet must it needs be finite, as having the original from a finite creature. But it is impossible that God should be exceeded by the malice of the devil, therefore there is a restoring of man, to that blessedness and glory, from which he fell by his sin, as you have seen it proved before, in the 18. Chapter, and from all the reasons there brought, to that conclusion, you may bring reasons for the proof of this Article. 3. If man were created according to the will of God, innocent, and without sin; then that present estate of sin, and death the punishment thereof, wherein he now is, must needs have been brought upon him, since his creation, contrary to the revealed will of God: wherein, though for the declaration of the justice of God against sin, some be suffered to continue; yet because sin is contrary to the will of God, and death contrary to the end of His creation of mankind; it is necessary that there be a redemption, or freeing of some appointed thereunto, from the thraldom, both of sin and death. But it hath been proved, Chap. 15. that man was created innocent. Therefore there is a Church, or a number known unto God, of them that are so redeemed. 4. There is a God who hath made His promises of everlasting life. There is faith, hope, and repentance, and other virtues both Christian and moral, whereby the promises of God are apprehended, and obedience performed to His Commandments. Therefore there is a holy Catholic Church. For it is impossible, either that the promises of God should fail of their performance; or that faith and other virtues should be without their reward. For so the Spirit of grace, which wrought these virtues in man, should work in vain. But this is impossible. 5. This holy Catholic Church is declared in sundry places of the holy Scripture; and in special, according to all the causes thereof, in the Epistle to the Ephes. 4. chap. 1. from vers. 2. to 15. And although Saint Paul, in that place write to a particular Church; yet is the Catholic Church no other than such as is there described: no more than the British or Spanish Seas are different from the great Ocean, either in substance or qualities. For there is but one body, and one Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one hope, one baptism, one God, and Father of all. Ephe. 4.4, 5, 6. And as there is but one God; so is there but one Mediator between God and man, the Man jesus Christ, 1. Tim. 2.5, 6. And this one Mediator is that one only mystical head of His mystical body. For there is no name given under heaven, whereby we must be saved, but only the name of jesus Christ, Act. 4.12. And as there is but one head; so is there one only body, as it is said, Cant. 6.9. My Dove, my undefiled is but one, and john 10.16. There shall be one fold, and one shepherd: by which texts of the Holy Writ, it is manifest that there is one holy Catholic Church, as we do believe. §. 3. And by this which hath been said, it may easily appear what those differences are, between this Catholic Church, and other particular congregations, whether in private houses, or in Cities, Countries, Kingdoms, or Peoples, which in Cant. 6. cited even now, are signified by the Queens, Concubines, and the innumerable Virgins, which consent to the same points of faith and doctrine. 1. The first, and most common is this, that in the Visible Churches, Hypocrites and Atheists are found among the chosen; and these are the tares among the wheat, the bad fish among the good, Matth. 13.48. But in this holy Catholic Church, no vile or profane person can be, as it is said Rev. 21.8. and 22.15. That without the holy City, shall be dogs, the fearful, and abominable, the unbelieving, murderers, whoremongers, sorcerers, idolaters, and every one that loveth and maketh the lie. 2. A second difference is in this, that every particular Church is visible, so that every member thereof, may be fully informed of all things whatsoever is taught therein for truth; either concerning doctrine or discipline: but the Catholic Church, in the sense we here take it neither is, nor ever was, nor can be visible, but to the eye of faith alone, as here we confess in our Creed; for faith is the proof, or argument, of things not seen. Hebr. 11.1. If then the Catholic Church be a thing to be seen, then is it not to be believed; if it be to be believed, then must it needs be invisible. 2. Beside this, the universal, or Catholic Church, as Saint Paul describes it, Ephes. 13.15. is of the Saints in heaven, as well as of them that are in earth; yea, and of them that are not yet borne, as of either of these. And although all the members of this Church, during the time of their pilgrimage upon earth, be visible, or in a visible Church; yet, while they are here on earth, we do not believe them to be of that Catholic Church, with that assurance of knowledge, which a saving faith requires; such a faith I mean, as is due to an Article of our Creed, but only with that hope, or credulity, which Christian charity, and their holy conversation doth bind us to have of them. 3. For as God only knoweth the heart, so He only knoweth who are His; and if He only know, then cannot we; and though we see them in a true particular Church, yet do we not thereby know that they are true members of the Catholic Church. Object. 1. If the true Church be not always visible, why doth our Lord send us to the Church, Mat. 18.17. Answer. That commandment of Christ shows what is to be done in particular visible Churches, not in the invisible Catholic Church; and this is to be observed in such texts as are like to this, which the Papists bring, to prove the perpetual visibility of the Catholic Church. For if they could make that good, they would hope thereby, to prove the Church of Rome to be the Catholic Church. But if the first were given, the second would not follow. For was there no Catholic Church before Romulus murdered his brother? or, where was the Catholic Church, when Rome was yet the mother of all the abominations and filthiness of the earth? First in their worship of devils; and after, when their lives were answerable to their Religion, as you read in Saint Paul, Rom. 1. and in their own prophets, juvenal, Arbiter, etc. and again, since they have forsaken their faith once praised, Rom. 1.8. and borne the former reward of their idolatry? And if that Church be the Catholic Church, out of which none can be saved (as they say) what shall become of all those Christians in the whole world, which detest the Church of Rome, and all their idolatries and false doctrines; as the Greeks', and all that follow them, the Nestorians, jacobites, Ethiopians, the reformed Churches in the West, etc. which for the number may seem to be, at the least, five to one to the Papists, notwithstanding their false pretended universality? To the former differences between the Catholic Church and particular congregations, you may add a third, that any particular Church may err wholly, both in manners and doctrine, as I shown in the Chap. before § 7. N. 2. but the Catholic Church cannot err. 4. Any particular Church may fail, or cease to be; but of the kingdom of Christ there shall be no end. Therefore the Catholic Church cannot fail; from whence it followeth; 5. That the Catholic Church is of the greatest antiquity, as having the beginning thereof in Adam and Eve, (for I inquire only of the Church of the redeemed, not of the Angels) but particular Churches had their beginning afterward, some at one time, some at another; as that of the jews, in Abraham and his family; that of the Ethiopians in the Eunuch, etc. 6. Concerning the succession of the Catholic Church, there is none such as they account, of Kings, or Bishops, in this or that See: but because Christ's kingdom cannot fail, therefore there is this succession; That before these Saints that now live shall die, others shall be borne, that are the true members of the Church; and thus is there still but one Catholic Church, which unity contains all and every member thereof, in one mystical body, whereof our Lord Christ is the Head. Notes. (a) I Withheld thee from sinning against Me.] Against this, and many such texts of Scripture, the Heretic Pelagius taught, that man of himself, without any special grace of God, might fulfil the divine Commandments: and if the grace of God were at all needful, it was only, that a man might more easily, through grace, do those things which he was commanded to do of his own free will. But this grace (said he) is only in our free will, which our nature hath received of God, without any * See what Pelagius meant by this, in answ. to the jesuits challen. in Ireland. pag. 478 179. 480, & 481. etc. merit of ours foregoing. In this only God doth help us, that by the law and the doctrine, we may know what we ought both to do and to hope for, Aug. Haer. Cap. 88 By occasion of which heresy, divers unnecessary questions have been moved, about free will, universal grace, perseverance, and the like, which are no way available to the increase of godliness, or the comfort of the conscience, but rather have overthrown the faith of some, and been the fuel of Factions, both in the Church and Commonwealth. But as among the Corinthians, when schisms and discontents arose, concerning their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Love-feasts, before the holy Communion, the Apostle brings them to the simplicity of the first institution thereof, 1 Cor. 11.21. So by the same Spirit of wisdom, hath his Majesty, our gracious Sovereign, with the advice of our reverend Fathers, the godly and learned Bishops, cut off these curious questions, with all inconvenience and scandal as might grow thereby, See his Majesty's declaration, before the Art: of 62. Read also the Art. 9.10.11.17. So that now through the mercy of God, by the piety and constant care of his Majesty, and by the providence and zeal of our faithful shepherds, there is assured hope, that these tares, which so lately troubled our neighbour Churches, and by the servants of the envious man, were attempted to be sown in our beauteous fields, shall never spread any root of bitterness among us. And although these questions thrust in themselves here in this place to be discussed, seeing predestination is the eternal foundation of the holy Catholic Church, out of which there is no salvation; and into which none can come, but he that is holy: It may seem that it ought to be enquired, what holiness we have of ourselves, or what strength, to come to that holiness which we ought to have; and what strength to continue therein. But because obedience is better than sacrifice, and because reason ranging beyond these bounds which God hath set, is accounted by Saint Paul, Rom. 9.20. a replying against God; let us leave these questions, as Saint Paul left that of predestination, to the mere mercy and will of God, and that absolute Lordship which he hath over His creature, as the temperer of the clay hath power over the same lump, to make one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour. And seeing man's understanding, searching into the things of God so fare above his reach, as the infinite wisdom of God and His secret will are, must needs fall into error; let us be contented to keep ourselves within those limits which God Himself hath set. Deut. 29.29. The secret things belong unto the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed, belong to us and to our children, that we may do them. To this purpose Saint Paul writeth concerning this sealed secret, 2 Tim. 2.19. The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are His; and let every one that nameth the Name of Christ, depart from iniquity. Therefore lest any man should run beside his own hopes, whilst he inquires too busily into the hopes of other men, let us remember that wise and faithful counsel which is in 4. Esdr. 8.55. Ask thou no questions concerning them that perish. The reason went before verse 47. for thou comest fare short, that thou shouldest be able to love the creature more than He that made it. ARTICLE X. ❧ The Communion of Saints. CHAP. XXXVI. THey that make this clause to be only an appendix for explication of the former, as if they would say, I believe the holy Catholic Church to be the Communion or fellowship of Saints: come short of the uttermost meaning thereof. For beside the two properties of the Church, to be Holy and Catholic; it is necessary to know what the Privileges or prerogatives are, which belong to that holy congregation, that they may know that their service is not without reward. These prerogatives are 4.1. This Communion of the Saints, which is the ground and assurance of the rest. For from hence it follows, that we may assuredly believe that our sins are forgiven, and therefore that our bodies shall rise again, and that to everlasting life. But this Communion of the Saints is twofold; 1. Among themselves: Secondly, in the participation of those benefits which are purchased for them by the merit of Christ. Yet this Communion among themselves, is rather a third property, than a privilege of the holy Church, and ariseth from that Communion which we have with Christ, For he that loveth Him that begetteth, loveth him also that is begotten of Him, 1. joh. 5.1, 2. And because all the faithful are governed by one Holy Spirit, therefore are they ever ready and willing to impart what gifts soever they have received, to the common good of all that may be partakers thereof. And this not only in the supply of outward helps, as it appeared, Act. 4.32. but much more in like affection one toward another, in prayer one for another, in supporting each the infirmity of other, as one member of the body is ever helpful to another, in comforting, in exhorting, and in the Spirit of Meekness admonishing one another, and every one in himself, giving an example of a virtuous, and honest life, according to that commandment, Mat. 5.16. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven. And these things proceed from that inward and spiritual Communion which we have with God the Father, and with His Son jesus Christ, as it is said, 1. john. 1.3. For seeing we know, That God so loved the world, as that He gave His Son to die for the life of the world, we ought also to love the brethren. So likewise the spiritual Communion, or participation of those benefits whereof we are partakers by the merit of Christ, stands altogether in this, that He our Mediator, God and Man, having given Himself a ransom for us: God doth not now look on us as we are in ourselves, corrupted in our sins, but as we are washed, but as we are sanctified, but as we are justified in the name of the Lord jesus, and by the Spirit of our God, as we are one body with His Son, and He our head, is become our righteousness, our sanctification and redemption: So that through Him, we have not only these privileges here mentioned; of the forgiveness of our sins, resurrection, and life; but also having in Christ the adoption of sons, we have by Him an entrance unto God the Father, a right and interest in the eternal inheritance of the Kingdom of Heaven, and whatsoever may be available to our eternal happiness, for the gift was not as the offence, as you might see, Chap. 18. §. 2. For as we know that Christ our Lord, the eternal Son, was partaker of our nature, and are likewise assured, that the greatest actions of God in His creature, are for the greatest good that can come near the creature: So ought we to be persuaded, that we also shall be made the sons of God, by that Spirit of God that dwelleth in us, as it is said, 1. Cor. 6.17. He that is joined to the Lord, is one Spirit. And these are the exceeding great and precious promises, that God hath made unto us in Christ, that by Him we shall be made partakers of the divine nature. 2. Peter 1.4. this is that union, and Communion for which our Lord prays that it may be made perfect in us, john 17.21, 22, 23. 1. For seeing the soul of man is a thing whose excellency doth so fare exceed all things of this world: it may not be thought that the happiness and perfection of the soul can stand in things that are inferior to itself: as in riches, honour, worldly pleasure, or the like: But seeing it knows that there is one only infinite goodness, which because it is infinite, must needs be eternal, and able to satisfy all the desire of the creature that can be partaker thereof: therefore doth it aspire thereunto, because in the enjoying of that alone, it can be made perfect. And if this desire of the soul should be in vain, than the Holy Spirit of God which wrought this desire in the soul, should have wrought in vain: then the infinite goodness, which might satisfy the desire of the creature, should be defective toward the creature, and consequently not infinite: then the promises of God made in His word should fail, and the prayer of our Mediator, cited even now from john 17. without effect. But all these things are impossible. Therefore there is a Communion of the Saints with God, and with one another, as we confess in the article. 2. If the merit of Christ be infinite, and that not for Himself, but for His body, which is the Church, than it is necessary that an infinite reward be given thereto. But the merit of Christ is infinite, both actively and passively. Therefore an infinite reward is due to us thereby: So that by the Spirit of Christ which is in us, we have communion both with the Father, and the Son, 1. john 1.3. 3. All the dignities of God are infinite, and they are all to be manifested in the creature, so fare forth as the creature can be made capable thereof. Ergo. Now the foundation and original of communion is in this, that for as much as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself took part of the same, that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, Hebr. 2.14. and that to this end, that we might be partakers of His immortality, and from that union of the divine and humane nature, whereby our Lord, of the seed of Abraham, became one with all mankind, ariseth that spiritual and mystical union of us with Him, that howsoever we are absent in body, yet being renewed by the Spirit of our mind, we live unto Him, & have Him evermore abiding in us, as we evermore abide in him, & daily more & more grow up with Him into one mystical body, as if we were flesh of His flesh, and bone of His bones, Eph. 5.30. and from this mystical union, we have the assurance of that glorious union which shall be in heaven, when we shallbe joined to our head inseparably: and this is that union or communion which all the faithful hope for, whereof we have the assurance of His promises in His Holy word, the signs and pledges of the Holy supper, and the witness of the holy Spirit of God in our hearts. And thus is Christ ours, with His graces, and His merits, and thus according to the exceeding great and precious promises, are we made partakers of the divine nature: not that we participate of the incommunicable essence of the deity; but that by the renewing of the Holy-Ghost, we put off our corrupt desires, and are transformed in our minds according as His Divine power doth give us all things that belong to life and godliness. ARTICLE XI. ❧ The forgiveness of sins. CHAP. XXXVII. BEing is of God alone, whose being, because it is infinite, therefore must it hold in itself, all the extremities of being; so that nothing that is, can possible be, but by Him: therefore, seeing the soul, the body, and the abilities thereof, are from God alone; the devil can claim no interest in man, in respect of any of these: for none of these had their original from him. But because he was a murderer from the beginning, and inspired his inbred poison into man, even from the beginning: the root of mankind being thereby poisoned, the venom spreads throughout all his race, to corrupt both his understanding and his will; that so his actions being corrupted by the ill, which he wilfully committeth, his being also may become abominable: But as the Physicians make a difference between the body and the disease; so He, our gracious healer, discerns between the being, His own work, and the corruption thereof, the tares, (I mean) which the envious man sowed thereupon, to save his own work, and to cast the venom, and the effects thereof, on the face of the enemy, to the increase of his eternal damnation: and first heals the understanding, that it may see the sin; then the will, that he may detest and avoid it. And thus, by the renewing of the mind, are we transformed from the image of the devil, and that stamp which his sin did set upon us; So that the satisfaction being made to the infinite justice, both for our original and actual sin, the workmanship of God, even our whole being may be glorified with that glory for which it was created, which also it had in the eternal decree before this world was. And because our great weakness, caused of our inbred infection, and our many sins ensuing thereupon, doth every moment stand up, as a wall of separation, between our God and us; therefore hath God given unto us, such assured hopes of His mercy, that although we fall, we shall not be cast away, because the Lord putteth under His hand, Psalm. 37.21. and sustaineth us with this confidence, That although our sins be as red as scarlet, yet they shall be made more white than snow, Esay 1.18. And because this hope and confidence, ought always to be before our eyes, as being the sure stay and anchor of our souls; therefore is nothing more fully assured unto us, than this, among all those things which we do believe. Stay thou trembling and fearful soul, and though the ugly visage of thy monstrous sins make thee afraid, which indeed are so much the more hideous and deformed, because they are not only against the Law of God, but against the law of reason, rightly judging, and against thine own conscience: yet stay and see what hope there is for thee; and though that messenger of hell, Despair, with all that wretched train of all thy sin, which he brings with him, doth hunt thee so close, that thou darest not stay, though thou wouldst be any thing, save that thou art; and most of all, nothing at all: yet see if a door of hope, as wide as the valley of Anchor, Hos. 2.15. be not set open for thee, only if thou wilt be entreated to go in, and be saved. 1. Thou objectest the wrath of God, from which there is no avoidance. But are not all men borne under one state of corruption? and who can say his heart is clean? if God then should be extreme, to mark what is done amiss, who can abide it? and if every sin, in as much as it is against an infinite justice, deserves eternal punishment, can no man be saved? So all mankind should have been created only to punishment: but this is against the infinity of His goodness, who is full of compassion, slow to anger, and great in mercy, good to all, and His tender mercies are above all His works, Exod. 34.6. Psal. 144.8, 9 Therefore there is forgiveness of sins. 2. Therefore is the sin of the wicked angels unpardonable, because it was wilful in them, because they cannot repent them of it, and because they have no mediator to make satisfaction for their sin. All which (through the mercy of God) to us are found contrary in the sin of man: for neither was his sin wilful, or of himself alone, but from the devil which tempted him thereto; neither is it without repentance, in all that belong to God; neither is it without a Mediator that is able to make satisfaction fully for all our sins. But when all sufficient means are orderly disposed for an end, it is impossible but that the end should follow. Therefore there is a forgiveness of sins, as we are taught to pray. 3. Glory and happiness is not given, till sins be first forgiven; So that if there be not a forgiveness of sins, the greatest and most excellent virtues must for ever remain without reward. For we see that in this life, virtue is so fare from reward, or esteem, that it is rather persecuted with hatred and contempt, as the Proverb hath it, Virtutis comes invidia. And if virtue can find no reward, neither in this life, nor in that which is to come; then the goodness and justice of God should be defective. But this is impossible; therefore there is forgiveness of sins. 4. Change the terms of the first reasons in the 18. Chapter, and they are easily brought to this conclusion. So from the reasons for the Catholike-Church, and from many other, this Article is easily concluded, as you may see by the reason following. 5. Christ took not on Him the nature of Angels, but He took on Him the seed of Abraham. Hebr. 2.16. For it behoved Him in all things, to be made like unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest, in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people: therefore was He made a little less than the Angels, that He might suffer death for our sins; and this, that He might abolish his power, that had the power of death, Hebr. 2.14, 15, 16, 17. but nothing of all this for any benefit to Himself: but for us was He borne, for us He died, and rose again, and sitteth at the right hand of God, making intercession for us. And these are the glorious works which were given unto Him of the Father to do for us, and cannot possibly be in vain. Therefore seeing He Himself became our surety (for the things of heaven are not known, but by the Registers of heaven) See Hebr. 10.7. and 7.22. Gen. 3.15. Esay 53.4.5.6.8.11.12. and hath in His own body borne the punishment of our sins upon the tree. 1. Pet. 2.24. it cannot stand with the justice of God, to exact that debt of us which our surety hath satisfied. And therefore it follows that our sins are forgiven us. 6. And that I may at once decide this question, both by reason and authority also of holy Writ, and give full comfort and hope to thee (poor soul) that art pressed down, even to the gates of hell, under the burden of thy sins: stay and see if thy comforts be not greater than thou hadst thought. First it is a clear case, that no man's life is justly called in question, but by the plain and manifest letter of the Law. Thou wilt say, that is thy desperate case, For it is written, Deut. 27.26. Cursed is he, that confirmeth not all the words of this Law, to do them: so is the Letter (I confess) but that is now cancelled, and that by the interpretation of the Law itself, builded upon one and the same justice with the former; as where it is said, Hab. 2.4. The just shall live by faith; than not by doing the works of the Law, although it be most just, that he that doth the works of the Law, should live therein, Levit. 18.5. as Saint Paul argues, Galat. 3.12. for Laws are made for the preservation of humane society in general, so for the safety and defence of every innocent in particular, that doing well they may be without fear, Rom. 13.3. But Christ our Saviour, though He were separate from sinners, though no deceit were found in His mouth, lived not in His innocency, by the patronage of the Law. And if the Law had not power to give life to the innocent; neither in justice can it have power to condemn the guilty; and if no flesh shall be justified by the works of the Law, Galat. 2.16. but that all men thereby stand guilty before God; what madness is it, to seek life by that which brings the sentence of condemnation, and that upon all men indifferently? And if Christ jesus be of God made unto us, Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification and Redemption, 1 Cor. 1.30. what shall we need to fear the condemnation of the Law, which through the infirmity of our flesh was unable to give life, or seek any other righteousness, then that which by faith we have in him? And if He be our righteousness, how can the Law condemn us, when He hath fulfilled it for us? Rom. 8.3, 4. therefore comfort thyself in God. Blessed is the man whose hope is in the Lord his God, and though thy hopes be weak, nay, though thou walk in darkness, and have no light; yet trust in the Name of the Lord, and stay upon thy God, Esay 50.10. And though thy conscience condemn thee, yet God is greater than thy conscience, and knoweth all things 1 john 3.20. Objection 1. It is not long ago, that certain men from the mint of their own brain, sought to give out a coin under their own stamp. That we are not justified by the active righteousness of Christ, but by that which was passive only: and another like this. That we are not bound to the observation of the Law delivered by Moses, either judicial, Ceremonial, or Moral. But because this coin had not the public stamp, it was accounted false; and therefore this last argument of yours, which draws so near to their last position, may seem to be fallacious. The Law defended not the innocent, ergo it cannot condemn the guilty. Who knows not that the just Law was most unjustly wrested against our Saviour, that He ought to die, because He said, He was the Son of God; when as in the case of treason against Caesar, upon His own interpretation, He was acquitted by the Roman deputy. Answer. So He was pronounced innocent against all their other objections, and yet His innocency saved Him not. Yet His case was a reserved case, in as much as He was no private man: but even the Head of His Church, who had set Himself to answer for all His members, and therefore when the Law protected not Him, who was innocent above all men, and for all men, it condemned itself as unable to give life: and therefore the conclusion is good, that it is not of any power to condemn any of them who were condemned in Him that was innocent. But that I may answer more particularly: I say that I am fare from these men, in both their opinions. For although the things which our Lord did, so fare forth as we can imitate them, are examples for us, yet not only for example, but also for our justification, that the law of perfect righteousness being fulfilled for us, we might be freed from the curse of the Law. Moreover by that active righteousness which our Saviour performed, He was able to save all that come unto God by Him, whereas if it might be supposed, that God and man in one person could sinne (as the devil tempted Him) than His suffering had been only sufficient for Himself, whereas now, His death was meritorious for all. For as that supposed sin had been infinite both in respect of the person against whom, and the person by whom it had been done, being an infinite Person, so must it have had an infinite satisfaction; So all that Christ had merited by His death, had been available only for Himself: but now being offered a Lamb without spot, His sacrifice is sufficient for all that come unto God by Him. Then for that other opinion, that we are not bound to the fulfilling of the Law, it is most false. For though the judicial were peculiar to Israel's common wealth, and the ceremonial Law served only till the substance was exhibited; yet the moral Law, in regard of the eternal justice and equity thereof, as the law of nature, may not be broken without sin: nay, so much more straightly are we bound to the performance thereof, as the thoughts are more unruly than the actions, otherwise what meant those interpretations of the Law, Matth. 5. and elsewhere, fetched from the innermost meaning of justice, which binds the very thoughts: It hath been said to them of old, etc. But I say unto you, Love your enemies: and whosoever lusts, hath committed adultery in his heart, etc. Is not our Lord a sufficient Lawgiver for His Church? Do they take away sin out of the world, and so make void the death of Christ? For where no Law is, there is no sin imputed. Rom. 5.13. I confess that the Law hath no power over them that are in Christ, to eternal death, because it was insufficient to protect His innocent life, although the keeping of the Law, if it were exact, might claim to eternal life. But the works of the Law, and faith in Christ, are by Saint Paul set in direct opposition in this argument of justification, See Rom. 3. from verse 20. etc. And Galatians, Chapter 3. But yet though obedience cannot bring life eternal to the doer of the Law, because the Law is perfect, our obedience imperfect; yet sin brings deserved death upon the sinner, whereby their vanity appears, which hold the keeping of the law not necessary: and likewise the truth of the former conclusion, that seeing the keeping of the law gave not life to our Lord that fulfilled it, neither can the breach of the Law bring condemnation to them that are in Him, to whom there is no condemnation. Rom. 8.1. Object. 2. Object. 2 But seeing the merit of Christ is infinite, and He being both God and man, of infinite worthiness above the creature; and for this purpose appearing, that He might take away the sins of the world: how comes it to pass, that after the sacrifice for sin is offered, yet both sin, and death the punishment thereof, do still remain? Answer. It was an easy thing for God utterly to have abolished death, after that by sin, it had entered into the world; so that neither the body should have died the natural death, nor the soul the spiritual death of ignorance, and pleasure in sin, nor both together the death eternal. But yet God would let both sin and death remain, and that for four reasons especially. First, that the justice of His most righteous sentence might stand. In the day that thou eatest of that tree of the knowledge of good and ill, thou shalt die the death. 2. That the infinity of His wisdom and goodness might appear; that as death by sin had entered into the world, so by death he might destroy sin: that whereas the devil which had the power of death, sought to deprive man of life and glory, He might take the weapon out of the hand of that Egyptian, and as Benajah, kill him with his own spear, and by death bring man to everlasting glory. 3. That man might see the greatness of the benefit, and willingly conform himself to follow Christ through the pains of death, and horror of the grave, seeing God hath called and predestinated us to be like the image of His Son. 4. The devils fell by pride, and least man should grow proud, therefore is sin and death left with him, to humble him thereby: So that to the faithful, the condition of death only is changed. For whereas justice would that man should die, because the sentence of death had proceeded against him; And mercy would not the death of a sinner, Wisdom decided it, that death should be made the way to everlasting life, and so both justice and mercy might have what they desired. Object. 3. Object. 3 But how is sin said to be forgiven, when both sin, and the punishment do still remain? Answer. The meaning and purpose of this Article of our faith, is, that we steadfastly believe the forgiveness of our sins, so that they shall not rise up in judgement against us to our eternal condemnation. But concerning the temporary punishment in this world, we must remember that which is, Hebr. 12.6. Whom the Lord loveth He chastizeth, and scourgeth every one whom He receiveth. And this appeareth most plainly in David, 2. Sam. 12. whose sin though God had put away, that he should not die; yet was it afterward punished to every circumstance, as you may read. And though all chastisement for the present be grievous: yet are not afflictions brought upon men, but only for their humility, and exercise of their faith and patience; or to turn them from their sin that they may repent, and be made partakers of His holiness; and so the eternal remission of their sins, made sure unto them according to His promise, Esay 43.25. I, even I am He that putteth out thine iniquities, for Mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. And again, Esay 44.22. I will put away thy transgressions as a Cloud, and thy sins as a mist: Turn thee unto me, for I have redeemed thee: Read further. Esay. 53. from vers. 4. to the end, Mic. 7.18.19. He retaineth not wrath for ever, because mercy pleaseth Him: He will turn again and have compassion upon us; He will subdue our iniquities, and cast all our sins into the hottome of the Sea. Col. 1.13. God hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the Kingdom of His dear Son, in whom we have redemption through His blood, that is, the forgiveness of our sins, Hebr. 1.3. Christ by Himself hath purged our sins. See the text cited out of jeremiah, Heb. 8.10, 11, 12. and Hebr. 9.26. and 28. 1. Pet. 2.24. Who His own self, bare our sins in His body, on the tree, that by His stripes we might be healed, 1. john. 1.7. The Blood of jesus Christ purgeth us from all our sins, Reve. 1.5. He hath loved us, and washed us from all our sins in His blood. Rev. 5.9. Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof. For Thou wast killed, and hast redeemed us unto God by Thy blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and Nation. ARTICLE XII. ❧ The resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. CHAP. XXXVIII. § 1. IT may seem that the Christian man's hopes are more glorious than all other hopes, because he is so well content, with patience to expect the promises, and to defer his hopes to be enjoyed in a better life than this; yea, for those hopes sake, to deny himself many pleasures and contents in this present life; an argument doubtless, as of a constant hope, so of an invincible courage; that for this hopes sake, because he judgeth Him faithful that hath promised, he beareth patiently all oppositions, persecutions, and all things else whatsoever may seem to stand against this hope of happiness in the life to come: which constancy is so much the more to be praised, because it is of a hope above hope, seeing all reason and causes in nature are against it; insomuch as with them that believed it not, it was scoffed at, as you read Act. 17.32. or else accounted madness, as Act. 26.24. yea, and where the great teacher of the Gentiles takes upon him to ascertain this doctrine of the resurrection, as 1 Cor. 15. he brings his main proof especially to this purpose; That it is to be held a Gospel, which we are to receive as a matter of faith, which of itself is the substance and proof of things hoped for. We shall consider the validity of Saint Paul's arguments in their due place, in the mean time what hope we may have from them who undertake to give proof of this Article by natural reason, you may see by that which Thomas Aquinas hath brought, contra Gentiles lib. 4. cap. 79. The soul (quoth he) is immortal, and naturally united to the body, as the form thereof. Therefore it is against the nature of the soul, to be out of the body; and nothing that is contrary to nature, can be perpetual. Therefore it is necessary that it be again united to the body, that the body may rise again. To this reason it may be replied, nothing is, or can be put in nature, whereby the soul being once departed, is again reunited to the body: but that is a thing transcending nature and only in the will and power of God. For although the resurrection be indeed a natural thing, in respect of the terms, that is, the body and the soul; because neither the body, nor yet the soul, is any perfect species in nature, seeing they are made one for the other, and the souls desire of being with the body is never satisfied but in the body; yet in respect of the principle or cause which should join them together, being separated, the resurrection is above nature, and therefore cannot be enforced by any natural reason. For the soul, by any disease or other cause contrary to nature, being driven out of the body; there is no natural cause left, either in the one, or in the other, which is able to reunite them: for if so, than that cause would have been of force to have retained the soul still in the body, that it should not have departed therefrom: And therefore that axiom, That nothing which is against nature can be perpetual, hath no force to infer the resurrection, which depends only on the will, the mercy and justice of Almighty God, and not on any thing that is in nature. The second reason is this. 2. That which is imperfect in the being thereof, cannot be capable of perfect happiness. The soul separate from the body, is in the being thereof imperfect; in as much as being a part of man, it is not perfect, but in the whole man soul and body together; Therefore it is necessary that the soul be again united to the body, that both may be perfectly happy together. Answer. The perfect happiness of the soul and body together, is a promise of grace, and utterly beyond the state of nature, and so no natural argument of the resurrection. But the perfection of being is either natural, or connatural: The perfection, which I call natural, shall be only in the state of glory, when the natural parts of man, soul and body, shall be joined together according to the perfection of their several being after the resurrection. The connatural perfection of the reasonable soul, is that which is in knowledge and contemplation of things that are divine. The soul being separate, because it is freed from that variable and frail companion of the fantasy, which follows the appetite, and dieth with the body, Psalm. 146.4. is better fitted to that perfection which is in contemplation, then while it dwelled with the body, and because it sees that there is no possibility in nature, of any return to the body, it is with all patience and joy, content to expect till God's appointment be, that it shall return, as it was said to the souls of the Saints, That they should rest for a little season, until their fellow Martyr's time were fulfilled, Revel. 6.11. So that although for the perfect happiness of both, the soul is to be joined to the body; yet that joining follows not for the desires sake of the soul, but for His wills sake who hath promised such happiness unto both soul and body. Thus you see that the glorious hopes which the holy Christian faith brings with it, are above all the reasons and possibilities of nature. Therefore let us not seek natural proofs for the resurrection, but from the light of grace, and the virtues of the divine dignities which the holy Scriptures have made us to know; let us see what arguments we can find of more strength and solidity. And because the reasons that are to be brought for proof of this Article will follow easily enough, if it be made manifest that the will and decree of God upon all mankind is, that there shall be a resurrection both of the just and unjust, Act. 24.17. I will first bring the holy Oracles thereto; then the reasons that accord with them; and lastly answer such objections as Atheists are wont to bring to the contrary. That which is in Gen. 3.15. The seed of the woman shall break the head of the serpent, in john 3.8. is interpreted, shall destroy the works of the devil, that is, sin, and the punishment thereof, death; which cannot be, except the dead be raised again. job 19.25. I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that He shall stand at the later day upon the earth; and though, after my skin, worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another, though my reins be consumed within me. Which text, though it be as plain and direct for the resurrection, as any other in the Scripture, yet john Mercerus rejects that sense, because the Hebrew Commentators do not so expound it. Esay 26.19, 21. Thy dead men shall live together, with My dead body shall they rise: awake and sing ye that dwell in the dust, for the earth shall cast out her dead. For behold, the Lord cometh out of His place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more hid her slain. Read to this purpose, Ezech. 37. all. And if you say, that the calling of the Israelites is there prophesied, in that Metaphor; yet remember that no Metaphor is taken from things that are not. Dan. 12.2. Of them that sleep in the dust, many shall awake to everlasting life; some to shame and everlasting contempt. Hosea 13.14. I will ransom them from the power of the grave, I will redeem them from death: o death! I will be thy plagues; o grave! I will be thy destruction: repentance is hid from mine eyes. john 5.28, 29. The hour is coming, in which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice, and shall come forth: they that have done good, to the resurrection of life; and they that have done ill, to the resurrection of damnation. 2 Cor. 5.10. We must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that which He hath done, whether it be good or ill. So by these texts, among many other, it being manifest that God hath decreed a resurrection for the bodies of men, both good and bad: it being also manifest, that nothing is impossible unto Him, but that He doth whatsoever it pleaseth Him, in the heaven, and earth, in the seas, and all deep places, Psal. 135.6. it must follow of necessity, that there shall be a resurrection; which, that ye may the better apprehend, we will add some reasons that accord hereto. 1. And first of all, that argument which our Lord jesus brings to this purpose: Matth. 22.32. I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of jacob, but God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Therefore Abraham, Isaac, and jacob, though they be now dead, yet must they rise again, for all men live to Him, that is, are in His power to be brought again unto life when He will. To know the strength of this argument, you must look to that which is, Gen. 17. I will establish My Covenant with thee, and with thy seed for an everlasting Covenant. But no covenant can be everlasting, if either of the parties die. Therefore Abraham and his seed, that is, the faithful cannot perish, but evermore live unto God, as it is said in Luk. 20.38. For to this end Christ both died, and revived, and risen again, that He might be Lord both of the dead and living: the dead He saith, that they may live again. For if our Lord jesus died to purchase eternal life for us, it is impossible that we should not live eternally. 2. The arguments of Saint Paul, in 1. Cor. 15. fall as thick as hail, and that first argument, in the first place, stands thus. 1. It is a Gospel which he received, and preached unto them according to the Scriptures; And seeing the doctrine of God, for His own authority, being the God of Truth, is to be received, for our reverence only which we own to him, we ought to believe it. Hitherunto tend those words. v. 3. and 4. For I delivered unto you that which I received, that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He risen again the third day according to the Scriptures. 2. And from this ground of faith, he doth conclude, vers. 12. that there is a resurrection, to wit, for them that die in the faith of Christ; For Christ died not for Himself, but for our sins, and risen again for our justification, Rom. 4.25. 3. Since by man came death, by man also came the resurrection of the dead. vers. 21, 22. For the well-being of the body cannot be but by the head. 4. vers. 25. He must reign until He have put all His enemies under His feet, Psal. 110.1. Therefore death also shall be subdued. Ergo. The bodies of men kept under His power, shall rise again. 5. If the bodies of men rise not again, these absurdities and inconveniences must follow. That they that are dead in Christ, are perished, and while they lived here, were of all men most miserable. Our preaching, and your faith is vain. We are false witnesses of God, ye are yet in your sin. They that are baptised over the dead, are baptised in vain: we are needlessly in danger every hour for the preaching, and belief of this doctrine. My contention at Ephesus hereabout, was to no purpose. The Epicure that lives to eat and drink, is the only happy man. But these things are impossible, and amongst Christians accounted incredible. Therefore there is a resurrection, His doctrine in other Epistles, is to the same purpose, as Rom. 8.11. 6. If the Spirit of Him that raised up jesus from the dead dwell in you, He that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His spirit that dwelleth in you. This argument from the community of the Spirit, you may understand by Chap. 17. §. 4. n. 2. Phil. 3.21. 7. He shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like to His glorious body, according to the working, whereby He is able even to subdue all things to Himself. 8. The hope of the resurrection, as it is a comfort against all the trouble and afflictions of this life, so especially against sorrow for them that depart from hence, as you read, 1. Thes. Chap. 4. vers. 13, 14. etc. 9 2. Cor. 5.10. All must appear before the judgement seat of Christ, therefore the dead shall rise again. 10. For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself; For whether we live or die, we are the Lords. Rom. 14.7, 8, 9 Therefore the dead shall rise again. 3. If there be a resurrection of the dead, than the love of God may extend itself eternally towards man, according to that excellency of compassion and love, than which, none can be greater: So that not only our sins be forgiven eternally, but also those mercies vouchsafed which we can neither deserve, nor think of, because His love hath not whither it may extend itself any further: and likewise the will and understanding of man, may know and love God in that excellency and perfection of love, which is possible to man, in his perfection to perform. But if there be no resurrection, neither of these things can be. Therefore it is expedient that there be a resurrection. 4. An infinite goodness is sufficient, and able to fulfil all the good desires of the creature; both of the soul with knowledge, with joy, with love, and all other virtues which it can hope or desire: of the body also in giving of it health, strength, activity: for heavy and elemental, to make it spiritual; for earthly, to make it heavenly; to be serviceable in every respect to the desires of the mind; to pass from place to place, to dilate or contract itself; to appear, or disappear, etc. Which if the infinite goodness never should, nor would perform to the creature, than had He put into the creature a hope, and expectation of happiness, above that which He meant to perform: So the imagination of goodness should be greater than the real goodness, and our apprehensions more large, and an infinite goodness should not be able to answer the finite desires of the creature. But all these things are impossible. Ergo. It is necessary that there be a resurrection of the body, and life everlasting, whereby the expectation of man shall be fulfilled. 5. The Law of God is the pattern of perfect justice; And His infinite justice requires, that reward be given to every one accordingly, as he hath broken or observed it, and that according to the measure of His infinite justice, so fare forth as a finite creature can be capable. Therefore there shall be a resurrection of the flesh, especially by the lusts, whereof the divine love and justice have especially been broken. 6. If there shall be a resurrection of the body unto eternal life; then God may use His creature, man to His glory, as it pleases Him: if not, than the power of God shall be destitute of a subject, framed of body and soul, which He may use to His glory. But this is impossible, that His power should be destitute of such a Creature to whom He hath promised immortal glory, therefore there shall be a resurrection unto everlasting life. 7. By how much any efficient is greater in power, by so much the more effectually doth it work, that the effect be brought to the best end, whereof it may be capable, and that especially if the glory of the efficient be joined therewith. The desire and uttermost hope of every man is to live ever in body and soul, not parted asunder, 2. Cor. 5.4. and to this end and hope, God Himself hath created us, vers. 5. and of this thing, every man is capable, and the great glory of the Creator shall be most excelling in this, that He free His creature man from the baseness of mortality and corruption, to an estate of Glory, and immortality: Therefore it is requisite that there be a resurrection, and life everlasting: For He fulfilleth the desire of them that fear Him, Psal. 145.19. Therefore they shall rise to life everlasting. 8. The will of man is created of God, that he may aspire and come to that end, whereunto the goodness and will of God have created him, which end he cannot attain unto, if there be no resurrection and eternal life. For if there be no resurrection, then is he created only to the enjoying of happiness, short and fading in this life, so should he have the understanding and desire of exceeding great felicity, and the enjoying of little. But this is impossible, for so the effect, that is, the short happiness, should not be answerable to the cause, that is, the will of God, which hath put this will and desire of eternal happiness in man. But if the natural appetites of eating, drinking, procreation of the like, &c. cannot be in vain, much less, the spiritual desires of knowing, of loving God, and pleasing of Him. But the first are not in vain, therefore not the latter, though that be not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural, and then that which is spiritual. 9 Man as he is a creature of God, is good, Gen. 1.31. and his goodness is greater in respect of the end of his creation, which was to know, love, and honour God, which in this life he cannot do, because of sin, the work of the devil in him. But it is impossible, that either the sin of man, or the malice of the devil should frustrate the end of God in His creation. Therefore there is a resurrection, and eternal life, wherein God shall have His due from man, and man his eternal joy in God. 10. No word or commandment of God can be in vain, as that, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and Him only shalt thou serve; or that; Thou shalt be perfect with the Lord thy God. For man doing thus, the soul shall be happy, and approach to that end, for which it was created. For therefore God loved man, that he might love and honour God again; which because it is not done in this life, because of our infirmity, and our sin, therefore there shall be a resurrection, and life everlasting, wherein our love shall be perfected, lest the divine love should suffer eternal injustice, and eternal punishment be brought upon the creature, so exceedingly beloved, and not returning that love again. 11. Man is the end of all bodily being, either in that he is the combination of all bodily beings, whether they be elemental, vegetable, and sensitive; and likewise of things that have imagination and reason, See hereto, Chap. 17. §. 4. n. 5. or else because all bodily beings shall have their rest and perfection in him, and with him: or at least because he uses these things to such works as are acceptable to God: But if there be no resurrection, then after the end of this world, man in whom, and with whom, all these things are to receive their perfection, not being at all, all these things have no end of their being, and so either not being at all, or else being for no end, their creation (as concerning their uttermost and true end which is the eternal glory of God) should be in vain, and that expectation or groaning of the creature to be delivered from the bondage of corruption, of which Saint Paul speaks, Rom. 8. should also be in vain, and the promise of making all things new, Rev. 21.5. Es. 65.17. 2. Pet. 3.13. should also be of none effect. But all these things are impossible. Ergo. It is necessary that there be a resurrection of the body, and eternal life. 12. Neither is the body, nor yet the soul for itself, but both the one and the other, that both together may make one perfect man: So the perfection and blessedness of the whole man is more than that which can come only to one part. But if there be not a resurrection of the body, this greater blessedness is utterly lost, so that although the soul be happy for ever; yet the greater blessedness of the soul and body together, suffers eternal privation. So the whole should be only, that one part may be happy: so the hope, even of the faithful should be in vain, and their eternal happiness only in imperfection; and so the punishment of the wicked. But these things stand neither with the justice of God, nor the truth of His promises. Therefore the body shall rise again. 13. And because this is our last hope and uttermost comfort in all our calamities, and a special bridle to restrain from sin, it is fit that upon all occasions you should exercise yourself to make this conclusion on whatsoever you think, or whatsoever you hear out of the holy Scriptures. For every promise, and every threatening therein, brings you to this; that a reckoning must be given for all that which you have done in the body: For if the body, with the senses, the servants of the soul, either for sin, or righteousness, should not live again, than the divine justice, in reward, and punishment, should be defective, but this is impossible. The texts that are plain you will understand by yourself, as that of Moses, in Psal. 90.3. Thou turnest man to destruction, and sayest, Return ye children of men. Some are a little further off, which yet you may easily bring hither, as Esay 38.18, 19 The grave cannot praise thee; They that go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth. The living, the living, he shall Praise thee, as I do this day. Therefore the dead shall rise again. For seeing man was made to glorify God in his body, and in his soul and that his end cannot be frustrate; man must live again, that his mercy and justice may be praised, both by the good, and the bad. jannes' and jambres withstood Moses, 2. Tim. 3.8. Therefore Moses, jannes', and jambres must come to judgement. For it is a just thing with God to reward you, and to punish them that trouble you, 2. Thes. 1.6.7. And if for your further satisfaction, you will read that which the Fathers have written; you may take that which goes under the name of justine the Martyr, in his questions of the Greeks': the oration of Athenagoras, concerning the resurrection of the dead. Irenaeus lib. 5. cap. 4. etc. his arguments for the most part taken from Athenagoras. Theophilus lib. 1. ad Autolycum. Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, lib. 2. cap. 10. Read also that excellent book of Tertullian, of this argument, where you may see what his judgement is concerning the qualities of the bodies being raised, and some objections to the contrary answered. This Article, the jews, both Cabalists and Talmudists, hold so firmly against that heresy of the Sadduces, that they say, That he can have no part in the world to come, which denies the resurrection. Lib. Sanhedrin Cap. Halet. Neither is there any man that lives, and sees the continual course of nature, in the digestion of the food, that can deny that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the body, of which Pythagoras, and after him, Plato speaks in Phaed. and most of all Saint Paul. 1 Cor. 15.39. § 3. Yet so fearful is the judgement which follows after the resurrection, unto the Atheist, that he searches all corners of cavils against it, you shall take some of them with their answers, as I find them in Tertullian, and Thomas Aquinas, contr. gent. lib. 4. cap. 80, and 81. Object. 1. And first it is said, 1 Cor. 15.50. Object. 1 That flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Answer. Till by grace it is made spiritual: So not the substance of the flesh is there understood, but the present estate thereof, with the lusts and wicked desires; which if a man do mortify by the Spirit, he shall live, Rom. 8.13. So in john 6.63. The flesh profiteth nothing, understand the fleshly-minded man, which of himself knoweth not the things of God, and those things which belong to sanctification and eternal life. But concerning the being or substance of the flesh, or body of man, seeing it was tempered by Gods own hand, fashioned according to His image, made the seat of the soul so excellent a being, by which and with which the soul works whatsoever it doth; seeing in the holy Baptism, the flesh is washed, that the soul may be clean; seeing in the holy Supper, the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ is received by the mouth, that the soul may be strengthened in God; seeing our bodies are the members of Christ, the temples of the Holy-Ghost, and He dwells in them; seeing our bodies are not our own, but Gods, 1 Cor. 6. seeing they are the instruments of holiness, in all the works of mercy, in prayers, in wholesome counsel, alms deeds, in endurance of sorrows, in fasting, in imprisonment, in martyrdom in death; it is impossible that God should leave forlorn the workmanship of His own hands, the closet of His own breath, the masterpiece of His cunning, the heir of His riches, and the Priest of His religion and service, to dwell in eternal death; that He should not heal the wounds, and restore those dead to life, which have been wounded and slain for His sake. And though the flesh in itself be weak, and through sin utterly lost; yet seeing our Lord came to seek and to save that which was lost, and that He Himself hath borne our sins; it is impossible that either the merit of Christ for us, or the mercy and goodness of God should be in vain. Therefore the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together, Esay 40.5. and from one Sabbath to another shall all flesh come, and shall worship before me, saith the Lord, Esay 66.23. And I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh. joel 2.28. And seeing the flesh hath these holy promises, therefore the flesh shall rise again, that as both the flesh and the soul have sorrowed, so they may both rejoice together. Object. 2. But the Prophets speak of the resurrection darkly, and in figurative speeches only. Object. 2 Answer. Not only, but oftentimes so, as they cannot be otherways meant. And though they use figurative speeches; yet no figure is taken but from somewhat that is properly and truly such. Moreover, the words are often such as admit no other meaning, as in john 5.28, 29. The hour is coming in which all that are in the graves shall come forth; they that have done good, to the resurrection of life; and they that have done ill, unto the resurrection of condemnation. Object. 3. Object. 3 If the same body shall rise again, of the same shape and lineaments; some shall be whole men, some maimed, some halting, blind, etc. Answer. The qualities of the bodies shall be changed, the substance shall not be lost. For as it is against the justice of God, that one substance should do that which is pleasing to Him, and another be rewarded therefore: So if all tears shall be wiped away, then also all cause of tears; all hurts, wants, and deformity both of body and soul. So that as the same body shall be returned to the same soul; so shall it return entire and whole. Object. But if the use of the members cease, why are the members needful? Ans. Though the natural body shall be made spiritual, and thereby be delivered from the necessities of those things to the use of which we are now tied, as of food, clothes, etc. and so the members freed from their offices; yet are they not therefore unnecessary; For the tribunal of Christ requires a perfect man, that he may receive in his body, according to that which he hath done in his body. Moreover, for the perfection of beauty and glory, the body must be entire, the integrity of which stands not in the offices of the members, but in their substance. Neither yet shall all the offices of every member cease, for the instruments of the voice shall still serve for praise to God, as this Father thinketh. The objections which Thomas Aquinas brings from natural doubts, are of no force against the reasons which we have brought from the light of grace, and knowledge of the Scriptures: For it is yielded, that the resurrection of the body is beyond all the power of natural causes to effect, but that it is only of the will and power of God, as to make man at the first, so to restore him again out of his former principles, into which he was resolved. But that you may see how weak natural reason is, compared with the truth of God, and on what wretched hopes the Atheist depends, which trusts that his sins shall never be brought to judgement; I will propose the reasons and answers as they stand. Object. 4. Object. 4 That which is corrupted, cannot be made the same again; as a natural habit of the body, or mind, being deprived, cannot be restored. Answer. The impossibilities of nature, cannot limit that power which created nature, especially in the resurrection of the body, wherein the Author of nature hath professed that He can, and hath promised that He will raise it up again, as you read before. Object. 5. Object. 5 But the essential principles being lost, it is impossible that the same thing in number should be restored. Answer. The essential principles in man, are soul and body, which being restored each to other in the perfection of them both, nothing which is concomitant, whether it be property, or necessary accident can be wanting, and that both these remain in the state of being, and consequently in the possibility of being brought together again, you may see Chap. 17. § 4. N. 5. Object. 6. Corruption is a change from being, unto not being. Object. 6 Therefore it is impossible that the being of man being corrupted, the same being in number, should be restored. Answer. This is in effect one with the former. And it is true, that the total is destroyed in man by the separation of the parts. But neither of the parts do come to nothing, but are in the hand of that power to be conjoined again, by which they were conjoined at first. Object. 7. Object. 7 If whatsoever hath been essential to the body of man, must in the resurrection be restored unto him, than this bodily proportion shall be very uncomely; in as much as the hair, the nails, and whatsoever else is wasted away by the force of natural heat, were once as essentially of the body as that was, which he carried with him to the grave. See the first supply to Logic, question 66. Answer. As it was said before, that whatsoever was wanting in the body should be made up: So understand on the contrary, that superfluities, and deformities shall be taken away: and that every one shall rise again in that perfection which is peculiar to mankind. Object. 8. That which is common to all, of any kind, Object. 8 seems natural to the species. But there is not any common virtue, of any natural agent, to work this: Therefore it seems that all men shall not rise again. Answer. The resurrection of the dead is not by any natural cause, but it depends only on the power of God, to whose justice every man must give an account of his own works. Object. 9 Death is the effect of sin, Object. 9 from both which we are freed only by the death of Christ. Therefore it seems that all shall not rise again, but they only that are partakers of the merit of His death. Answer. It is true, that such only shall rise to eternal life, the rest for justice unto judgement. And because death is the wrack of nature in all men, and the work of the devil; and that our Lord came to repair nature, and utterly to destroy the works of the devil: Therefore, that it may appear that He hath perfectly finished that for which He came, all men must rise again. Object. 10. Object. 10 The last objection seems a mighty one above the rest. That if all men must rise again perfect, what shall become of the Cannibals, who have eaten one another? nay, if any of these Cannibals eat only man's flesh, and beget children, seeing their seed (as their wisdom affirms) is only the superfluity of the nourishment, before it be converted into the substance of the father's body; here is the knot of Gordius, who hath most right to this seed, whether the son whose body was made of it; or the father, or he from whose body it was devoured, by the father? But this Philosophy of the superfluity of the seed, hath been hist out in the 17. Chapter. The main doubt is answered by Saint Paul. 1 Cor. 15.44. Thy body is sown a natural body, but it is raised a spiritual body. So then, though Bears, or dogs, or Cannibals, or worms devour the flesh; yet seeing only flesh is nourished thereby, a material body with a material, a natural body with a natural; the spiritual body is free from any natural change. For even now the soul dwells not in the body, but by those mean spirits which are raised from the bodily parts (as I shown before.) Therefore though this material, individual body shall be raised up; yet because it is raised up a in spiritual estate, it will be free from natural corruption, because it is fitted to be an eternal habitation for the soul, being wholly spiritual; and then there will be no want of any member or part, when the soul shall be able to fit itself of a clothing, for all uses, out of a spiritual body; neither shall it need to seek any supply out of a foreign body: For as in justice the same soul must return to the same body, that both may suffer, or be glorified together; So shall both be perfected together, according to the perfection of every individual, in their proper parts: And though they be scattered in ashes, or dust, as fare as from East to West, yet shall every atom be gathered into that body in which it first received the impression of an humane soul, to become a part of a reasonable man. The Poet gives you an example of a Gardener, wehling his seeds being mingled together. Namque ut quondam olitor, qui forte minuta sub uno Diversi generis confusa videbat aceruo Semina; mox secum, dum singula seligit, hoc est Ozymon, hoc apium, lapathum istud, & oxalis illud, Daucus, & andrachne, ammi, apiastrum, urtica, melanthum; Sic tua, sed melior sapientia, novit acuto Permistos hominum cineres discernere visu. I will give you an experiment for your easier understanding. Take a knife, a punch, or other tool of steel well hardened, and touched with a load stone, mingle a quantity of the fyling of iron, or steel, with so much common dust as that the fyling appear not; yet with the knife or punch made clean, you may separate the fyling, according to the first quantity, out of the dust. And if this be possible to metal, by reason of the common spirit; how muchmore to the soul, when it is commanded to gather together, that dust, which once it had enlived by itself? §. 4. Among the heresies against the doctrine of our holy religion, that which denies the resurrection, was one of the first. For beside the Sadduces which denied it, as you read, Mat. 22. and thought that the soul died with the body, all the sects of the Samaritans, (except perhaps the Dositheans) held that error with them. And although it be not known to me, which of them fell first into the ditch: yet seeing both sorts held the books, and authority of Moses (and none of the Prophets beside) authentical; and that the Sadduces interpreted Moses according to the letter of the Law, and thought that the blessings and curse therein contained, did belong only to this present life (which was the original of this error) with me they shall be accounted, the blind guides of the blind. Among the Christians, some twenty sects of Heretics have been, which denied this Article; some upon one ground, some upon another. The first fountain of this poisoned doctrine among the Christians, was Simon the Samaritane, whose Scholars held it successively unto Marcus, about a 100 years after Simon. This Marcus also upheld the same heresy: but after him it was by turns called up from hell again. Carpocrates out of Plato's School, brought in the change of souls, from body to body: but much worse than he. For Plato thought that the souls of men were sent into the bodies of beasts, or of crazed and old men, for the punishment of their former sins: but Carpocrates taught that they were brought thither for the fulfilling of those lusts which they had not done in their former bodies. For being here subject to the power of the enemy, man (said he) cannot escape the wrath of these adversaries; but by the filthiness of life, and doing such things as please them. And therefore the souls that live here most virtuously, and temperately, are oftenest sent into other bodies. Though this doctrine of the devil's Chaplain, upheld the immortality of the soul, yet no resurrection of the body. Valentine, and after him the Manichees, taught that the souls of men only were redeemed by Christ, but not their bodies, and therefore they should rise no more. Neither yet should all souls be saved. For there be (said he) three sorts of men: spiritual, animal, and carnal. Spiritual, which by nature have a most excellent faith, and these shall be saved without good works, as Seth: Animal, which have but a little faith, but may be saved by a supply of their works, as Abel. But the carnal as Cain, can by no means be saved. Martion, concerning the resurrection of the body, sided with Valentine, And so did Apelles. For, (said he) Christ Himself went to Heaven without any body. For that body which He had taken from Heaven, and the elements; at the resurrection He delivered again to their proper principles, from whence He took it. The Seleucians' also, that affirm that Christ left His body in the Sun (as you read before) are bound to deny to us any ascent into the heavens above: for it cannot be better with us the members, than it is with our Head. origen's error against the resurrection, is at large refuted by Epiphanius, Haer. 64. and if you mind the objections and answers before, you have the sum of that which Origen brought against it, and the other answered. Hierax denied a resurrection of the body, but is disproved by the arguments here brought, as all the other Heretics which are here mentioned. A resurrection of the soul he yielded unto, except of the Infants, which died before they had knowledge; because none is crowned, except he that strives lawfully, as you read before, in the 28. Chapter, where his reason is answered out of Epiphanius, Haer. 67. And although you see such monsters of opinions, as I have said, and if you have leisure, may read the refutation in particular, in the Author aforesaid; Yet if you take good heed to that which hath been spoken for, and against the truth; you may confess that the truth is great, and shall prevail. CHAP. XXXIX. ❧ And life everlasting. § 1. WHile there was no sin in the world, it stood not with the justice of God, that any punishment for sin should be inflicted: therefore death, and all diseases, as his forerunners, with hunger, thirst, and all the enemies of life, were far from man. But after that sin had brought in death, it was a mercy that all those enemies of life, which accompanied death, should show themselves, that man might daily be put in mind of his mortality, and return unto Him whom he had offended. Now if you shall ask from whence this change of estates, from immortality, to mortality, did succeed in man: I think even from hence, that the pure soul, the image of God, dwelling in the body, which was framed of the bodily creature, which was yet pure, and not subjected to the curse, had power to sustain the body in that perfect estate wherein it was created, and so should have preserved it for ever, if it had held that dignity which it had, and harkened only to the ordinance of God, and had reigned over the bodily affections and desires, as it ought, and had power to do. But when the soul would forsake God the guide thereof, and that dignity which it had naturally over the body, and follow the lusts and appetites thereof, and for that treason against God, lost the power and strength which it had to support the body: and moreover must seek sustenance for the body out of the creature, now accursed and deprived of her first strength: it was impossible but that according to the curse, corruption, diseases, and death should follow thereupon. Yet seeing the merit of Christ is so full of satisfaction to the justice of God, and He so powerful to restore all the decay of nature; and to destroy all the wrack and mischief which the devil hath brought thereinto: we may firmly believe as we profess in this Article, that we shall at last be brought to the enjoying of everlasting life, better than that to which we were at first created. 1. For although by the craft of the devil, sin entered into the world, and death by sin passed over all mankind: yet seeing man was made immortal, and that neither the end which God purposed, nor yet the infinite merit of the death of Christ can be in vain: it is impossible but that mankind at last should be brought to eternal life. 2. The infinite goodness of God, is the reason and the cause that he is good to all, and that His mercy is over all His works, Psal. 145.9. Therefore there is an eternal life reserved for man the most excellent of the visible creature, and the will of man above all other things, desires an eternal life in glory and happiness, according to His promises. But if no such eternal life shall be, than the action of God toward His creature, shall be in littleness and defect; neither shall he fulfil the desire of them that fear Him. So also the will of man should more desire the accomplishment of the divine goodness upon the creature, than the will of God should desire the accomplishment of itself. But these things are impossible: therefore there shall be an eternal life in glory and happiness. 3. Virtue, and the ready service of man unto God, is that thing wherewith God in man is most delighted, and which He hath commanded, as it is said, Be ye holy, for I am holy, Leu. 11.44. and the desire of this holiness is found in them especially, that hunger and thirst after righteousness, and hate their sins, whereby they displease Him. But this service of man to God, hath not hitherto been duly performed by any living among the sons of men, neither can be performed, both in body and soul, by the dead. Therefore it shall be performed in the life that is to come, wherein both Gods will, and the desires of His shall be fulfilled. See Matth. 5.6. 4. If there shallbe an eternal life for man, than man shall receive of the divine goodness and power, a power whereby he may both be, and do those things whereto the divine goodness and wisdom hath appointed him. But if there be no life eternal, than the end of man's creation should be only to privation, and not being. But it were better never to have been, than after all the miseries of this life, in the end to return to an everlasting not being. For so the effect, that is, mankind, should no way be answerable to the cause, nor yet be any proof or manifestation, of that goodness, infinity, eternity, and power by which it was made. But this is impossible, and against the conditions both of the prime cause, and the infinity of the dignities thereof. Object. But you will say, that this reason doth no more prove that there is an eternal life for man, than for beasts, and other of the creatures, which also ought to continue for the proof of that wisdom, and almightiness of their cause. Answer. There is a difference between the end, and those things which are for the end. Man is the end of all the visible creature, and therefore it follows, that all those things are to be in man, as in the end, so far forth as they can be, work, or be glorified in Him. And from hence also it followeth, that man must be for ever, lest all these things which were for him, should return to nothing with him; and the image of that infinite goodness, and wisdom by which they were made, should come to nothing eternally. Therefore though they shall be in man as the idéa of them all, yet not in their several or distinct beings beside man. 5. No natural desire of the creature, which is implanted in every individual, of every kind, can be in vain, because it is implanted therein by a superior power, which cannot be frustrate. But it is implanted in all men naturally, both to desire, and to hope for eternal life. Therefore there shallbe an eternal life. For if after the resurrection, man should not live for ever, then there should be in God a will to raise him to life; contrary to his will, that he should live for ever: So His being should not be simple, and one: but this is impossible, as it was proved, Chap. 9 §. 6. 6. The more powerful that any cause is, the more manifestly doth the likeness thereof appear in the effect. And sigh God is the first and chief cause of all, and that the likeness of man, His work shall be greater in his perpetual well-being, than in not being at all: therefore there shall be an eternal life, wherein the greatest likeness of the effect to the cause shall be perfected, that man may live in eternal Righteousness, Wisdom, and Glory. Otherwise the infinite justice might seem defective, in reward and punishment, if both good and bad should perish alike. Moreover, the word whereby the punishment was inflicted, was neither so general, nor so without exception, but that there was grace reserved. And now, lest he take of the tree of life, and live for ever [in his sin] therefore the Lord God sent him forth of the garden of Eden, the type of eternal happiness, till he had tasted of death, the punishment of his sin, than should he live for ever in joy. 7. And these reasons for the assurance of everlasting life, you may add to them that are in the Chapter before. And above all reason, the holy promises of God which cannot fail; as john 3.16. God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him, should not perish, but have everlasting life. Titus 3.7. We are made heirs according to the hope of everlasting life. Matth. 19.29. Every one that hath forsaken houses, etc. or lands for my sake, shall receive an hundred fold, and shall inherit everlasting life. Psal. 37.18. The Lord knoweth the days of the upright, that their inheritance shall be for ever. Psalm. 23. I shall dwell in the house of the Lord for ever. And that the joys of heaven are eternal, it may appear by the torments of the wicked that are in hell: of both which see Matth. 25. from vers. 31. to 46. And therefore the Apostle concludes, Rom. 8.18. That the afflictions which are of this present life, are not worthy to be compared with the glory that shall be revealed. For those things which God hath prepared for them that love Him, are such as neither eye hath seen, nor ear hath heard, neither have they entered into the heart of man to conceive, 1 Cor. 2.9. And concerning the assurance of this joy, let the same mind be in us which was in Saint Paul, Rom. 8.38, 39 I am persuaded, that neither death nor life, nor Angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ jesus our Lord. For it is just with God, to give unto His Son, having fully satisfied His justice for the sin of man; to give to His Son, I say, according to the merit of His desert, that glory, and honour, and immortal joy, which is due to Him therefore: which joy, for the infinite merit of His Person, being both God and man, must likewise be infinite. And because Himself is God blessed for evermore and hath eternal glory and happiness, and a Name which is above every name that is named in this world, or in the world to come; therefore hath He not any need of this purchased glory which is due for His sufferings; but that glory is reserved for them that are called of His grace, to be partakers thereof. And because a finite creature cannot be capable of infinite glory at once, intensiuè, that is, according to the infinite measure thereof; therefore is it bestowed, extensiuè, that is, in the externity or continuance thereof, wherein man is carried from glory to glory, by the Spirit of the Lord, 2 Cor. 3.18. Neither is it for any man to think, that this glory which Christ hath purchased by His obedience, should be settled on that humane nature which He assumed in the Incarnation. For that hereditary, or native glory, which He had, as being one with the Father, was abundantly sufficient to glorify that tabernacle wheresoever He was pleased to dwell, as He saith, joh. 17.5. And now, o Father, glorify thou Me with thine own self, with that glory which I had with thee before this world was. So it appearing, both by reason and authority of the holy Scripture, that this happiness which we do believe in eternal life, is to be eternal as the life is; that first doubt which was first * In the entrance before Chapter 1. proposed in the entrance, is fully satisfied. The other two questions, concerning the soul, you shall hear by and by. § 2. The heresies that have been concerning this Article, though they be divers, yet two especially are needful to be examined: One of the Chiliasts, which thought, that after the resurrection, the kingdom of Christ was to flourish 1000 years in this world: taking that Scripture which is in Revel. 20. for proof thereof. The other is that which they lay to St. Origen. That all the reasonable creature, even the most wicked among men; yea, the very devils themselves, after their sins, by long torments, have been purged out, shall be restored to joy and happiness in the kingdom of heaven; and again after a long time, shall fall to their former sins again, and so return to their ancient punishment: and this, say they, shall be the revolution of all the reasonable creature, both good and bad, for ever. 1. But this is contrary to the truth of the holy Scripture. For no creature, either man or Angel, can approach to God, or come to heavenly happiness, but only such as God doth love, and whom He loves, He loves unto the end: john 13.1. because in Him is neither variableness, nor shadow of change. jam. 1.17. 2. Moreover, as none can be partaker of heavenly joys, but such as are interested therein by Christ; seeing no man cometh to the Father, but by Him. joh. 14.6. if there should be any falling from joy, it would seem to argue an insufficiency of the merit of Christ, which cannot stand with the infinity thereof. 3. Besides, if God willed this eternal revolution of the creature, from extreme joy to pain, and from pain to joy; then were we not taken into the state of sons and heirs of glory, yea, coheirs with jesus Christ. Ro. 8.17. but to the state of bondmen, which should have so much happiness, as we were able to purchase by our endurance of afflictions and torments. 4. So the justice of God should not be infinite, if it might be satisfied by a finite creature. 5. And if any satisfaction to God could have been made, beside that which was by the death of Christ, then that of Christ had been needless and in vain. But all these thins are impossibilities. Therefore there is no such revolution from one state to another, as this opinion, feigned to Origen after his death, when he could not answer for himself, would bring in. But though Origen were a Saint, yet was he a man, and so might have his errors. CHAP. XL. Amen. ❧ The third supply; Concerning the questions incident. 1. Whether the soul of man be immortal? § 1. 2. Whether there be one common soul of all men? § 2. 3. That the holy Religion of the Christians is only true, and none other beside it. § 3. 4. How faith is said to justify? § 4. Whether the soul of man be immortal. § 1. IT is not the doubt that any Christian can make, whether the soul of man be immortal, or no. For when God hath come down from heaven, and hath taken upon Himself, the being of man; when He hath been borne, and died to make satisfaction for the sin of man; can any one that believes this, make a doubt whether he have an immortal soul? or whether immortal life do belong to him both in soul and body? Therefore is not this question proposed for the Christians sake, but by way of defiance against the Atheist, and such godless people as say in their hearts; There is no God, no soul, no life to come. And although by all the arguments of the two last Chapters, and many before, the question may receive an easy solution; yet to give full satisfaction, is this which follows in particular. But to brand both the questions, and the movers thereof, with their due infamy, it must ever be remembered that the error of the mortality of the soul, doth take away the foundation of all religion, and common honesty: For how can he make due reckoning of honesty, that cares only for himself, to shift and shark for a present maintenance in worldly plenty, and supposed joy, and thinks that all is ended with him in this life? Or what reverence can he have of God, or His service, who is not persuaded that there is a God? or if that must needs be put, yet is he persuaded, that with this life ended, his foul also comes to nothing. And if there be no reward of any virtue, or of any religion, is it not better to follow the pleasures of sin with greediness? 1. But, Atheist, I answer, That if God should so neglect them that honour Him, as that He would not reward them; neither in this life, nor yet in that which is to come, than were He unjust: if He knew not their devotion, than were He not wise. But these things are impossible for thee to suppose, that God should be either unjust, or unwise. For perfect justice, such as the infinite justice of God is, doth ever bring forth a judgement; in which it must appear, that in Him that is infinitely just, there was neither ignorance of the service done unto him, nor any disability to reward it: which because it appears not in this life, certainly it must be manifested hereafter. Therefore the soul is immortal. 2. Seeing all the world cannot afford that which may give a full content unto the soul that judges rightly of every thing: Seeing we are taught, 1 john 2.15. not to love this world, neither the things of this world; it is manifest, that the true happiness of the soul ought not to be sought here among those things that are inferior, and below the dignity and state of the soul, which can be blessed only in the sight of God, as our Lord hath taught us, Mat. 5.8. Therefore the elect of God, which according to His counsel and command, seek true happiness in another life, shall in another life be sure to find it. 1 john 2.17. 3. The working of the soul cannot be hindered by the body: not only the spiritual actions of the understanding, and motion of the will; but even the actions of the soul upon the body, (as I have somewhere given instance, in the beating of the pulse) and whatsoever hath motion of it own nature, cannot be hindered to attain that end whereto nature drives it, and the thing itself desires to come (as the continuance and perfection of itself) because nature doth not work in vain, and the soul doth naturally desire true happiness; that is, spiritual, eternal, and beseeming the nature of itself. Therefore the soul is immortal. 4. No substance which is intellectual, is corruptible. For corruption in substances, comes only by the separation of the matter, and essential form: And because beings intellectual, that is, such as have power of an active understanding, do not consist of matter, but are of themselves pure forms, therefore they are not subject to corruption, and death, properly so called. And although the soul, beside the power of understanding, have also the power of growth, and senses, as the natural faculties thereof, by which it doth enlive man's body to move, to digest, to see, hear, feel, etc. and that when it goes away from the body, these faculties of the soul forsake the body, yet they die not in the soul, but shall enlive the body in the resurrection, as they did before: so that the soul is no way mortal. 5. Common consent of all Nations, both Christians and Barbarians hold, and ever have held the immortality of the soul, and the soul itself bears witness thereunto, which at the sight of grievous sins committed, finds such terrors and affrightings in itself, as are sometimes more fearful than death. But if the souls of men did not live after the body, what cause had guilty minded men, either to fear death, or any torments that could follow after it? 6. The excellent endowments of the soul, the engines, and curious arts that are invented, the search of the heaven's motions, and the invention of truth in things removed from our senses, yea, even concerning the truth of God, are arguments sufficient of the soul's immortality. 7. And beside these reasons, the infallible authority of the Holy Scriptures ought towering this confession even from the very Atheist. For the soul being breathed into man by an immortal principle, by the breath of God Himself, may not be supposed to be corruptible: for so how could a thing mortal or corruptible be the image of the immortal God? Gen. 1.26, 27. yet say I not as the Gnostics, or Priscillianists, that the soul is of the same being, or substance with God, but that being so created by Him, and His image, it cannot be mortal, Mat. 10.28. Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul, but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. The parable of the rich glutton, and Lazarus, in Luk. 16. show, the immortality, and state of the soul, both of the good and bad. Read also 1. Pet. 3.18, 19.20. Phil. 1.23. Revel. 6.9. That there is not one common Soul of all men. §. 2. 1. BY some of the reasons before, and by all the authorities brought out of the holy Writ, it is manifest, that this fantasy of one common soul in all Men, was but a dream of Averro. For if the humane soul be the proper form of the body, and the specific difference of every subject, be by the form thereof: If there be one common soul of all men, than the essential difference of men is taken away: so that they be not now this man, and that man, but all men must be one man, as concerning their internal forms, the difference of men must be in their heccieties, or numeral diversity of their bodies only. 2. But so the understanding and knowledge of all men should be one and the same, and one man should not be wise, and another foolish, but all men wise, or foolish alike, if there were only one soul or understanding of all men. 3. So also the vice of one man should multiply itself over all men. 4. And all men should have equal joy in the end or happiness of any one man. But these things are not so. And as these inconveniences prove the differences of souls, while they are in the bodies of men: So likewise do they withstand that confusion which would be of the souls of men, being departed out of their bodies, which are not supposed to fall into the Chaos of life, and there to be confused as a drop of water falling into a River. For the souls being separate from the bodies, have their several degrees of perfections, whereby they are distinguished, as 2. from 3. so as they cannot be the same, as 2. cannot be 3. 5. Moreover, both that unity, and this confusion of souls, would utterly take away all justice in reward and punishment of their deeds, which they have done well or ill, in this life. 6. The uttermost happiness of man, is the adequation of all his faculties in that which is the perfection of goodness, that is, that he love that which he understands, and that he have power to perform it: for otherwise, his understanding would be the original of pain and sorrow unto him, if he should know that which were good to be done, and should not have power to effect it. But if there were a confusion of all souls, or their understandings, when they are separate from the body, that universal unity, or confusion of souls, would cause a lesnesse, or abatement in the glory, and end of the understanding, and consequently, an abatement of man's love to the Creator, seeing the greatest understanding could not advance the mean and low understanding of fools and ignorants; but contrariwise in that confusion, should by them be abased. But this is contrary to the nature of the understanding, of the will, of perfect love, etc. Therefore impossible to be. 7. The excellency, or greatness of every thing hath the greatest concordance with being, as the littleness, or meannes of being, inclines to not being, and hath some agreement therewith. From whence it will follow of necessity, first, that if there be one common or universal soul or understanding, which is divideable into very man, this division takes away that universal unity. For how can it be one in number, if it be divisible, & yet not material, or bodily? but that excellency which is in the common soul, by that infinite division among so many millions of men, is brought almost to not being. Secondly, there must be different understandings of all men, both living and dead, that the excellency of all truth may find some understandings, by which it may be apprehended. 3. Seeing nothing is truly beloved, which is not first known or understood; the love, and that understanding which man hath of God by this division, suffers such detriment as cannot be made up again. For the soul being parted among all men alike, one cannot love nor understand more than another: So neither the excellency of one man can be more than another, nor the glory or happiness of one man more than another. 8. Common experience, and the difference which is in men, shows the position to be false and foolish, and so let it go branded. You may see what Cusa brings to this question, Idiotae. lib. 3. cap. 12. And Tho. Aquin. contra gent. lib. 2. cap. 73. and the decree of the Lateran Council. Sess. 8. Object. But you will say, If the souls of all me● be only of one kind, and that their difference is only in number; then this difference of the souls must arise only from the bodies, to which they are allied; from whence these inconveniences must follow necessarily. First, that the souls of men are material forms; for the particular being of every thing depends upon that from whence it receives the individuation: So that the soul of man, depending on the body, and having the original of the particular being from the body, either it dies with the body, as the soul of the beast: or if it remain after the body, yet seeing it receives the particular being from the body, when it is parted from the body, it must run into the common Chaos of life: seeing that whereby the distinction was made (that is, the particular bodies) are now taken away. Answer. The suppositions of this objection, that the difference of men's souls is only in number, or depending upon the particular individuation of their bodies, are false. For the particular endowments of every soul, make such differences as is fit to be in souls, as I gave instance before in numbers: to every one of which, an unity added, or taken away, makes the number so different, as that it cannot be any other number than that it is; Although numbers are not truly said to be different Species, but only to be distinct, or divers individuals. For in Spiritual substances, as the soul of man is, whereof we know so little as we do, we must be content to hold the general truths, when we cannot know the particular or precise differences. That the holy Religion and Faith of the Christians is only true, and none other beside it. § 3. ALl true Religion must have the beginning from the true God. So neither the service of the false gods of the Painims, nor the will-worship either of the jews, or of the Christians, can come into any account of true Religion. And because the true God only knows what service is acceptable unto Himself, and therefore hath ●om time to time taught his people what He requireth of them; therefore this question which is now to be decided, is only between the Christians, and the people of the jews or Israelites, seeing these only have received the laws, and words of God, how they ought to serve Him. For whatsoever the Turks may pretend for their religion, which their false Prophet Mahomed taught them; yet they have no authority from heaven; neither by their law may they question any thing which they have been taught. But concerning the jews, though it must be yielded unto them, that they were the true Church, first called and separated from the world, to be a peculiar people unto God; who first received the covenant of Circumcision, and after under Moses, the other ceremonies, even until the time of reformation came by jesus Christ: yet because they did not look unto the end of the law, nor see how all the law was finished in Him, in whom all the Nations of the earth were to be blessed: therefore they dwell still in their old and beggarly rudiments, being still seduced by their Rabbins, teaching them that their law is an eternal law, as it is yielded unto them, concerning the inward meaning or substance, that is Christ, and His eternal Redemption: But concerning the outward observances, the Law is not eternal, as divers of their own, both by Nation, and sometimes by opinion have manifested unto them. I name unto you only Paulus Ricius, who hath made it plain, both by the Scriptures of the Prophets, and and by the Talmudists their expositors in his second book de coelesti agricultura. That the roots (as they call them) or Articles of the jewish faith, are not a sufficient direction to bring them to heaven: but that the Christians by their faith may be made partakers of the joys to come. For first he proves that the doctrine of the Trinity of Persons, in the unity of the deity, is agreeable to the holy oracles of God, and the exposition of their Talmudists. Then 2. That the mystery of the incarnation, and the deity of the Saviour of the world is according to the Scripture. 3. That His birth ought to be of a Virgin, and therefore His conception by the Holy-Ghost. 4. That the mystery of His passion, and 5. resurrection are likewise manifest by the Scriptures. And 6. that the first coming of the Messiah is already past, as you might see all these Articles confirmed before. And because these things are necessary to be known and believed to everlasting salvation, and that the jews do not believe them, neither can be brought to believe them, till the Redeemer appear the second time to judgement, that he may turn away the iniquity from jacob, that all Israel may be saved, as the promise is: Let us rejoice in our most holy faith, and pray that their return to the true faith, with the fullness of the Gentiles, may be speedy, according to the promises, Es. 59.20. Rom. 11.26. and verse 15. How Faith is said to justify. §. 4. SO precious is the redemption of souls, that that must be let alone to God for ever. And therefore no works, or merit of our own, nor of all the Saints of Heaven, can be of any avail for us, that we should be accounted just before God, but only by our Lord jesus, and His righteousness, both original, and actual, apprehended by a true faith, are we accepted righteous. For because God doth not accept of any righteousness which is not most perfect, according to the perfection of his most just law: And seeing the fountain of all our actions is corrupted by our original sin: therefore is the original righteousness of Christ, most necessary to be imputed unto us, to take away our original sin, and His actual righteousness also wholly necessary, that by His obedience and His sufferings, we may be justified: Understand by the original righteousness of Christ, not that righteousness which is in Him as God (as some have done) but that righteousness which was in Him, as man, from the first minute of His incarnation by the Holy-Ghost, which is His original, or habitual righteousness: And this righteousness of His, though it be not in us; yet it is imputed unto us, even as our original and actual sins, were imputed unto Him, that we might be justified by Him. And although it be necessary for us to know and to believe, that as we are made originally sinful by Adam, not only because the offence of him that was the father of us all, is imputed unto us, or is reckoned ours, because we were all in him originally; but also in respect of that stain of sin and corruption, which we draw originally from him; so is this righteousness of Christ accounted ours, in as much as He hath set Himself to answer for us, as it is said, Matth. 20.28. That He gave His life a ransom for many, that as by the disobedience of one Adam, many are made sinners, so by the obedience of One, that is Christ, many are justified, Rom. 5.19. Therefore faith alone is not said to justify us, but faith with the object thereof, that is, Christ with all His merits. So God the Father, for the merit of Christ, is said to justify the ungodly, Rom. 4.5. And the holy Spirit also is said to seal the promise of God unto us, Ephes. 1.13. and to justify us in the Name of the Lord jesus Christ. 1. Cor. 6.11. Neither is faith any meritorious cause for which we are justified: neither doth faith, precisely considered, include charity or other virtues, thereby justify us; but as an instrument, or hand, is it given to us of God, whereby we take hold on Christ, and His righteousness preached unto us in the word of reconciliation. Therefore as the hand which receives the treasure, doth not make a man rich, but the treasure itself: So neither the habit, nor the action of faith, no not as it is the work of God in us, doth make us just before Him; but only correlatively, that is, as it brings to us the merit of Christ, and makes it ours. See what you find hereto in the Note (b) on the 27. Chapter. The Conclusion. BEcause I had both read and heard, that divers men of fame in learning had undertaken this task which I have now performed (as you see) I waited with great patience and hope the accomplishment of their promises. But when they were dead, and no fruits appeared, worthy of such hopes as they had given, having now past the seventieth year of my life, I utterly despaired of what I had so long hoped for. For though I had oftentimes thought of that argument, and for mine own use had gathered divers Notes and Arguments thereunto: yet when I considered, that in that age the vigour of wit doth often languish, which in younger years is more pregnant, though not always with that staidness of judgement, which ought to go therewith; and especially, that for my professions sake, I was compelled to poets and their fables; and among children, to speak to their understanding; yet when that great and grievous pestilence, which befell in the year 1625. had made a stop to that daily toil, I knew it was foolish and altogether vain, to flee from the hand of God; and that no thoughts could befit a Christian better, in the continual hearing of doleful knells, and sight of corpses carried to the grave, than such as hold the mind fast to God, and those blessed hopes, that He hath given to Christian men. And therefore having brought my household to a few, and them no gadders abroad, but such as were easily commanded to stay within; I took the comforts, which Almighty God vouchsafed me, and found myself safe under His protection; and so cheerfully undertook that task, which I had long thought on, because my expectation of others had quite failed me. Therefore I praise and magnify that glorious and holy Name, not only for that whole and perfect deliverance, which He vouchsafed unto me at that time, but much more also, that He hath been pleased to effect by me, so mean, that which other virtuous and learned men held fit to be done for the benefit of the Church; and yet effected it not. And if this labour of mine may prove any way available to the comfort of others, or the strengthening of their faith, or establishing of them therein; that they fall not into those heresies, into which other perverse minded men have been plunged: For this also shall His praise be ever in my mouth, according to that example of the holy Angels, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 FINIS. A TREATISE CONCERNING THE TRINITY OF PERSONS IN UNITY OF THE DEITY. Written by ALEXANDER GIL, to Thomas Mannering an Anabaptist, Who denied that JESUS is very GOD of very GOD: but man only; yet endued with the infinite power of GOD. The second Edition. ❧ Imprinted at London. 1635. TO MY VERY LOVING FRIEND, Master THOMAS WHITE, a Citizen of BRISTOL. WHile I was at Norwich, in the year 1597, I writ this Treatise upon such occasion as appears therein, and delivered it unto that Heretic, that by himself, if God would, he might consider and be persuaded. Since which time I have kept it by me: and though some of my private friends desired copies; yet allowing that wisdom of Solon, who would make no law against Patricide, lest the mention of the fact might give occasion to commit it: and withal considering that it is too simple and poor for the public view; I refused to make it common. Yet after perceiving a present necessity, because that some began to wander in this labyrinth: and withal remembering, that if any weakling shall hereafter entertain this opinion, he may, before he be wholly possessed therewith, find the absurdity of it and be reform; that many a novice in Christianity, who therefore doubts of the trueness of his Religion, because he finds no familiar reason to persuade, but only the rack of authorities to constrain him to acknowledge it; may perhaps be hereby satisfied and find comfort: and that they who are already strong, may by this overplus, triumph in the goodness of God, who requires them to believe no more, than they may by that understanding, which he hath given them, be persuaded of: I have for their sakes who may reap benefit thereby, neglected all froward Censurers, not guilty unto myself of any offence which I can commit in making it public. Such as it is, accept (kind Sir) as a parcel of that assertion, which may hereafter follow, of every Article of our Christian faith; if God shall vouchsafe me understanding, leisure, and maintenance thereto. I therefore offer it unto you, both because I know you are diligent in reading of books of good argument; and because I have none other means, whereby to show myself thankful for your manifold kindnesses and your love. London, this 20. of April 1601. Your loving and assured friend, A. G. THE TREATISE. THough many things discouraged me to write unto you of this Argument in such sort as I intent; considering that neither your daily reading of the Scripture, neither the persuasion of learned Divines can move you to accord unto the truth; though by manifest testimony of Scripture they convince your heresy: and most of all, that God hath left you to believe that lying spirit of Antichrist, who denyeth that jesus is that Christ: Yet nevertheless, having some hope that God of His goodness will at last pull you as a brand out of the fire, and quench you with the dew of His grace, that you may grow in the knowledge of His Son; I will as briefly as I can, lay down some few reasons of that faith, which every one that will be saved, must hold. Whereby if I persuade you nothing, yet shall I obtain thus much; that you, who neither believed His word, nor yet opened your eyes to see the light of reasonable understanding, shall at last confess, that His word and judgements are holy and true. But before I come to the point, let me first persuade you, that although the knowledge of the holy Trinity be one of the most high mysteries which can be known or believed, and that it is the only work of the Holy-Ghost to work this faith and knowledge in the heart of man; yet nevertheless, God hath not left us destitute of means, whereby to come to this faith and knowledge, but hath also with His word, given us a reasonable soul and understanding, whereby to grow in the knowledge of Himself and His will. For when Adam was created, he had given unto him all perfect knowledge meet for him. Now God, who created the world for no other purpose, than the manifestation of His own glory, might not leave that creature without understanding of the Godhead, who being by nature and creation the most excellent in this visible world, was made for that purpose especially above all other, to set forth His praise, and to call on Him. Now how could he do this, if he knew Him not? But (I think that) seeing it is said, that man was created in the image of God, you will not deny that man before his fall, had much more perfect understanding of the Godhead, than it is possible for him to have, till he come to know even as he is known, but that by sin (you may say) this knowledge was lost: not lost, but corrupted only, even as man's will. For then it should follow that we were inferior to bruit beasts, who have in them a sensible knowledge meet for that end whereto they were created. Furthermore, it is not possible that man's sin should frustrate the end, which God intended in His creation; but it is manifest, that man was created to know and honour the Creator. Again, seeing in Christ all things consist, he being ordained of the Father before all worlds, in whom the world should be both created and restored; It is plain that this light of our understanding both proceedeth from Him, and is restored in Him, as it is said, john 1. He is that light that lighteneth every man that cometh into the world, not only His chosen with knowledge of His saving truth, but even generally every man with reasonable understanding, whereby we may know whatsoever is to be known of God: and how? even by the works of God, as it is plainly concluded Rom. 1, 19, 20. Therefore are they not to be heard, who hold any thing without the compass of Faith, which is without the compass of Knowledge. For Faith ought so to be grounded on Knowledge, as Hope is grounded upon Faith. So that as Faith, Hebr. 11.1. is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an eviction or proof of things hoped for, though they be not seen: so may I say, that Knowledge is the proof of things, which are believed. For Faith is nothing else but the Conclusion of a particular Syllogism, drawn from the Conclusion of an universal, which the knowledge of God had concluded, as it is manifest, jam. 2.19. and Hebr. 11.3. By conference of which two places it appeareth, that this knowledge, of which I speak, this Historical Faith, as to believe that there is one God, which made all things of nought, is only such a knowledge, as the devils, and wicked men have: but to believe, and have confidence in this God, is that particular conclusion, and that faith which causeth us to have hope in His promises. Therefore said Christ, Have Faith in God: that is, strive to know God, that knowing, you may have faith, and believe in Him. And we see that in these things, where a bare faith without knowledge might seem to be most required, because (as a man would think) there were no reason to be given of them, namely, concerning the maintenance of this life, and the resurrection to the life to come; both Christ and His Apostles use no other reasons, but such as every reasonable man may easily be persuaded by, though authorities of Scripture were not wanting to both purposes, as it is manifest, Matth. 6. and 1. Cor. 15. Yea, Paul at Athens, or wheresoever he persuaded the worship of the true God among the Gentiles, he persuaded not by authority of Scripture, which amongst them had been very weak; but by such arguments as they knew to be sufficient even in themselves. If these things were not so; how then could the Gentiles, which knew not the Scriptures, be without excuse for their ignorance of God? Therefore I conclude, that there is nothing which is believed, but it may also be known. Now knowledge (we know) is engendered by such principles as have truth in them, the which is evident of itself. So that by plain and reasonable understanding, a man may know whatsoever he believeth. You will say, To what purpose then serve the Scriptures? I answer: That God, infinite in goodness, hath together with this understanding and light of Nature, given us withal His Word, as a greater light, whereby our lesser lights might become more shining: That He hath given unto us not only an inward Word, to wit, our natural understanding; but also an outward word, as a most illustrious Commentary, both of declaration and amplification of that text, whereby we may the better understand, whatsoever we ought to understand without it. But how then cometh it to pass, that all men have not Faith? And how is Faith said to be the gift of God? The first answered, Rom. 1.21. and Ephe. 4.18. For hardness of their heart, who when they knew God, did not glorify him as they ought: therefore their imaginations became vain, and their foolish heart was full of darkness. And for this cause is Faith also said to be the gift of God. First, in respect of that knowledge whence it doth proceed, which knowledge is His gift. Secondly, because it is the only work of God, to make that knowledge to become fruitful, by laying it so unto man's heart, that the hardness thereof may be removed, that when we know God to be good and just, we also believe and worship Him as we ought. Thirdly, and most especially, because that God oftentimes pardoning the ignorance, which men have of Himself and the creature, doth so enlighten the heart with His Holy Spirit, that it is suddenly framed without any previant knowledge, to faith and obedience. The truth whereof nevertheless doth not any whit impugn that which I say; That God hath given unto every man so much understanding, as to know what he ought to believe, and to be satisfied for the reasons of his Faith, if he could open his eyes to see in the midst of what wondrous light he were placed. This point is manifest both by many Scripture-authorities, and by many reasons, which I omit. But taking this as either granted, or sufficiently proved, that God hath given us light of understanding, whereby to yield a reason of the Hope that is in us; a reason, I say, even of every Article of our Faith: let us with holy reverence come unto the thing in question, and see what reason we have for our defence. I will therefore a while forbear to use the authority of holy Scripture; not that I esteem the weight or evidence of any reason comparable thereto: but only perceiving by that talk I had with you, that you had read the Scripture, as one of those, whom Peter noteth, 2. Epist. 3.16. Not intending to wrangle about your wrested interpretations, I will first propose the evidence of reasonable proof: and afterwards bring in the assent of holy Scripture, that you may perceive in what wondrous clear light you strive to be blind. And because I know not what your opinion is concerning God, (for he that denieth the Godhead of Christ, may as well deny the Godhead absolutely:) that being one step toward the question, I will proceed orderly, and give you also a reason of our faith, concerning that matter: taking this only as granted, which is rife in every man's knowledge, that both the terms of Contradiction cannot be affirmed of the same subject: that is, that one and the same thing cannot be both affirmed and denied, of the same subject, at one time, and in the same respect. But first, by the name of God, know that I mean an Eternal Being, infinite in goodness, in power, in wisdom, in glory, in virtue, and only worthy of endless love and honour. My reason is thus. If there be not a Being, which had no beginning; then of necessity, that which was first existent or begun, must be a beginning unto itself, by causing of itself to be, when it was not. But this is impossible, that any thing should be a cause, and not be: for so should it both be, and not be; therefore there is an eternal Being, which is the beginning, middle, and end of all things, and Himself without beginning, and this eternal Being, we call God. My reason is plain to be understood; and remember what I have said, that I may go on. Whatsoever is without beginning, is also without ending; because it hath no Superior, which might bring it to nothing: therefore God is eternal. Again, whatsoever comes to nothing, is corrupted by his contrary; but nothing can be opposite to God, therefore He is Eternal. Or else I might thus reason. 2. Being, and Not-being are such contraries, as one of them cannot spring out of another: for every thing, for the preservations sake of itself, doth repress and corrupt the contrary. Seeing then that there is Being, which could not possibly raise itself out of Not-Being; it follows that Being had a primacy or priority before Not-Being; and therefore of necessity must be eternal: for otherwise there was a time, wherein it might be said, that Being is not Being, and so Not-Being should have been first, and contradictories might have stood together: but both these are impossible; therefore there is an eternal Being; and this eternal Being, we call God. Furthermore we know, that the greatest excellency or perfection of every thing, is in the nearness, or likeness thereof unto the first cause. But every thing is more excellent in the Being thereof, then in the Not-Being: Therefore Being was before Not-Being; and for that cause, Eternal. Now Eternity is an infinite Continuance: Therefore whatsoever is Eternal, must of necessity be Infinite: and this Infinite being, we call God. Moreover, whatsoever hath Infinite continuance, hath Infinite Power to continue infinitely; and this omnipotent or endless power, we call God. I might reason likewise of His Goodness, of His Wisdom, Truth, Glory, etc. But one shall serve in stead of the rest, and I will take His Wisdom for my example, and prove unto you, that likewise to be Infinite, and that not only in existence, but in action also. And first that he is wise; God is most worthy to be such as He is: but if He were not wise, He were not worthy to be God: Ergo he is wise. Now mark how these depend one on another. In God is Wisdom, which by reason of His infinity, is also Infinite: and by His Eternity, is also Eternal: so that there is no time, wherein it may be said, that this infinite Wisdom is not infinitely exercised, for than were it not eternally infinite. Therefore His wisdom is infinite, not in existence only, but also in action. Again, the Wisdom of God is such, as hath no defect or imbecility therein. But if it were not infinite both in action and in existence, a man might find defect therein, and imagine a more Infinite wisdom then that is, but this is impossible. So might I conclude of all the other dignities of God. But I haste to the purpose, and I think that you will not unwillingly grant what I have said, but understand the rest. All the Dignities of God being actuated or brought into working, require of necessity an Infinite Object, whereon they work, because they themselves are infinite: but nothing can be Infinite, but God alone; therefore it followeth that these Dignities are objected, or exercised in God alone. And this is that Eternal Son, begotten before the worlds, in whom the Father resteth: or as the Prophet speaketh, His beloved, in whom His soul delighteth; which cannot be applied to any creature, without which, God is happy in Himself: Therefore saith the Apostle, that in Him dwelleth the Godhead bodily. How is that? Not in His manly body eternally; for His humane body took beginning of the flesh of the Virgin, when the fullness of time came, but yet bodily, that is, as essentially, or substantially, as the body of a man is substantial to the man. For every dignity of God being infinite in action (as was proved) must of necessity produce such as itself is. As for example; the Wisdom of God, or His Infinite Understanding, must have an Infinite intelligible, or understandable object, which is produced thereby, by an infinite understanding. So that ye must know of necessity, and mark three Terms, as I will a while call them: the Term from whence: the Term whereto, or wherein: and the middle Term between them. I will for your capacity, which I know not to be much exercised in these matiers, make a comparison meet for your understanding. When the mind or understanding of a man conceiveth any understandable object, there is (you know) first the power of understanding in the mind itself; secondly the object understood; and thirdly, the discourse or action of the understanding, whereby that object is apprehended. Now give me leave to tell you, what differences you must make, between the understanding of God, and the understanding of man in this comparison. First, the mind of man being finite, the understanding is notable to view all that, which can be understood thereby at one time, or with one action of understanding; but must conceive of one thing after another: whereas the Understanding and Wisdom of God is such, as at one sight seethe himself, and every thing else, past, present, and to come; and this not once only, but even continually, because it is eternally infinite. Secondly, the intendment of man worketh nothing in the thing conceived, to make it either to be, if it be a mere conceit; or to be other than it is, if it be existent: but the understanding of God, is by reason of His power so active, as that it causeth that, wherein it is exercised, both to be, and that according to his manner of apprehension, or understanding of it: which understanding is by His infinity so infinite, and by His Eternity so continual, as that of necessity there must be a subsistence, or a Person, wherein it is exercised, which must also be Infinite and Eternal. And this is that glorious Son of God, who is thus begotten or produced eternally, both before the world was, even as he is now, and shall not cease to be produced, after the world shall cease, eternally. Thus you see two of the terms spoken of: From whence, and Wherein: now you must know the middle term between them. The term Whence, is the Wisdom intelligent, God the Father. The term Wherein, is the Wisdom intelligible, God the Son. The middle term is, ipsum intelligere, which in my Comparison I called, The discourse itself, which also in this must needs be Infinite. For an Infinite intelligible, cannot be conceived of an Infinite intelligent, but by an Infinite action of the understanding: and this is that Holy-Ghost, which as you may easily understand, must of necessity proceed from both the Father, and the Son, and be also infinite and eternal, and therefore God. Now because they are all Infinite, and of Infinites essentially, there can be but one: therefore are these three in Essence or Being, one, but in Subsistence, or clear distinction of Persons, three. Understand my comparison, which I made: I will yet clear the matter further for your conceiving. If you take in a mirror, the light of the Sun, and reflect it directly thereon again, in the Sun it is one, in the glass another, and yet the reflection of the beams, is also a third, but for all this, there is but one nature and Word of light, which comprehends all three: so is it in this triunity of which I speak. My leisure serves me not to dilate these things, but I hope you are able to understand what I say, therefore I will proceed. It is said, that Powers are known by their actions, and actions are limited by their objects. I know the meaning of it, and it is not unfit in this place. But to my reason: The Power of God is infinite, and by His infinite Wisdom He knoweth it to be infinite: but God could not know that His Power were infinite, unless He were able thereby to bring forth an infinite action; and every infinite action must of necessity be exercised in an infinite subject. (For whatsoever is received, is received according to the capacity of the receiver:) therefore there is an infinite subject, wherein the power of God is exercised: that is, the Son, of whom I speak. And here again, behold the triunity; an infinite power, the Father; an infinite action, the Holy-Ghost; an infinite subject, the glorious Son; all three one infinite Being. Return to your comparison. As the understanding of man could no way know his own power, but by his actions, neither can there be any actions of understanding, where there is nothing to be understood, no more is it possible to be in the Deity. Now understand that, as I have reasoned from the Wisdom and Power of God; so might I reason from all His other Dignities: so that for one reason which I have brought, I might have brought you fifty. But I show you the way, if you be guided by the Spirit of Truth, how you may strengthen yourself in the way of Truth: therefore I will go on, and show you yet more plainly by more familiar reasons. An infinite power is not more weak than a finite: but every finite creature, which we can cast our eyes unto, doth by nature produce his like, as much as in it is; as a man begetteth a man; trees bring forth seed, whereof their like in nature may spring, and in like wise every other thing. Therefore the infinite Power of God begetteth His like also, which is the Son, the image of the invisible God, the first begotten of every creature, Col. 1.15. But none can be like unto God in His Being, who is not very God: therefore Christ the only begotten of the Father, is also very God. marvel not, that I make this argument from the creature, to the Creator; for in this very point of the Power and Godhead, the Holy-Ghost Himself teacheth me to reason of the invisible things of God, by the things visible, Rom. 1.20. And hereby also learn to help your ignorance, and put away your wonder, how God should be one, and yet three. See you not how the understanding; the Sun-light also, is one in nature, and yet three in evident and clear distinction? though in so base and imperfect order, as that which is in all perfection, is possible to be above it. And further, see you not in every thing a body, a spirit, and a life, which is the knot between them? Or rather, see you not how the very bodily composition is both one, and three? one body, which is united of three bodies? that is, earth, water, and air, or oil, which yet again in the root of their nature are but one. For oil is but a due mixture of water and earth, meanly fixed, and meanly volatile; and earth is but fixed water; so that water, which is but one, is the root of the three: as it is manifest, Gene. 1. and 2. Pet. 3.5. They which understand the rules of Pyronomie, know what I say; and if you understood me well, you would confess, that not only this instance which I have brought, of earth, water, and air; but even the whole frame of Nature did proclaim the Trinity in the Unity. If I should here tell you, how the Heaven, the Earth, and the Deep, Gene. 1. might be understood mystically, and the Analogy between the Creator and the creature therein: and then tell you, what Let the earth bring forth living soul, might mean, and compare it with that place, That which was made in Him was life; and then particularly for man, The Lord God also made the man of the dust of the earth, and tell you, that it was so necessary, because that Christ is Terra viventium: and enforce an argument to prove the triunity, by that treeble repetition of the man made in the image of God; comparing it with that place, 1. Cor. 11.3. and 7. If I should then tell you, that it was necessary that the Son of God must become flesh, as well that the infinite justice of God might be actuated in Him, which could not be actuated in Him, being only God: as for many other reasons, Both from the justice, and Mercy, and Wisdom of God, though to a well-sighted understanding, I might seem to have laid a precious foundation of Philosophy, divine, and natural: yet to you I might rather seem perhaps to have proposed Cabalistical dreams, than any sound argument to the thing in question. Yet this will I tell you, and hold it for good Divinity: that the main drift and scope of the whole Scripture, is to show the creation of all things in Christ, through Him, and for Him: and the restoring of the whole creature in man by Him: That in all things He might have the preeminence, Coloss. 1. Neither doth this any whit derogate from the honour of the Father. For first, It hath pleased the Father, that in Him should all fullness dwell: and besides, it is an honour above all honours unto the Father, to be the Father of so glorious a Son. Therefore is this world, and all the things therein, created to the Image of Christ, to express His glory, even as He is the expressed Image and glory of the Father. And here is the world's Eternity, which had in Christ an eternal Being; according to that His Name, Esay 9.6. The Father of Eternity. Here are those separate Ideas, about which Plato and Aristotle could never agree, and which neither both of them, nor many of their followers did perfectly understand: not that they might not by the frame of nature, and the wisdom which God had given to man, be understood. For is not this world as a book wherein we may read and understand by the created truths, what is the Truth, which is increated? but all true knowledge is the gift of God. Therefore wrist not that place, Coloss. 2.8. against the Christian search after the knowledge of nature, whereby above all other humane knowledges a man is brought to know God, and to honour Him as he ought: but rather be sorry, that your knowledge of Nature is no more. For this will I tell you, to teach you to know yourself, that there is nothing in the creature, which may be known, (and all may be known that is in the creature) but man ought to know it, and to glorify the Creator thereby. And this great labour hath God given to men, that knowing how short they are of that they ought to be, they might be humbled thereby, Psal. 1.11. Eccles. 1.13. And why ought this to seem strange? doth not God require that perfection at man's hand, wherein He did create Him? and was he not created with perfect discourse to know the creature, that he might therein behold the Creator, and so glorify His wondrous power and goodness? But this question would draw me from the question in hand: and therefore I will briefly add one reason more: and because my leisure is little, I will be as short as I can: but I pray you lend me your ear; for it is hard in English, an inartificial language, to express my mind: but because you told me, you could a little Latin, I will be bold here and there, to use a word: my reason is thus. The whole and perfect nature of a Principle or Beginning is in God, who is alone the beginner of all things. Now a Principle is of three sorts, whereof every one is so clearly distinct from another, as that one cannot possibly be that other: therefore in the Unity of the Deity there is also such clear distinction into a Trinity, as that one distinct cannot possible be that other, from which He is distinguished; yet in the Unity of essence they are all one. The differences of a beginning stand thus; It is either Principium principians, non principiatum; that is, a Beginning, which is a Beginner unto another; yet hath not His beginning from another, lest there should be a process into infinity à parte ante: this is God the Father, to whom it is peculiar to beget the Son, yet is Himself neither made, nor created, nor begotten of any other. Secondly, there is Principium principiatum principians; to wit, a Beginning which hath his beginning of another, and is also a beginning to another, lest there should be any defect or imbecility in the Beginning: and this is the Everlasting Son, very God of very God, begotten of the substance of His Father alone before the worlds, neither made, nor created. Thirdly there is Principium principiatum non principians; that is, a Beginning, which is also begun, but is not a beginner unto another: lest there should be a process into infinity à parte pòst: and this is the Holy-Ghost, who proceedeth from the very substance and Being of the Father and the Son, and is with them one GOD coëternall and coëquall. But you will say, Is not the Holy-Ghost a Beginner unto any other? how is He then the Author of our consolation? and how is He said to lead us into all truth, & c? Understand what I mean: He is not a beginner unto any other of the same Infinite Essence or Being with Himself. For the beginnings, which I spoke of before, are in the Essence of God alone. Now our spiritual consolation, whereof the Holy-Ghost is said to be the Beginner, is but an emanation or effluence from that Being, which he himself is; as the light of the Sun doth illuminate every bright body exposed to His light, and yet imparteth not His being thereto. You will again object, that Eternity hath no beginning, nor ending: how then can Christ be both eternal, and begun? and how again can He be equal to the Father, whereas He being begotten of the Father, the Father hath a priority before Him? I answer, that this beginning is that production or begetting, which I before declared, to have been heretofore no other, than it is now, and shall be eternally: as the Sun hath brought forth light since His creation, and shall still bring forth light till the world's dissolution. For this action of God, whereby He begetteth His Son, is not a transient action, to cause a passion in the subject, and a repassion in the agent, for in such, the subject of necessity should have been existent before the action; but this action is immanent, and therefore of necessity of the same nature with the same agent; which agent because it is eternal, therefore the production is also eternal, and consequently the product, and so of necessity very God. But you must ever remember what difference I made between the action of God infinite in power, and therefore able to actuate the object; and the immanent actions of our mind. Now for the Priority, or posteriority, you may object. I grant there is Priority among the Persons of the Godhead; but of what kind? not of Being; for their Essence is one, & therein is none afore or after another, neither is any one of the Trinity more or less God than another: not of time; for they are all one Eternity: not of dignity, for they are all one infinity, and the Son Himself being very God, thinketh it no robbery to be equal with God. But yet there is Priority, and that of order only; for the Father is in order before the Son, because the Son is begotten of the Father: and the Son likewise is before the Holy-Ghost, because the Holy-Ghost is the mutual love between the Father and the Son: and so proceeding from them both. I will make a comparison unmeet for the matter of which I speak; for to whom shall we liken the Highest? but yet meet to help your understanding. When a man doth dream, and imagine things which are not, there is, you know, the fantasy the phantasm, or thing imagined or dreamt, and the phansying or working of the fantasy about that object. Now these three are all of one nature, and are one after another only in order, and not in time. For the particular fantasy of such an object, is before the object, and makes it to have an intentional being; then the object being the discourse of the fantasy, followeth in order, which nevertheless was in time as soon as it, observing ever the cautions that are to be observed. Thus have I very briefly shown not many reasons, but rather how many reasons may be shown for this Christian assertion: yet have I shown enough to persuade any reasonable man, to yield meekly unto the truth of that doctrine, which is so evident, both in the Book of God, and in every faithful and true Christian man's confession, and according to that discourse, which is evident to every man's understanding. Now give me leave to speak a little to those arguments which have thrown the most learned of the jews headlong to the feet of Christ, to make them acknowledge that the Messiah must be both God and man. I will not herein do any thing contrary to that, which in the beginning I protested, that is, not to compel you by authority of Scripture, but to entreat you by reasonable persuasion, to incline your ear to the truth. But because I may not without injury to the cause, leave altogether out such manifest proof, and without injury also to yourself, who might think that I went about to sophisticate a true seeming untruth, which would not abide the touch: I will only intent my finger to some very few, of many thousands of axioms of the Scripture for this purpose, and leave you to make the conclusion by yourself, hoping that the jews example may provoke you to follow them, so far forth as they have followed the truth. Exo. 13.21. it is said, The Lord went before them, etc. Chap. 14.19. The Angel of God, which went before them, removed: where Christ the Angel of the Covenant is called, The Lord jehovah. Again, Exo. 15.3. The Lord is a man of war, His name is jehovah: therefore Christ is God and man: who by this conflict upon the Cross, triumphed over Death and Hell, as it is written in the Gospel, The book of the wars of the Lord. Again, Esay 9.6. Unto us a child is borne, there is His Manhood: and unto us a Son is given, and they shall call His Name, The mighty God. And Esay 35. v. 4. Your God will come and save you. jere. 23.5. etc. I will raise up unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign, and this is the Name whereby they shall call Him, The Lord our righteousness. And jer. 33. v. 16. judah shall be saved, and He that shall save her, is the Lord our Righteousness. Where the Name used, is that great Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 jehovah, which is never given to any creature. Zac. 9.9. proves Him God and man. What shall I cite unto you that of the 2. Psalm? Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee: which place, with many more, is brought in the Epistle to the Hebrews, to this purpose, which is your question. These authorities the Thalmudists, who stick only to the kill letter and apparent sense of the law, hold sufficient to put this matter out of doubt. Now, if leaving this outward sense of the Scripture, we should desire to know what is the quickening spirit thereof, and should ransack the treasuries of the Cabalists, remembering that place of our Saviour, Mat. 5.18. One jod, or tittle of the Law shall not pass, till all be fulfilled; and should examine the question by the letters and pricks of the Scripture, we should more easily find an entrance than an end thereto. Yet for a taste take only the first three words of the Law, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bereshith, bara, elohim: which may not unfitly be thus turned: In the beginning, they the mighty God created. And of that again, take the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bereshith, and see what it may signify by that part of the Cabala which they call Notariacon, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 b. the first letter of ben, signifieth the Son: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. the first of ruach, signifies the Holy-Ghost: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a. the beginning of av. is the Father: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 s. the first of Sabbath, importeth rest: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. the beginning of the ineffable Name of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not there only, but even of itself it imports the Deity. For we consider of things not obvious to our senses and understanding, as if they were not: and therefore this least of all the letters, nearest unto nothing, doth signify God. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 th'. the first of Ta. or Thom. is construed a Closet or a Depth. Which construction if you put together, according to the rules of that excellent Grammar of Divinity, with reference to that which follows, may import thus much. The Word, the Spirit, and the Father, resting eternally in the Closet, or unconceivable abyss, or (as Paul calls it) the inaccessible light of the infinite Deity, manifested their almighty power in creating the heaven, and the earth. Neither is it without a great mystery, that the Son is here put in the first place: for In the beginning was the Word: because the chief honour both of the Creation, and restauration of the world is given unto Christ, as the Apostle doth comment upon this text, Coloss. 1. And in another place, In Him is all the treasure, both of the wisdom and knowledge of God. As Psal. 104. v. 24. In Wisdom hast thou made them all. For in Christ were all things together one infinite wisdom, till in the Creation he made them several, according to their distinct Ideas. Therefore saith the Apostle, He sustaineth every thing by His powerful Word: that is, the Son: and elsewhere, In Him (Christ) we live and move (after the Creation) and have our Being (before the Creation.) And for this cause doth john begin the law of mercy and grace, in the very same words, wherewith Moses began the law of justice and condemnation; In the beginning. For we know nothing of God, neither of justice, nor of Mercy, etc. but only by Christ; as he saith, No man knoweth the Father, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveile Him. And in another place, No man cometh to the Father, but by me. Now the Holy-Ghost is put in the second place, because He is the mutual love of the Father and the Son, and as I may say, the instrument of their actions, both immanent, and transient. Go forward now, if you will, to the next word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bara; you see, it affords the same argument for the triunity, by the three letters before explained, and the number which is the singular. Think not this a fancy, neither reproach the divine Cabala, as the ignorant Sophisters use to do, not knowing how above all other knowledges, it doth advance a man's meditation on high. And to the present purpose, they which know any thing in the holy language, know that this sentence can no way agree in Grammatical construction, unless the singular verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 barà, be thus made plural, that it may have concordance with the plural 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elohim. And that these three persons are, in the unity of their Being, one, may appear by that, which is Chap. 2. v. 4. where the name of their essence jehovah is joined to Elohim; as if you would say, the Gods jehovah made the earth and the heavens. You will ask, why these letters, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. b.r.a. are twice put, seeing in this preciseness, no such superfluity should have needed? I tell you, that it is not done, but to intimate unto us a most high mystery. For in the first place it imports that Eternal and Infinite Being of the Father, the Son, and the Holy-Ghost, which they had before the worlds in their endless glory and felicity, in that silence of the Deity, in that super-supreame Entity, which is unto the Godhead, perfect above perfection, without any respect unto the creature. It imports that Infinity, that Eternity, that Power, that Wisdom, which is above all things, and gives unto itself, to be such as it is: that Nothing (as the divine Areopagite seems to speak) which is before and above all things, that may be spoken or thought, without any respect of any emanation, or effluence whatsoever. And therefore follows that letter of rest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that of unity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and that of perfection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Now in the second place, it signifies the Deity, as exercised in the creature: and therefore follows that Epithet Elohim which shows that emanation of Power or Strength; and is sometimes given unto the creatures, Angels, and men. It were an endless thing to speak that of these mysteries, which may be spoken, neither can I; For the Law of the Lord is perfect, and man is full of weakness. I have said so much as I think meet concerning the Triunitie. Now a word to that point, that Christ is God: which although it appear sufficiently in the Triunity before proved, by this anagogical doctrine: yet to that second person in ●●rticular, is that which followeth Esay 7.14. it is said of Christ, that His Name should be called Immanuel; but in the history of the Gospel, in Matthew and Luke, both before His Conception, and at His Circumcision, He is called jesus. It is therefore meet that you know, how jesus is Immanuel or God with us. The writing of the Name of JESUS is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ihsuh, though according to the rules of the pronunciation of that tongue, jesus, and according to the ancient abbreviation following the Hebrew orthography IHS. In which Name you see are all the letters of the greatest ineffable Name of God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 jehovah; with the interposition of that letter of rest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 s. for then was God reconciled to the world; then was everlasting righteousness brought in, when the Word became flesh. This is that glorious Name, of which God spoke by the Prophet, Behold, I will make my Name new in the earth. For you see how of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is, JESUS. This is that Name, which is meet for the Son of God alone, and cannot be given to any creature, because it is a Name of the Deity, as it is Heb. 1. It is that Name which is above all names: in which the Angels and the righteous soul's triumph; at which the powers of Hell are aghast and tremble, to which the whole creature yieldeth meek obedience. This is that Name of which our Lord spoke, Father, I have manifested thy Name unto men, the Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. For so long as the mystery of the Incarnation of God was hid, so long that Name remained unsoundable: but when the Word became flesh, and dwelled amongst men, so that the mystery was reveiled; then the Name, which was before not to be pronounced, was lawfully pronounceable. That as the Word of life was to be seen with eyes, and handled with hands; so that glorious Name might also be beaten between our lips, and teeth; and this by the interposition of that letter of rest. The jews knowing this reason of this great mystery, and moved with the reverence thereof, durst never pronounce that Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but in stead thereof, Adonai or Elohim. Let it not trouble you, that judah the son of jacob was called by such a name, as had these four letters therein, with the addition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 d, thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 jehudah: but rather wonder and learn, how by these sacraments the children of God before the Incarnation, exercised their faith, saluted the promises afar off, and saw that our Lord should enter into our earthly tabernacle, by the door of judah's flesh; for so much the letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Daleth importeth. To which mystery the heavenly Poet alluding, triumphed with that double joy, Psal. 24. Lift up your heads ye gates, and be ye lift up ye everlasting doors, etc. foreseeing the descension of God the Son, by the gate of our flesh, and the a scension of our flesh by Christ, into the heavenly places: both which He celebrated by that repetition. Compare with this place, Gen. 39.35. and 49.8, 9, 10, 11, 12. and Revel. 5.5. and other places, as y● shall read, and understand them: and withal consider, how the ancient have prided themselves with the several letters of this Name, to keep in remembrance by their own names, a thing never to be forgotten, The Incarnation of our Lord: As Abram assumed h. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and was called Abraham; Oshea took i. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and was called joshua, as you know. Neither again let it trouble you, that some do write this name thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ISV, because (say they) the letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. s. turned upward 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as much as the double he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 omitted. I know no reason for this, but many authorities against it, as you may know by that which is, and shallbe said, though I let pass a very great number. Now consider the Name in every letter, and see what clouds of witnesses there are, that Christ is God and man: and learn by the Name itself, how Christ is the Character or engraved Image of the person or subsistence of the Father. Hebr. 1.13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i. Is the Crown or Diadem of the ineffable Name of God, and signifies the Godhead. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. u. Pretends the tree of life: for it is a thing much noted among the learned of the Hebrew tongue, that this letter is never put radically in any natural Hebrew word, either in the beginning or end thereof, but is as the tree of life, in the midst of the Paradise of God. The double letter h. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. signifieth, that Christ, concerning His Deity, is essentially united to the Humanity; and concerning His Humanity, united also essentially to the Deity; and that by the Holy-Ghost. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 h. is a spirit or breath: therefore is Christ in Himself, or in respect of His Deity, the superior Wisdom of the Father, and the Son of God, not made, but begotten, Pro. 8.22. In the creature, or with respect of His Humanity, the inferior wisdom of God; not begotten, but made, and created, Ecclus. 24.11, 12. Now the letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. s. hath many things therein to be considered. For you may not think, that it was taken by chance into this Name; but for the Notory, and for the Geometry. For the Notory I have observed, that the Theologians, both of the Old and New Testament, have celebrated thereby; first, the rest, or dwelling of the Godhead in Him, as Esa. 42. ver. 1. and joh. 1. ver. 33. Then the rest, or Ideall being of the world in Christ before the creation: and the restoring of the world by His suffering: wherein the justice of God rested, or came to a period, as Esay 53.11. He shall see the travel of His soul, and be satisfied. Lastly, that great jubilee or Sabbath of Sabbaths in the world to come, when all the creature shall rest from corruption. Secondly, they learned thereby the everlasting Anointing of Christ to be our King, our Priest, & our Prophet. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the head of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is to anoint. Hitherto belongs that of the 45. Psal. Thou art anointed with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. And in particular; I have found David (or my beloved) servant, with my holy oil have I anointed Him: that for His Kingdom. Dan. 9.24. speaks of His Priesthood: To finish the wickedness, to seal up the sins, etc. and to anoint the most Holy. Esay. 61. of of his Prophecy; Therefore hath the Lord anointed me, He hath sent me to preach, etc. For this cause was there no Anointing in the old Testament, but typical, as a shadow of the good things, that were to come; so that when He came, all these anointings ceased; both of the levitical Priesthood, for Thou art a Priest for ever. Hebr. 7: and of the Kingdom; for He shall reign over the house of jacob for ever: Luk. 1.33. And for his Prophecy He saith, Whatsoever I have heard of my Father, I have made known unto you. The whole scope of the new Testament is to this effect. Now the Geometry hath also many mysteries: first, it is one semicircle with three branches; the mystery of the Trinity in the Unity: all whose dignities of Virtue and Power, etc. are coequal in all, and in every person, entirely, and indivisibly; and therefore in our Lord also: according to that saying of the Angel, The Holy-Ghost shall come upon Thee, and the Power of the most High shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing which shall be borne of thee, shall be called, The SON of GOD. Shall I tell you what Lectures the Divines have made upon the text of this letter? Zach. 11.13. did read herein that goodly price, at which the wicked jews did value Him. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. in the Hebrew Arithmetic is ten; so the three ten in the triple Crown of this letter, are the thirty pieces of silver, which the traitor took to betray the precious blood, which was too dear a ransom for the whole world. And one in another place said; They have sold the Just for silver. Consider the letter, and every part thereof, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This inferior semicircle is the creature, the earthly Paradise, in the midst of which is the tree of life. And that thus the letter vau 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is one part, and signifies in that tongue, a nail, if you will, that nail, that pierced His hands, and His beauteous feet, to which, if you add the iod reversed, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you may well perceive the figure of the whole Cross, that Tree of life, which bore that heavenly fruit; that spiritual food, whereof Adam and his faithful children, which overcome, may eat, and live for ever. Revel. 2.7. Thus you may see, how the Word became flesh, and dwelled among us. You may see that riddle of the Angel to Esdras, 2. Book, chap. 5. v. 37. expounded: The image of that Word, from which, and whereto, the Books of both the Testaments do sound. You may see what confidence we may have in that promise of Christ, who in the days of His flesh said, Whatsoever you shall ask the Father in my Name, He will give it you, joh. 16.23. But after His Ascension, the miracles, that are to be done in that Name, are more wonderful Mark. 16.17. And again, He that believeth in me, greater works than these shall He do, for I go to the Father. Behold the mystery of it, cause it to ascend, and describe that circle, whose centre is every where, whose circumference is not where. Now are the superior and inferior conduit-pipes soudered together, (as the Hebrues speak) now the higher influences, the Spirit and Graces of God are not given by measure: and the refluences so great, as that Whosoever believeth, out of His belly shall arise fountains of living water, springing up unto eternal life. O glorious Name! O sacred Mystery! by which you may well perceive, that there is greater Unity between the Deity and the Humanity, then by any words of contiguity, or continuity may be expressed. You may well perceive, how according to that place of the 89. Psal. He the first borne; or, as joh. saith, Chap. 1. The only begotten of the Father is made higher than the Kings of the earth. Here is our righteousness, our sanctification, and redemption complete: here is our adoption and reward: our consolation, our life, and religion: our reverence, and our fear: yet our joy and boldness: all in all: The presence of God. I am not able to give due honour thereunto. My thoughts are swallowed up, when I consider the other great mysteries, which this one letter doth import: the mystery of the triple world; the mystery of mercy and of justice, of Election, and Reprobation; of that great jubilee, or Sabbath of Sabbaths, when that which is above, shall again descend to restore the creature from corruption and change, into that nimietie or excess of Goodness, wherein it was created. But these things are therefore here to be omitted, because the discourse thereof were long, and because they are rather consequents, than premises to the question. To tell you at once, and to make an end of this argument: The whole Nation of the learned jews confess, that the Messiah should be called by this great Name: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. To which purpose, there are, besides these which have been brought, many places of Scripture, which in the Hebrew verity are most direct, though by our translations they might seem somewhat harsh. They hold, I say, that He must be both God and Man: and in a word, there is nothing, which we Christians do affirm concerning our Lord, but the evidence of Scripture doth compel them to confess it. Only they differ in this, from us; whether This jesus be that Christ, that should come into the world; though this also be a thing not questionable, as you may learn of Daniel 9 vers. 24, 25, 26. and 2. Esd. 7. verse 28.29. Although the common error and expectation of the jews, was of a terrestrial Monarchy; yet the best learned of them agree, that the Kingdom of Christ is not of this world. For they remember that place in the Testament of jacob: The Sceptre shall not departed from juda, till Shiloh come. By which it follows, that when Messiah shall come, there should be no more show of an earthly kingdom. That of Zach. 9.9. is as direct, jerusalem, behold, thy King cometh unto thee poor. They remeber also that in the 21. Ps. I am a worm and noman, a shame of men and the contempt of the people. And that also of Esay 53. He hath neither form nor beauty; when we see Him, there shall be no form that we should desire Him, He is despised and rejected of men, etc. Read the whole Chapter and the Psalm, compare them with the histories of His Passion, and behold Him on the Cross, in the horror of His anguish, and extreme perplexity. But you will say, what is this judaisme in the letters of His Name, for argument to prove that He is God? Is it more, then if we should write the Name of Christ with the last letter thereof capital, ChrisT; because it may represent the Cross? or else the two last letters so interlaced, that they may have reference to the Serpent in the wilderness, because that was also a figure of CHRIST? Though I had here to answer for the Cabala of every of the 72. languages of the Confusion, yet I say only thus: If after all this that I have said, you will still be contentious; I have no such custom, but I am well content, that either thus, or by any other means, a ChrisTian man should hold that in perpetual memory, which is his joy, his Victory, his Crown, his happiness in this world, and in the world to come. Were it to any purpose to make you know, what the ancient Philosophers, who knew not the Scriptures, have thought of this matter? all speaking this one thing which the light that God hath given to mankind, did make them know, although they concealed their intendment by divers names. Yet Hermes called Him plainly the Son of God. Zoroaster, the Understanding of His Father. Pythagoras, Wisdom; as Paul and Solomon, every where, and particularly, Prou. 8. and in the book of that title. Parmenides named him The Sphere of Understanding. Orpheus termed him Pallas, to the same effect as the other, if you know the fable: and yet he speaks more plainly to the Trinity, in his Hymns of the Night, of the Heaven, and of the Air. Plato's separate Ideas mean nothing else: and in sum, as many of the Philosophers, as were worth any thing, were not ignorant of this thing. But I fear, these authorities are with you of little worth: yet have I brought them, that you may see how we are furnished with all kind of proofs, and how you do contemn all manner of testimony. If this which I have said, persuade you to look better to the foundation of your faith it is sufficient: if it persuade you nothing, then have I done contrary to the Commandment, which forbiddeth to cast pearls before swine. But yet I hope, that God will not suffer you to be led any longer by that spirit of Antichrist, against which S. john doth so often warn us. For I do you to wit, that this your heresy is no new thing, but even as ancient as the Apostles time. For, the reason of john's writing of his Gospel, was, to prove the Godhead of Christ, against the Heretics that denied it in His own time. And truly, I marvel that you, who have received this heresy from the rotten bones of Arius, should not provide for your safety as he did. He denied the authority of S. john's writings to be authentical. And why? because this earth-bred Giant, which would pull Christ out of the throne of His Deity, should with his lightning be suddenly burnt. Believe you the Scripture? Is john's authority sufficient? then the case is plain. We are in Him that is true, in His Son jesus Christ, who is very God, and eternal life. 1. joh. 5.20. Can you now confer this Scripture with that place, I have said ye are Gods, and not be ashamed? I and the Father are one. The jews understood that He herein professed Himself to be very God: and are you His enemy more than they? Read joh. 10. ver. 30. & 33. & 34. and you may understand the meaning of both places. The devils acknowledged Him to be God of Infinite power: I know Thee who Thou art, even that Holy One of God: And will not you confess as much as the devils? But this is more than I thought to say, only you may see hereby, that we speak no other thing than Christ Himself, even in His enemy's understanding, said. Now if you could see a little the folly of your own opinion; that were enough to cause you to put on a better mind. I will touch it as lightning doth touch the ground: for if you be willing to be reform, there is no doubt, but you may propound it to the learned Divines, and be fully satisfied. You say Christ is only man, but yet endued with the infinite Power of God. Here first you do injury to the Highest, to make the Power of God to be accidental unto Him: whereas he is purus actus, absolute perfection, and without shadow of change: His Being is most simple and pure, not capable of accidents. Then His Being is such, as no addition can be made thereto, to make it more than it is: therefore it is necessary, that He be ever actually whatsoever he may be. Besides, His Being is Infinitely distant from Not-Being; therefore His Power is inseparable. Again, if there come any thing to God as an accident, it must come unto Him from Himself; or else from another: not from another, for He is impassable, or such as cannot suffer violence: not from Himself; for all such accidents do proceed à potentiâ, that is, from the imbecility, or imperfection of the subject: but His Being is most simple, and infinitely perfect. Again, all accidents do rise from the matter, form or composition of the subject. In Him is neither matter, form, nor composition. Now all things we see in this world, do consist, ex actu & potentiâ, of perfection from God, & imperfection from themselues: for of themselves they are non entia, absolutely nothing. Yea, even the very Angels, and the soul itself, are partakers of this composition: (for nothing is purus actus, but God alone) therefore are they subject to accidents; yet they which come nearest to perfection, are most free from accidents; as that which is mere perfection, hath no accidents at all. Know then, that all the dignities of God are in him essentially one God. For the Goodness of God, His Power, His Wisdom, His Glory, etc. Being all infinite, do of necessity concur in the nature of infinity. Whence it followeth, that whatsoever is in Him, is essentially Himself: therefore the power of God is not accidental, or such as may be imparted to a man. The learned Hebrues according to this do hold, that Ensoph or infinity, is not to be numbered among the other attributes of God: because it is that abstract Unity, whereinto they all essentially concur, and from which they all essentially proceed. and hence by the way take another strong argument to the former question: for if God be essentially a Father, than the term correlative, a Son, must be in the Godhead also, and that essentially. But now again see another folly in your supposition. The work of our Redemption is a work of infinite goodness, mercy, power, wisdom and glory; therefore it followeth, that Christ. the worker, had infinite mercy, power, wisdom, etc. Now I demand; had Christ this infinite goodness and power, so given to Him of God, that the Father Himself had in the mean time none? This you dare not say, for that were to say, that God did cease to be God: which cannot stand with His Eternity. Now if God the Father had, notwithstanding this absolute infinite power of Christ, of which he spoke, All power is given unto Me, both in heaven and in earth: than it followeth that either there were two infinities of power; or else that these two which had this infinite Power, were all one Infinite. The first is against the nature of infinity for that is absolutely infinite, which so comprehendeth all things, as that it leaveth nothing without itself, and yet is not comprehended to any other. Besides, if you would say, that the Father and the Son had each of them several indivisible infinite Powers; it must follow, that neither of their Powers were absolutely infinite: because each of them had not the infinite Power of the other: And besides, that both these infinite Powers must be conjoined with infinite weakness, because they must be mutually subjected to the infinite Power one of the other. But both these things are impossible. So you see that two Infinities can by no means stand together: therefore it followeth, that these two, to wit, the Father and the Son, are in Being one, and that of infinite Power; and this is that which I strive for: which, as you see, I have concluded by your own assertion. The time would fail me, to lay before your eyes the manifold untruths, which would ensue of your position, which savoureth neither of wit, judgement, nor learning: And therefore I see, how they which have once departed from the truth, must of necessrity run into infinite absurdities. Therefore look back, and be ashamed of such new-fangled toys, as you do daily imagine, which in truth do argue the great inconstancy and vanity of your mind, & withal, such palpable blindness of understanding, as the darkness of Egypt. For tell me without selfe-liking, what sound judgement doth this argue, to be driven about with every wind of doctrine? a Protestant, a Brownist, an Anabaptist, an Antichrist. What bringing up? what gift of learning and knowledge have you, that you should presume to oppose your sentence, against the faith & doctrine of all the Christian Churches in the world? Blush, and learn with meekness the truth of that Word, which is able to save your soul. You may see by your own miserable experience, what it is to forsake the Unity of Faith, and the Communion of the Saints, who embrace the truth of God's word, and have manifest tokens that they are the true Church, to wit, The word of God truly taught, and the Sacraments duly administered. What if there want perfection? The Church militant must ever confess; I am lovely, yet black: For it is impossible that any church should be without imperfection, so long as the world standeth: but at the end it shall be presented without spot or wrinkle. Therefore remember from whence you are fallen, and repent, and do the works of righteousness, lest Christ, whom you so despite, come against you shortly. The work of Christianity is not in foolish questions, and disputing about needles subtleties, but in doing the works of truth and righteousness. Pray, and endeavour yourself thereto. And till such time as God for His Christ's sake, vouchsafe to have mercy on you, the enemy of His Son, and give you grace to repent of this great wickedness, I am neither your friend nor yet your foe. ALEX. GIL. FINIS.